Is it better than the Lamm pre?
Back to tubes
- Thread starter sidvee
- Start date
Is it better than the Lamm pre?
Yes - in sq it is perhaps the same but in features it is far ahead. The Lamm is a great preamp., undoubtedly, but too spartan/purist for today's setups - main drawback is the lack of a remote. However one feature of the Lamm I miss is the gain setting - imo it is a very important requirement for separates.
Cheers,
Sid
I have had at-least a half a dozen pre-amps from well known brands like Conrad Johnson, ARC, Lamm, Luxman, Parasound and lesser know brands like Backert, Modwright etc in the past decade. All of these have been under $10,000. Was any one of them significantly better in sound quality than the other - Absolutely not? Did any one of them have a better synergy with my existing components at that time- Absolutely yes. Did all of them have the features I wanted? Absolutely not? Will I use a DAC direct into my amp? No (Won't say absolutely, because going direct has a certain measure of increase in resolution but somehow I hear a bit of loss of musicality in going direct). So this is where I am currently - own two tube based preamps. each costing under $10,000 - the Backert Labs Rhumba 1.3 and the Luxman CL-38uc. Don't see any new additions - at-least for tube pre's in the next couple of years.
Cheers,
Sid
Cheers,
Sid
D
Deleted member 15865
Guest
With a much humbler gear, I’ve experienced exactly that when I tried bypassing preamp and getting signal from CXN (streamer DAC) into the power amp. Just couldn’t enjoy the sound though felt lot cleaner.
panditji
Well-Known Member
Good decision to get out of audio retail..
Speakers to me, Panditji, are the voice of a system, so yes I admit I have gone through/and still go through a lot of them. Also I find it very difficult to stay monogamous, especially when it comes to speakers. I like to taste a different sound signature every now and then, though as I get older the urge is reducing a bit I might say
, maybe until I find the audio equivalent of the pink pill to pump more blood into my ears. Then I might get more. 
Cheers,
Sid
Beast_of_burden
Active Member
I am considering either the Spendor classic 3/5 or 4/5, which is this model to the far right? Can you tell me something about this Spendor, I know you have written reviews for Hifitoday.
This is the 3/5. Excellent speaker for female vocals (perhaps the best I have heard) and a generally great speaker for smaller rooms if your listening is based around small performances/female vocals. However treble is a bit recessed and mid range is warmish, so will not be the most revealing, and due to its size cannot really rock. I guess it competes with the harbeth p3esr/chartwell ls3/5 etc. Also needs a bit of power to be driven well. A most enjoyable speaker regardless.
I have stopped reviewing equipment for now, just enjoying my equipment and music.
Cheers,
Sid
Beast_of_burden
Active Member
Despite its obvious limitations everyone has nothing but good things to say. Whatever it's doing within its performance envelope I suppose it's doing it extraordinarily well.
Given your experience and the top notch systems that you have heard and own, this is really good information. Appreciate it.
sameer kumar
Well-Known Member
Congratulations ! ....Spendors finally . Happy listening .
Hi Sachin,
I really haven't heard this so I cannot comment. Also since this is ported it should be able to go deeper in bass and louder, but imo the thin walled sealed cabinet speakers have a magic in the midrange - if that is the right word. I heard the harbeth p3esr extensively and against the shl5 which I bought, though I would have preferred the p3esr if it had the bass extension and scale of the shl5. Anyways the 3/1 should have most if not all of the qualities of the 3/5 but due to the port room interaction and ease of placement will be harder.
Cheers,
Sid
I had that same rug 8 years ago.
Beast_of_burden
Active Member
How long have you had these Spendor 3/5s? Based on everything I have read, it's the sealed box that's a key ingredient in the recipe. I don't think I need much more convincing, an audition is in order.
Just under a week, needed a different flavor for my secondary listening space where for the past 5-6 years I have had Atc scm19, Atc scm11, Atc scm7 & Atc scm19v2. At first I was planning to get an Atc scm20, but of all these I have fond memories of the Atc scm7 which again is a small sealed speaker (though quite different in construction), so decided to go for the 3/5 based on my listening experience with the Harbeth p3esr.
Cheers,
Sid
D
Deleted member 15865
Guest
Thanks Sid. Yes, a rear port makes it harder as one has to get precise placement - it’s the biggest challenge I face with my current speakers (the Castle Knight 2). But I have come to love my speakers over the last three years I have them and the Spendor Classic 3/1 - they are similar in so many ways: almost identical dimensions, rear port, driver size, frequency range down to 40 Hz, sensitivity of 88 dB - that they seem like a vertical upgrade option to me. I couldn’t find many reviews of the 3/1 though, barring one Youtube demo video and a home demo video shared by one FM that have piqued my interest. Besides the characteristically mesmerising vocals, I find the sound of 3/1 has lower center of gravity (towards the bass) than most Spendors and that’s to my liking. I didn’t find the nasality that Spendors are (rightly or wrongly) accused of. I plan to follow these speakers online for a few months (for user and expert reviews to generate) and audition them at an opportune time. All in sweet time.
Would love to read your comparison of the two young guns - the SCM7 and the 3/5.
Last edited by a moderator:
Join WhatsApp group to get HiFiMART.com Offers & Deals delivered to your smartphone!
Similar threads
