Lamm M1.2 v. ML2.1

I can only comment on the LL2 (original version) vs. the L2, both of which I heard in my system (the LL2 for several weeks), so take it with a little salt. The L2 was more refined, a bit more neutral, with ultimately deeper bass extension (the LL2 was just a little fat in the mid bass, nothing you would really complain about nor really notice but for the comparison with the L2). That said, had I decided on having a Lamm preamp instead of the Jadis I wound up buying, I would have chosen the LL2, because it has more of that tube "magic" as Syntax correctly points out.

I also agree with Syntax that the ML2.1 will really restrict the number of speakers that you can use with it. You really need a very sensitive speaker, and even then there are only a few speakers around that are sensitive enough to let the full glory of that amp shine through. The M1.2s (and for that matter, the ML1.1s I own) will handle far more speaker loads than the ML2.1s. I do not think that either, though, can match the ML2.1's SET magic on the right speaker, good as they are.

All tube (remember, the L2 does not have tubes in its signal path, and I do have a preference for tubed preamps), a bit more natural and real sounding to me, probably in part due to its reproduction of microdynamics. I have always liked Jadis equipment for these reasons. Keep in mind that this is the four-chassis JP200MC, as well, using EF86 tubes, which is a different animal than the JP80MC I used to own, a much more neutral and transparent preamp. The unit has a freedom from congestion on the most demanding passages that is difficult to describe other than it just gets out of the way and lets you forget you're listening to equipment. The Lamm was very close to it in most respects; in fact, the guy who sold it to me (through my dealer) used the money to buy a Lamm L2!