Mark Levinson - are they good or just over rated

Hi guys,

I was auditioning some lovely Mcintosh amplifiers this weekend and came
across a sales guy commenting "Mark Levinson amplifers are just
overrated peice of yuppy trash".

I know that all the top-of-line Lexus models carry MLs. But car stereo
systems don't mean much to me. High-end 2-channel home audio does ;-)

Any comments would be very much appreciated.

Cheers

Max

On 14 Jan 2007 14:36:54 -0800, "max graff" wrote:

Hi guys,

I was auditioning some lovely Mcintosh amplifiers this weekend and came
across a sales guy commenting "Mark Levinson amplifers are just
overrated peice of yuppy trash".

I know that all the top-of-line Lexus models carry MLs. But car stereo
systems don't mean much to me. High-end 2-channel home audio does ;-)

Any comments would be very much appreciated.

Cheers

Max

Are you looking for genuinely good performance or just bragging
rights? If the former, buy pretty much anything that takes your fancy;
buy on the basis of offering you the right kind and number of inputs,
and power to suit your needs. If your room or speakers are
particularly dire you might want to include a set of tone controls.

The result will be indistinguishable from the best of high end
amplifiers, and a great deal better than a good number of them, which
have put cosmetics before design competence.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"max graff" wrote in message
oups.com
Hi guys,

I was auditioning some lovely Mcintosh amplifiers this
weekend and came across a sales guy commenting "Mark
Levinson amplifers are just overrated peice of yuppy
trash".

As if Mcintosh would never sell any of their seemingly less overpriced
products to any yuppy with the coinage and the desire.

I know that all the top-of-line Lexus models carry MLs.

A simple case of branding by Harmon International, who own the name.

Mark himself has lost the rights to both his name and his sexy wife, the
author.

But car stereo systems don't mean much to me. High-end
2-channel home audio does ;-)

What means more to you, sound quality or bragging rights?

Any comments would be very much appreciated.

Well, these are "any comments". ;-)

Arny Krueger wrote:
"max graff" wrote in message
oups.com
Hi guys,

I was auditioning some lovely Mcintosh amplifiers this
weekend and came across a sales guy commenting "Mark
Levinson amplifers are just overrated peice of yuppy
trash".

As if Mcintosh would never sell any of their seemingly less overpriced
products to any yuppy with the coinage and the desire.

I know that all the top-of-line Lexus models carry MLs.

A simple case of branding by Harmon International, who own the name.

Mark himself has lost the rights to both his name and his sexy wife, the
author.

But car stereo systems don't mean much to me. High-end
2-channel home audio does ;-)

What means more to you, sound quality or bragging rights?

Any comments would be very much appreciated.

Well, these are "any comments". ;-)


In my view, both the statements in the Subject line are true for most
"high-end" equipment.

As Don said, as far as sound quality goes, almost any modern piece of
electronics will sound the same when you don't know the brand. Buy on
facilities and looks, as hopefully you'll be living with it a long time.

Having said that, high-end equipment isn't just about performance, looks
and build-quality come into it a great deal. ML equipment, as is Krell,
MF, Audio Research etc etc are very well built, perform superbly, are
well engineered and therefore are "good". They have achieved Brand
values that allows them to charge premium prices which other brands
can't. I remember years ago Sony, Technics, JVC and others had a
"premium" range selling at similar prices to other High-End brands and
which I'm sure was just as good, but very few shops carried them and
enthusiasts shunned them. Their Brand just couldn't carry the price.

So the earlier advice seems sound. There's nothing wrong with ML, and
they are well built etc, *but* performance-wise, you can get the same
for a *lot* less money.

S.

"Bob Latham" wrote in message


There you go. Now tell me I'm an idiot without a clue and
all amplifiers sound the same and the dealer stitched up
my mate. Actually, if that's what you're going to say,
save yourself the bother.

As usual Bob, you've missed the point of 1,000s of posts on the topic. Your
error was not that you were ignorance of the well-known fact that all amps
sound the same, because that is not a well-known fact.

In fact your statement about amps sounding the same is a straw man that you
regurgitated so that you could premptively dismiss anybody who disagreed
with you on the grounds that good amps probably don't sound all that
different.

No, the problem is that you base a far-reaching claim on so-called listening
tests that were probably utter crap. They appear to be utter crap because
there is no indication of proper level-matching, no indication of any checks
to see that the amps are proper representatives of their make and model, and
above all, no indication of any bias controls.

Speaking as someone that has done more level-matched, bias-controlled
comparisons of audio products, over a longer period of time than almost any
living human, I'm here to say that good amps just might sound a little
different under certain critical circumstances, but that the kind of
differences you have listed out are no doubt due to the slapdash means you
seem to use to compare amplifiers. Garbage in, garbage out!

"Bob Latham"

Right so at the demo I had no way of knowing what the gain of the
amplifiers were and so we employed a sound pressure meter and a 1kHz CD
test tone. I'm sure the sound levels were within a db or perhaps at worst
2db.


** A TOTALLY crap test.

You are NOT sure of such an error margin with a ****wit test like that.

In any case, even + /- 0.5 dB level error will sway a listener's
opinion.



But having done all of this, what are you supposed to do?


** Use basic scientific method - of course.

That is the only way humans have EVER learned a single damn thing about
anything.

YOUR idea of " science " is the same as witchcraft and black magic.

