mmcelyea and others,
I can now report my experience with the ML 534 as replacement for the ML 532h. Indeed the 534 'ups everything' but in a manner which
greatly surprised me. The 534's improvement on sonic clarity and reproduction of transients struck me as equal to that brought by replacing the ML 326s with the ML 523. (I'd long believed that the pre-amplifier contributed well over half of sound amplification's net quality.)
Only once before, auditioning a 'cost no object' Spectral/Rockport based system, did a piano sound to me like a fine piano.
On connecting the ML 534 I suddenly had that piano in my living room.
The sound was immensely pleasurable, as perhaps only those who have sat within several feet of an expertly played Steinway or Mason and Hamlin piano can fully ascertain.
The sound was different from that produced by the Spectral-based system. The transients were not as quick, but the midrange was fuller and more satisfying, and the shape of the piano notes, the sculpted legato sound that pianists strive for, was equally or more audible.
And in the same context as the foregoing comparison, as one might suspect, the ML's reproduction of digital music was smoother, less 'grainy', and more pleasing.
Comparison of the ML 534 with the 532h independent of sonic 'clarity' is evocative of comparison of the ML 523 with the ML 326s.
In both instances, Todd Eichenbach, the chief ML designer, has returned to ML's roots, as once brilliantly exemplified by the ML 7. The 326s and 532h had an open and uncolored sonic quality with seemingly flat response throughout the frequency range, but at the expense of 'meat on the sonic bones'....an analogy one might extend to British as opposed to American loudspeaker preference.
Regarding amplification-transducer paring, the 523-534 combination does much to address the exaggerated brightness of the B&W D3's. Perhaps more interesting, and insofar as improvement in one part of a system exposes flaws in another, the ML 523-534 are suspect of delivering more detailed information to the B&W D3's midrange drivers than those can optimally reproduce. One asks to what extent a better midrange cone material might redress that issue, as B&W attempted in replacing Kevlar with 'Continuum' in the D3.
So I will seek rosenut 802D3's at a bargain price, and accomodate their esthetics. Could those be improved with a few coats of lacquer over the factory finish ? Might a pair of 'prestige' 802 D3's become available at a bargain price ? Might a subwoofer-803 D3 combo equal the performance of the 802 D3's ?
I can now report my experience with the ML 534 as replacement for the ML 532h. Indeed the 534 'ups everything' but in a manner which
greatly surprised me. The 534's improvement on sonic clarity and reproduction of transients struck me as equal to that brought by replacing the ML 326s with the ML 523. (I'd long believed that the pre-amplifier contributed well over half of sound amplification's net quality.)
Only once before, auditioning a 'cost no object' Spectral/Rockport based system, did a piano sound to me like a fine piano.
On connecting the ML 534 I suddenly had that piano in my living room.
The sound was immensely pleasurable, as perhaps only those who have sat within several feet of an expertly played Steinway or Mason and Hamlin piano can fully ascertain.
The sound was different from that produced by the Spectral-based system. The transients were not as quick, but the midrange was fuller and more satisfying, and the shape of the piano notes, the sculpted legato sound that pianists strive for, was equally or more audible.
And in the same context as the foregoing comparison, as one might suspect, the ML's reproduction of digital music was smoother, less 'grainy', and more pleasing.
Comparison of the ML 534 with the 532h independent of sonic 'clarity' is evocative of comparison of the ML 523 with the ML 326s.
In both instances, Todd Eichenbach, the chief ML designer, has returned to ML's roots, as once brilliantly exemplified by the ML 7. The 326s and 532h had an open and uncolored sonic quality with seemingly flat response throughout the frequency range, but at the expense of 'meat on the sonic bones'....an analogy one might extend to British as opposed to American loudspeaker preference.
Regarding amplification-transducer paring, the 523-534 combination does much to address the exaggerated brightness of the B&W D3's. Perhaps more interesting, and insofar as improvement in one part of a system exposes flaws in another, the ML 523-534 are suspect of delivering more detailed information to the B&W D3's midrange drivers than those can optimally reproduce. One asks to what extent a better midrange cone material might redress that issue, as B&W attempted in replacing Kevlar with 'Continuum' in the D3.
So I will seek rosenut 802D3's at a bargain price, and accomodate their esthetics. Could those be improved with a few coats of lacquer over the factory finish ? Might a pair of 'prestige' 802 D3's become available at a bargain price ? Might a subwoofer-803 D3 combo equal the performance of the 802 D3's ?