Lamm ML2, VLadimirs best effort to date?

Steve I'm sure Vlads statement ML3 is everything owners say it is and more, I'm happy for you.

I do not think that the ML2.1 was meant to be a sonic upgrade. I understood it to be a change easier for voltage usage, meaning 110 / 220 and a few parts differences, i.e., binding posts.

I have heard both and they were very similar.

I may be wrong.

binding posts do make a big diff IME, and the superior electric posts he used in the ML2s are regarded as the best avail (very little actual metal on them---ala eichmann bullet plugs).

i'd get the 2.1s and swap the superior posts in. you will notice an improvement

I replaced the binding post with WBT pure Silver and the difference is Huge. I would do that also with a ML2 :-)

Thank you for your replies, the binding post issue brought up by Rhyno and Syntax coincides with that of the opinion of two other owners that I know.

However one insists the M2 is the better sounding design, I have not heard the M2 in a system.

Jtinn thanks for joining in, the M2.1 was a direct replacement for the M2 with a few changes including new boards that were not available at the time the M2 was developed.
Along with modified output transformers, compatible world wide electrical adjust ability and [ heavy duty speaker binding posts ]....The worm in the apple.

Finally , I admit I was a bit hasty with my title and rightly deserved the light ridicule up top, just excited at the prospects of a totally new system.