How a pair of Mark Levinson ML2 stands with the best amps today ?

These were all great amps. I owned an ML-2, ML-3 and No 23.5 in the mid 80's. I started with an ML-2 but I was driving Magneplaner Tympani-IVs in a very large room. At low volumes, it was absolutely exquisite, but it ran out of power at louder volumes, and since I was in my 20s then, I liked to crank them louder than I should have. I switched to an ML-3 which had tons of grunt. When I sold my Tympani IVs and switched to Duntech Sovereigns, I also traded in my ML-3 for a No 23.5, which I agree was more refined. But these were all great amps in their day, and I think the ML-2 and No 23.5 could still hold their own against current amps (at least under $20K). 

Mark and I parted company in 1978. The ML2 was fully developed and shipping to dealers by then. The ML3 was still conceptual.

Two or three years later, after the ML3 and other ML products were introduced, Mark sold the company to Madrigal Audio. I was busy with my own (non-audio) company and I wasn't following the details except for occasional conversations with my former coworkers. Tom Colangelo, who had been my assistant, and Mark continued to develop and market products for the brand, brilliantly in my opinion. I was saddened to hear of Tom's death in 2007. I've never met a more talented and dedicated designer.

I don't have ML2 but have ML333.

I also have the latest Class D Purifi Eigentakt and Benchmark AHB2 (Stereophile Class A rated today).

The ML333 has more dynamic and extended treble than Class D Pirifi while driving 802D3.
The Benchmark AHB2 sounds very similar to ML333 , but when play loud classical music, it has less bass slam.

[please excuse my poor English]

A friend sells his ML-2 pair (2nd hand).

- is the ML-2 topology fully balanced ? I read that the XLR input was an option; this suggests that the circuit is not fully balanced. Which in turn implies that the RCA/Camac inputs are more "direct" (no additional circuit to balance the signal just after the input). Is it correct?

- On this sample, there are only Camac inputs & XLR (my Aries Cerat Incito preamp is not fully balanced, but has an XLR output; so RCA outputs of my preamp are more "direct"). So it means I would enter the "connections compatibility hell".

- if Nr 1 is correct => preferred output for my preamp is RCA <> preferred input for ML-2 power amplifier is Camac...

 

SPEAKERS: analysis Epsilon, 85dB, 4 Ohms nominal (3 Ohms above 3 KHz); flat impedance curve. Moderate level. Classical music. 50m², but listen midfield; excellent acoustics (brick walls and curvated vaults ceiling).

Thanks.

"Stenalx,

"

A very late reply to Charles1dad question above about later ML's using more gain stages + Feedback etc:

As Georgehifi correctly mentioned, their newest offerings appear to be simpler design with low feedback.

I was of course referring to the ML amplifiers post ML-2's and up to no 33's.

They got crazy complex (just look at the schematics) and the sound was really not that great. I have listened to /owned many big ML's. Although their build quality is always second to none, their sonics remained a lot to be desired.

 

ML-2's are a totally different beasts.

Good luck