Easy or see you goofed off majorly in all the hard science classes.

****WIT !!





........ Phil

Phil Allison wrote:
"Bob Latham"


Right so at the demo I had no way of knowing what the gain of the
amplifiers were and so we employed a sound pressure meter and a 1kHz CD
test tone. I'm sure the sound levels were within a db or perhaps at worst
2db.



** A TOTALLY crap test.

You are NOT sure of such an error margin with a ****wit test like that.

In any case, even + /- 0.5 dB level error will sway a listener's
opinion.




But having done all of this, what are you supposed to do?



** Use basic scientific method - of course.

That is the only way humans have EVER learned a single damn thing about
anything.

YOUR idea of " science " is the same as witchcraft and black magic.

Easy or see you goofed off majorly in all the hard science classes.

****WIT !!





....... Phil





I just realised that Phil's posts make far more sense if you picture the
old South Park bus driver while reading them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ms._Veronica_Crabtree


:-)

--
Nick

"Serge Auckland" wrote

As Don said, as far as sound quality goes, almost any modern piece of
electronics will sound the same when you don't know the brand. Buy on
facilities and looks, as hopefully you'll be living with it a long time.

Having said that, high-end equipment isn't just about performance, looks
and build-quality come into it a great deal. ML equipment, as is Krell,
MF, Audio Research etc etc are very well built, perform superbly, are well
engineered and therefore are "good". They have achieved Brand values that
allows them to charge premium prices which other brands can't. I remember
years ago Sony, Technics, JVC and others had a "premium" range selling at
similar prices to other High-End brands and which I'm sure was just as
good, but very few shops carried them and enthusiasts shunned them. Their
Brand just couldn't carry the price.

So the earlier advice seems sound. There's nothing wrong with ML, and they
are well built etc, *but* performance-wise, you can get the same for a
*lot* less money.



The demise of 'famous names' in the face of steep competition isn't
restricted to hifi gear. I believe it's the inevitable consequence of
manufacturers try to retain a significant percentage of the available market
without fully understanding the radical changes needed to be able to keep up
('parts bin/existing designs' thinking for a start). The question is are
companies like ML and Krell in a healthy position? If so, I don't see any
problem - not everyone is impoverished scum and not everyone wants their
converted lofts/penthouses/yachts sullied with the *cheapest* kit that'll
get the job done....

(Unlike me, but then my kit isn't trying to be *furniture* or trying to
impress anybody other than by its *sound*....)

Having said that, I am nearing the end of my own 'audio quest' and have
proved I can get a pretty good sound from fairly basic kit and some
homebrew - any changes in the future are likely to be of an 'upward' nature
to kit that has a degree of 'aesthetic appeal', some twinkly bits and mebbe
a few nice, blue LEDs....

:-)

Remotes are good also....

"Bob Latham" wrote


Okay, I know I'll regret this but......

In October 2004 a guy at work asked me about a surround sound amplifier.
He already knew I was a Kef,Meridian,Arcam kind of guy and so was not
surprised when I suggested the Arcam amp. Not the P7/AV8 that I have but
one more in his price range. Now being less convinced that all amps are
perfect and sound the same I did suggest he listened to it before buying.

I arranged a demo with a dealer that I used for 20 years and they agreed
with me that the Arcam was very good. We turned up on the Saturday morning
and listened and it sounded fine. Then the dealer said we have a Denon in
the same price bracket, it has more bells and whistles though. We tried
that.

I think all 3 of us were surprised by the result. The Denon was quite a
bit more punchy and dynamic than the Arcam, so much so that we needed to
check both amps had the same settings and configuration and *volume* which
we set with an admittedly cheap and nasty sound pressure level meter.

Dave (work guy) and I would each have put money on taking home the Arcam
but no, the Denon lives at his house.



No suprise there - Denon make some nice amps (I've got one) and offer far
better 'bang for your buck' than certain pricey English makes from what I
can see of it. One major appeal to me is that the Denon's phono stage seems
to be pretty good (for SS) - better than the dull and weedy NAD and ProJect
cheepie standalones, IME......

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
. ..
"Bob Latham" wrote in message


There you go. Now tell me I'm an idiot without a clue and
all amplifiers sound the same and the dealer stitched up
my mate. Actually, if that's what you're going to say,
save yourself the bother.

As usual Bob, you've missed the point of 1,000s of posts on the topic.
Your error was not that you were ignorance of the well-known fact that all
amps sound the same, because that is not a well-known fact.

In fact your statement about amps sounding the same is a straw man that
you regurgitated so that you could premptively dismiss anybody who
disagreed with you on the grounds that good amps probably don't sound all
that different.

No, the problem is that you base a far-reaching claim on so-called
listening tests that were probably utter crap. They appear to be utter
crap because there is no indication of proper level-matching, no
indication of any checks to see that the amps are proper representatives
of their make and model, and above all, no indication of any bias
controls.

Speaking as someone that has done more level-matched, bias-controlled
comparisons of audio products, over a longer period of time than almost
any living human, I'm here to say that good amps just might sound a little
different under certain critical circumstances, but that the kind of
differences you have listed out are no doubt due to the slapdash means you
seem to use to compare amplifiers. Garbage in, garbage out!



Ay oop, mind yer backs - Arny's trying to wipe his recently-endowed
'slapdash' bogey off....!! :-)