Lamm ML1.1 & ML 2.1


Hi,

I've the opportunity to heard 2 times the ML2.1 - 18 watts class A - first time on JM Lab Grande Utopia BE and the other one, on Kharma CRM 3.2

I love the sound of the ML2.1 : so natural, so human...

But I don't know the lower priced ML1.1 - the 90 watts -I'm living in France and it's not well distributed.

What differs between both in terms of sound ?

Do you know other amp with this kind of natural sound - at same price or lower !!!!

Thanks

David
davidri

Showing 5 responses by dmailer

I as well have some ML2's heading my way to potentially replace my ML1's. I feel my Reimer Teton speakers at 95db should be able to handle the lower powered ML2's. Davidri, I will post my comparative comments in a few weeks after I have them up and running.
Chances are that there is probably not anything wrong with your amps. It may just be the combination of the size of room, the high spl level you like to listen and the effeciency of your speakers. My room is about 425 square feet. I do listen to music at times in the 90-95db range but most of the time closer to 70-80db range. As I said before I haven't really noticed any distortion at any level that I would be listening.
My ML2's showed up yesterday and work just fine with my 95db Reimer Tetons. I pretty much agree with Oneobgyn on these amps as they are really special. 711smilin I look foward to your feedback on the Epiphany's. I listened for several hours last night and thought I would share some impressions and comparisons with the ML1's. I have had the ML1's in my system for several years and really had trouble imagining there could be much improvement. The first thing I noticed with the ML2's was that they did have a similar sonic signature as the ML1's. The ML1's do very well with dynamics and bass and I was surprised that the ML2's were just as dynamic sounding with only 18 watts. The one area which the ML2's exceeded the ML1's was in the low frequencies where they seem to resolve more low level detail. The area where the ML2's really stand out is in the midrange where I find it extremely engaging and more palpable. Sonic textures are very natural sounding. The ML1 on the other hand is also very transparent and has a very neutral midrange. The ML2's I would say are slightly on the warm side of neutral but in a good way. Both amps have an extended top end with the ML2 being slightly sweeter on top. Overall they do sound more alike than not but the nod goes to the ML2's for their resolving power and palpability. The difference in sound between them is most likely a result of the push pull vs single ended topology's. I suspect that each amp is at the top for its type. For the majority of speakers out there the ML1's are really hard to beat. If you have speakers with higher effeciency though the ML2's may be the best you can get.
Oneobgyn, I will definitely have to try out some NOS in the 12AX7 position. 711smilin, your in for a treat when those amps arrive. If your Epiphany's are more effecient than the Reimers then it should sound great as I have lots of headroom with these amps on the Tetons.
711 smilin, glad to hear you are liking your ML2's. I am not sure the effeciency of your speakers but with the Teton's 95db I do not hear any distortion at rather loud levels. I normally listen to most music in the 70-80db range. I admit though that I have not tried or for that matter care to listen at head banging 100db+ levels.