 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
73.229.163.4
In Reply to: RE: What makes an amp sound "boring" ? posted by peppy m. on November 26, 2024 at 02:16:17
The Mark Levinson 383 integrated amp is the definition of boring. I think they used these amps to pipe elevator music into your elevator ride.I had the ML 383 for a short while cuz I thought it looked so cool. It was a very nice looking piece IMHO. It was fairly smooth and transparent but also analytical and a little lean in the mids. I think that combined with its 'polite' presentation in terms of dynamics is what made it a total snoozer.
I've had other 'dynamically challenged' amps but they were on the warmer side (Pass Aleph 3 & Volksamp Aleph 30) so even though they didn't light my fire I wouldn't call them boring. I think the ML's sonic character as described above ALONG WITH its dynamically dead sound is what made it especially boring.
Not mine but here's an example ML 383
Very handsome and beefy I thought. But he turned out to be a mama's boy.
Edits: 11/26/24 11/26/24Follow Ups:
The thread instantly reminded me of the ML 383. I could not listen to it without falling asleep. It's a shame because I liked everything else about it.
... all basically equal. It's the basic fault of passive preamps. And with also speakers come to that.
Dmitri Shostakovich
Edits: 11/27/24
I totally agree, but I call it dynamic jump. An amp can be smooth sounding without being boring so long as it doesn't smother the dynamic range or response. Example: I generally like the sound of McIntosh stuff, but not all of it. An MA6900 I had, amp section only, was similar to what some don't like in Macs, smooth but heavy and slow, but the 452 and 462 have tremendous dynamic range and are anything but heavy and slow, reflecting the new revision of the company's house sound which started about 10 years ago.
A good test for dynamics is the opening chord of Debussy's "Images for Orchestra" Iberia section. It makes me jump every time, and makes a good test of an amp's jump factor. Some amps can handle this and sound powerful , clear, and detailed, others can't, even though they come from the same manufacturer.
I've never kept components that don't have a dynamic sound. Not for very long, anyway.
LowIQ
I don't think the ML 383 had a passive preamp section but I can't be sure. On the other hand my Pass Labs INT-150 did. According to Pass it was basically their X150.5 amp with a passive preamp section. It wasn't dead sounding but it lacked the more energetic nature of my X2.5 pre and X150.5 power amp separates that it replaced.The newer Pass integrated amps use an an active preamp section with gain. They must have learned from their first integrated amp product which was the INT-150 that I owned.
Edits: 11/27/24 11/27/24
"Who designed these dorm bathrooms?!" we exclaimed. When we were in college, we liked going around to others' dorms. We were curious to see not just the dorm rooms, but the bathrooms and laundry facilities. The above bathroom had the sinks right in front of the toilets.
If you were at the sinks, brushing your teeth, drying your hair, putting in contacts, applying or removing makeup, you had dormmies going in and out of the toilets behind you. And vice versa.
In the late-1990s, and early-2000s, I had the Mark Levinson Nos. 360 DAC and 380 preamp. Both were good. So when we brought in the No. 383 integrated amp, we had high hopes.
Alas, no matter which and how many sources, powercords, interconnects, speaker cables, and speakers we threw at the No. 383, the latter steadfastly drained the music of life and verve. The No. 383 even made Totems sound lethargic and uninspiring - which was monumentally wrong.
Moreover, the binding posts sucked. They only accepted spades. They were positioned, so that the speaker cable could only approach from the bottom or top. If the speaker cable approached from the bottom, then it blocked the balanced inputs. If the speaker cable approached from the top, that often placed a lot of strain on the leads. Said strain could also, over time, allow the binding post to lose grip on certain spade lugs.
The Mark Levinson No. 431 power amp sounds nowhere near as deleterious as the No 383. But it has the same crappy spade-only posts. This time, the speaker cable can only approach from the side, the benefit of which is that the cables won't block the analog inputs and IEC jack. However, they place rack handles across those posts. So if your speaker cable has angled spades, the leads may not fit through the rack handles, and onto the binding posts.
The Mark Levinsons' binding post and handle placement reminded us of bad dorm bathroom designs.
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
