View Single Post
  #20  
Old 07-19-2012, 06:21 AM
JackD201 JackD201 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 24
Default

The L2 does this thing where it really spaces out musical events in the soundstage. As such stuff like pizzicatos aren't masked as much by louder instruments. While it is fairly neutral I think it still has a touch of sweetness to it compared with say the VTL 7.5 of my brother which we compared in my system. It's top end is definitely more extended and pure than the LL2. What the LL2 has on the other hand is a more classic fullness to the lower midrange which depending on tubes used, in my case all Mullards, bordering on Octal type tone. While less bloomy than the LL2 the L2 has superior pitch definition all the way down.

There's one thing you might find disconcerting at first when you get your L2. With the LL2, I never got past 12 o'clock before stuff started falling off the shelves. 10 o'clock was plenty for even the most irresponsible listening. With the L2 I found myself at the 10 o' clock position for easy listening and had it cranked to about 1:30 for said episodes of madness. I asked Vladimir about it and he said he chose stepped attenuators for the L2 Reference that would allow for smaller increments between notches. This moved unity gain to about the 3 o'clock position. It felt weird looking at the dual knobs at first but I got used to it eventually.

Another thing is tube rolling. My experience as well as a few other L2 owners I've chatted with is that stock tubes work best.

As far as racks go. It's a dual mono design split right down the middle. In that middle is the DC umbilical. I would suggest an open rear (4 legged) rack. I use a Critical Mass PXK which has three legs and it can be a tight squeeze back there when setting up or tearing down.
Reply With Quote