Lamm LP2 and WE417A tubes

wow, that was interesting

Wow, interesting indeed.

I have not heard the LP2 but there has been so much praise by virtually everyone here who has either owned this or heard it that I would love to hear it vs. my Io. But maybe the Io would stir up less emotion (of the non musical kind) ... or is that, commotion?

Herman: It sounds like you have joined the group of those who love this unit. Do you find it to have a lower noise floor than the Io?

Rbes: I have a couple of fair questions: 1) Why did you not simply say from the start, "I happen to be one person here who did not care for the LP2 and here is a report as to my findings"?; 2) What is your reference phono stage that so well "showed up" all the problems of the LP2?

*** I have not heard the LP2 but there has been so much praise by virtually everyone here who has either owned this or heard it that I would love to hear it vs. my Io

Hm… you will find that Io it compatible to LP2. From certain prospective the LP2 is more interesting because it has some X-factor (look my article about L2) and some other things but Io is less “brick wall flat” then LP2. The Io is very mud-spattered vs LP2 us too syntactic. Witches are better? Both are no there…

*** Do you find it to have a lower noise floor than the Io?

Hm, I would not say so. The LP2 has 453 zillions dB less gain then Io and it looks like it quieter. Also, the LP2 is too sharp (musically speaking) that snips the noise and many that Patricia Barber so “attractive” for some people… In addition, the 417A/5842 tubes that used in LP2 are unfortunately VERY finny. They pick noise, they deviate gain, and they go into crazy sometimes. They have HUGE percentage (~80%) that might not be use in the LP2 input stage. The 417A/5842 is very unstable tube and there are many much better high mu tubes that might be bult a phonocorrector around, including the two stages 65dB gain instead of the 37dB gain that Lamm made in his LP2. What is the purpose to have a insufficient gain glycerin- like-sounding phonocorrector and to use it with transistor-table-radio-like-sounding transformer-condom? What to use it with, the $300 worth MM Grado?

I have to admit that I kind of slightly harsher on the Lamm LP2 because to me it was a disappointment phonocorrector. I even paid $250 in order Lamm to inspect it and to confirm that my unit was not broken. After a year of trying to push the demanded sound off my unit and after facing the SAME sound form at least 10 other units I declared the LP2 as juts an ordinary audiophile crap. I never extend more credibility to any other piece of audio that I had in my room and I never work harder trying to get out of LP2 are reasonable sound. Probably my frustration with this phonocorrector have licensed me to be slightly more critical to what the LP2 does. If some of the “older guys” remember the text of my add and my picture when I was dumping my LP2 on this site then you might decipher how I felt about this init.

Wel Jafox, if the LP2 is audiophile crap and your IO is worse you must be feeling pretty silly about spending all of that money :>)

I once had an IO but that was a while ago and it was a single power supply older unit in a completely different system so I won't attempt to compare the IO to the LP2. I was very happy with the IO and it is one of the few pieces I regret selling. The IO is much more flexible in terms of loading and the Lamm does have limited gain so if you need the extra gain (I don't) then the Lamm is not for you.

I too am curious what the reference phono stage could be.

And what is a juts finny syntactic phonocorrector? Inquiring minds need to know!