2. amps-preamps
  3. 1255201264

VTL 5.5 vs. Lamm LL2?

I'm trying to mate my VTL MB185 mono amps with a really nice preamp. My budget is around $3000.00. Initially, I thought that the best choice would be a unit made by the same manufacturer as the amps. Anyway, what better place to get an intelligent opinion on this than Audiogon. By the way,

I'm not interested in hearing anything about the Audio Horizons preamp. I've already read about that unit in the longest running. I believe that they have the longest running thread on audiogon (over 3.5 years) with over 1000 entries (most) from the same small handful of people. Does anyone find this odd? Either way, I'm not interested in this unit. Although, I'm sure that some of it's "long standing" fans will make it into this forum.
kensetsu
mitch2
4,206 posts
 
I have heard about some people using the Placette as you described to add a "remote volume." That would also deal with a gain issue that I didn't elaborate on in my earlier post, since it is discussed on the Lamm website. One of the changes with the newer LL2.1 is the ability to reduce the overall preamp gain via a front panel switch. This was in response to feedback that with higher level sources (CDP's) some found the gain too much and the usable range of the volume control was down near the lower end. Your Placette idea, or an overall gain reducer as made by Endler, would take care of that if it were a problem, although both would put an additional device in the signal path (as I presume the switch on the LL2.1 does). I wish the volume control on the LL2/2.1 were a stepped attenuator as on the more expensive L2 Ref, but instead on the LL2/2.1 they use a high quality potentiometer with steps (or detentions) on the control itself - not a true attenuator with discrete steps. If a true stepped attenuator with discrete steps were used, the volume control range would not be such an issue, although the control could then be designed so the steps would ramp up more slowly as done with the "CD Taper" volume control offered as an option on CAT preamps. Personally, this has never been an issue for me with regards to either finding an appropriate listening volume, or as it may affect the overall quality of the sound - it still sounds better overall than the other preamps I have tried.
nolitan
865 posts
 
Hi Mitch,

Great reply!
wondering, how does the LL2 stack up against the Tom Evans Vibe Pre-amp, or the famous Hovland HP100 pre-amp ?

Noli
mitch2
4,206 posts
 
Nolitan,
I have owned two Lithos 7 Vibes and a Lithos 6 Vibe and operated them with both the Pulse and with the standard power supplies. They all sounded very nice, although the Pulse PS kicks it up a notch with regards to dynamics and depth. The Vibe is one of three preamps I have tried that I could live with (the others being the LL2 Deluxe and the CAT Ultimate MkII). The Vibe/Pulse offers a very clear and musical presentation for a SS preamp, with the midrange being the strong suit, followed closely by the bass performance. Minor weaknesses were in the high frequencies, which were slightly dark sounding and maybe just a touch "strained" if you really crank it up, and perhaps very slightly lacking in drive compared to some of the better performers such as the CAT. The LL2 D beats it in dynamics, drive, midrange richness and texture, and high frequency purity and extension. The Lithos 7 model is an improvement over the 6, but not night and day, although having the Pulse PS is mandatory if you want the best sound from this preamp. If I were to give up tubes (probably will not) then the Lithos 7 Vibe with Pulse would be a top choice. Although just my opinion, I hope this helps.
nolitan
865 posts
 
Thanks Mitch-looks like the LL2 is a good contender especially at its price point.
Do you find the LL2 dark sounding ?
jtimothya
612 posts
 
I've had the LL2.1 in-house for several months and tried it with a variety of NOS 6DJ8 family tubes. Along with the expected gain in 'air', timbre, etc., these older tubes (Valvo 7308s, Amperex Orange Globes, Telefunkens) deliver real improvement to image specificity versus the stock tubes.

Wrt 'dark sounding' - I understand how that can be an initial characterization some folks will use, but its not the way I'd describe the LL2.1. What I hear is a slight mid-bass lift (coupled with the preamp's excellent resolution) that yields deeper tonal colors - harmonics, overtones - in the mid-bass frequencies. In lower registers there is more emphasis on the notes' fundamental - deep bass is weighty and distinct but not as tonally nuanced. Its the contrast or difference between the tonal character of the mid-bass and low bass that that may lead to the 'darker' description. It takes a certain analytical cast to hear it this way - definitely not the direction the LL2.1 leads the ear, but that's how I parse it for now.

For its cost I think its a helluva preamp.
 
More to discover