Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Paul S wrote:

Frankly, I am annoyed that I have been unable to grasp your notions of the "X Factor" …

Borrow L2 for a weekend and you will be able to see it. I it hard to explain.

Paul S wrote:

So then I imagine Milquiades as another serious shift, which you abandoned the ML2s for, which does not strike me as odd so much as it facinates me.  Hell, I'd start to work on those amps right now if it didn't also entail re-thinking and re-tooling my speakers, etc. in the bargain, just to give the suckers a listen.

Nope, the Milq are not “serious shift” from ML2. What the “vintage” ML2 did was very fine and I was trying very hard to now loose many of the ML2 befits. However, when I went for my next amp I have the very specific objectives that were targeted to address some ML2 limitation that I clearly identified over the years (I’m not wiling to explain what it was). The Milq did addressed, even in it’s fist revision, many demanded aspects but then it took some work to “slow” the Milq down and make some other Sonic changes. As I have writhen the Milq’s Sound was initially completely conceptualized even for 2 years before I started to work with Dima I called my next amp during those years as an AmplifierX, clearly know how it should sound but without havingit. Then, when the Melq come to existance, the amp was taught to sound in a specific way, still, the Melq itself did taught me something as well....  It was approximately 2001-2003 when realized that I wanted more then ML2 and within a year or so I knew what exactly I wanted from my next amp.  Unfortunately at that time I was not able to deal with Lamm about “more then ML2” because as soon I expressed that ML2 was good but NOT AS GOOD AS IT COULD BE the Vladimir become to feel threaten and begin to loaded on me his typical self-serving lying and deceptions.

Paul S wrote:

Is it so strange to you that someone would act to build your amps simply because he thinks he "takes your word" on the subject and "goes along"?  And I do not mean myself, but now that I've said this I'm thinking also that the amps will get built by the people who build them, for the reasons they build them.  In that sense, it seems you have lost control of the future of your creation, which I am not saying to inform but rather to remind.

Sure, I have no problems with it. Still I do not propose to “take my word” and I strongly encourage anybody who considered the Milq to make juts on channel prototype and to try. It is what I would do if I have an interest in some kind or design.

Paul S wrote:

But I wish you would compare and contrast the "relation between ML2's best performance and boundaries  of 'conceived reality' ", at least give us a shot at it...

Try to “compare” the “boundaries of conceived reality” between vintage ML2 and vintage M1.1. Yes, the ML2 is way more interesting amps but not in ALL aspects.  To be intestionally-abstractive: The M1.1 is way more liberal in music rendering (disregard electrical characteristics) then ML2 and give more “space for imagination". ML2 is “stiff” and stubborned and forces the things in it’s own way…  I am not talking that the ML2 ways are bad ways; in fact they are phenomenally useful… but only at certain level. When listening awareness get developed and the boundary where the ML2 operates too closed then ML2’s “forthfullness” might not be as effective anymore, quite opposite… it become self-suffocating….  However, here is where we enter the realms of the Lamm’s personal limitations where control and republican “love” are the “operational parameters”….

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site