2. amps-preamps
  3. 141681-19284

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

I saw a pair of these.  They appearead overkill amps with superb construction. Just about sound quality (not reliability) how they stand with today best amps ?
legarem
rugyboogie
199 posts
 
Thanks very much for your reply.Take care and stay safe,Mike
ebm
9,311 posts
 
Wonderful built quality and sound quality a classic.Jump on a pair ASAP!!
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 

Stenalx,

Based on your summation,  the ML2 was an excellently designed/implemented simple/straightforward (relatively speaking) circuit superb sounding class A amplifier. Any idea why the decision was made to add gain stages and feedback thus losing the "magic" of the original? Seems they should have left well enough alone.

Charles

georgehifi's avatar
georgehifi
10,312 posts
 

Today's ML's don't have much feedback as the distortion specs show on the 534 and 536 poweramps.
The the poweramps have input sensitivity that's almost 3v for full output this is a low gain amp, and distortion figures of 0.3%THD  showing low feedback designs.

  (they don't show the THD for the poweramp section of the integrated's, but one would think it's the same)

Maybe they lost their way in the 10-15 years ago when they dabbled in Class-D with the very expensive No.53 monoblocks, with very complex output filters to get rid of the switching frequency, they were probably high gain and high feedback
https://www.stereophile.com/content/mark-levinson-no53-reference-monoblock-power-amplifier

Interesting read that Mark Levinson wrote on Class-D.

"Interleaving of multiple Class D Amplifiers is potentially a step in the right direction, but does not go far enough.Personally I think that the best option would be something that combines a Class D Amplifier for the heavy lifting with something Class A for fine detail. Probably implemented in the style I did for AMR’s AM-77 "Jikoda" Style. In this case both of the circuits involved can operate fully open loop. In many ways the problems in Class D Amplifiers are analogous (but not identical to) those in Class B Amplifiers (but without an option to implement Class AB or Class A) so similar solutions apply. All Class D amplifiers are essentially delta-sigma DAC’s. If the input is not digital PWM signals (aka "DSD") but analogue audio then it is also a Delta Sigma Analogue to digital converter...Now DSD (aka SACD) which to my ears fails to come close, never mind equal true PCM CD Replay in most aspects of sound quality, operates at 2.8MHz switching, or around 10 times as fast as common Class D Amplifiers...Why anyone would want to listen through an A2D followed by an D2A Converter that are around 10 times worse than single speed DSD is beyond me. But with enough hype and snazzy naming it cannot help but sell high and wide."

And, don't worry, we haven't forgotten:

Cheers George
charles1dad's avatar
charles1dad
10,250 posts
 

I appreciate ML's comments. I recognize technology moves onward and evolves. I just find it quite admirable that a class A transistor   amplifier  from 1977  still can on sonic grounds (the most important quality/criteria  IMO) outperform  so many current production amplifiers. A 43 year old SS amplifier that people still covet for excellent sound quality.

Charles

More to discover