Lamm M 1.2 against Tenor 300 and Boulder 2060


I own a system based on Avalon eidolon with Halcro electronics,EMM labs and NBS black label and Kharma enigma cables.

I´m insterested to change the electronics for the a hybrid amp, as Tenor 300 or Lamm M 1.2 or for the Boulder 2060.

I will be pleased if you can help me, almost I´m interested about to know how compares the Lamm M 1.2 and the Tenor 300, also one important consideration for me is the relation price/sound quality, the Lamm seems to be less expensive, around 40% than the Tenor.

I demoed the Boulder, sounds well, but not much much different or in another league than my Halcros, which is your opinion?.

Finally which preamp do you think I will need to be used with Lamm M1.2 or Tenor 300, new CJ ACT2? Aesthetix? Wyetech? CTC? Connoisseur? Lamm?

Thanks to all for your advice.
batiportbf80
True to the recording. Unless you were in the studio at the time of the final mix, I don't believe anyone can say for sure what the artist and sound engineer intended for us to hear. I spent years standing next to a crash cymbal. When I sit and listen to my system, I do not wish to duplicate that experience any more than necessary. I want to save what hearing I have left. I think we all agree that the above amps are excellent and with appropriate front ends, will give an enjoyable listening experience. Its been my experience that musicians have a perceived sound in their head that they are always striving to get out of their instruments. If they change brands of instruments, or mouthpiece and alter that sound, they will continue making other changes such as reeds, ligatures etc. And usually come full circle to the sound they had before they went on their search. I do not think that is too unlike what we do with stereo systems. We are always trying to improve, but in the process quite often come back to that sense of rightness in our head. I personally do not care about measurements. If I hear something that sounds "more right" in my system, I would probably buy it, whether it be amps, cables, speakers, etc.
Dear Saxman2: I understand your points, but the issue it is still the same and it is not the only one: a tube electronic item is a: signal generator ( by itself ): when the signal goes through a tube ( by the physics law ) this tube ( that item )generate harmonics that don't exist in the recording and the problem is that these harmonics are at a hearing level. So, the tubes function like an equalizers ( in some conditions ) and always works like signal generators producing a signal that is inexistent in the recording . So, what is all about it?, in this forum the people speak about music and the reproduction through an audio system and when they have tube electronics: of what sound they are talking? obviusly not a music sound reproduction.
If for you or for other people these issues does not make sense, it is ok. Any one can do ( like you ) what it wants. I only expose those issues that are extremly important in the sound reproduction through tube electronics and that goes against the music, but WHO CARES?
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul.
Mr. Raul, I am left confused by your comments. I know little about the physics of tube and solid state devices, but does not current run through every component within a piece of equipment? And if so, does not each component, whether it be a capacitor, transformer or electron tube not have it's own signature? And if not, does every solid state, by virtue of it's being solid state, sound identical and therefore, equally accurate?

I have enjoyed both solid state and tube equipment with each giving a facsimile of recorded instruments or voices, but never have I heard a system reproduce the live sound I experience when attending a live performance. Solid state may offer a so-called quicker, more accurate, less colored interpretation, but seldom have I heard it carry the body and weight that has accompanied some excellent tube components. In my experience the best of tubes display a huge soundstage, a rounder and fuller image, and a most life-like decay. Bells and string instruments can have a body much closer to the real thing. I do not intend to prescribe one philosophy over the other, since I find both a distance from the real thing.

Incidently, I have heard some solid state amp designs with a softer more tube-like presentation, and contrarily tube systems sound hard and edgy. So much of this may depend on system synergy and specific tastes. I am usually not fond of analogies, but when viewing an artist's portrait, it may never carry the accuracy of a photograph, and yet it often offers something more approachable. Trust your ears. This is not relegated to a mere science.
Dear Steve: I'm not talking about science, I'm talking about music reproduction. Yes, I agree with you that at home all of our audio system are very far from the live music and that we only have a facsimile of it.
But the issue is: that we want that the sound reproduction was accurate to the recording, if not then what is all about?.
As you told us: " the solid state may offer a so-called quiker, more ACCURATE, less colored interpretation,...". I think that these is what we are looking for. The " huge soundstage " and " fuller image " depends of many things: the recording, speakers, front-end, room cables,.... BTW, when I go to a concert hall to hear any interpretation of this music art, I go not for " to see the soundstage ", " the inner deatil ", " the focus ", etc..., I go for listen the whole thing that named: MUSIC, that's all. The same happen when I go to a jazz club ( night club ): who cares ( in a live event ) about: soundstage or image ?.
Regards and always enjoy the music.
Raul.