MBL 101 (~1990) - amp suggestions.


Does anybody have experience with those speakers:
Designation was MBL 101, or MBL 101a/b/c (letters may designate colour).
They have _no_ cone drivers, only three 'Radialstrahler' units, the same size units as in later/current MBL 101 range, but lower crossover points. Subwoofers (MBL 201) were optional, I do not have them.
So far I have tried the following amps:
Pass Aleph 4: almost there, but feels like lacking authority. Also, female vocals seem to suffer (males fare better).
300B SET (glasshouse/hificollective): they make sound, even loud if pushed (circuit allows 300B to go A2), yet the match is poor, orchestra becomes a mess.
Moderate power SS AB amp ("INnovative Audio Ultrapath"): pointless. Sounds flat and gutless, worse than Aleph 4 or SET.
Mark Levinson 23: the best match so far. Controlled and effortless; merciless at times (poorer recordings are exposed for what they are).
-- Do you think I can [substantially] improve over ML 23?

inefficient

Showing 6 responses by inefficient

  • On MF AMS50:
interesting in general, but I don’t see it working from a technical pont:
76w in 4 Ohm do not seem to do the trick @ 80 dB/W (or even 80 dB/2.83V).

To R.:
in ‘cost no object’ situation I’d start with a pair of ML 33 and see if they are any good.
In real life I tred ML 23, I could get a Krell ksa 250s, probably a ML 333, a Pass X350...
or —and that is quite realistic right now — another Pass Aleph 4 and run them paralelled one per channel.
= I look for ideas and _experience_
Experience with old MBL 101 seems a scarce commodity though...

Currently I use MBLs in open living area, 6 x 7.5  x 2.5 m (or 20' x 25' x 8'4), Room has large windows, at  it's other end it opens to upper floor ( ~2 x 3 m / 7' x 10' "hole") + extends into a hall (1.2 x 4.5 m / 4 x 15 feet), not empty space (open kitchen, some furniture and clutter).
MBL 101 ability to fill the room is quite surprising (not nearly as much volume 'gradient' as when I used Lowther Fidelios).
And there is bass, -- my neighbour from two floors down informed me so.
Looked up 'EPDR resistance' -- thanks for the tip!
Stereophile has a good article in their archive, that clarifies a lot, among other things sets in perspective use of tubes (300B with a 6 Ohm tap really did not work too well, in 2 Ohm 'epdr' resistance they should not).
Also explains why Aleph 4 was not happy, it can live with 4 Ohm, but not with 2 Ohm.
So ML 23 is a decent match, and an amp doubling output down to 1 Ohm could be worth a try.
Thinking of 'eprd', McIntosh with their autoformers are on to something.
Gryphons seem rather costly.
I will go active in bass and relieve MBLs from 100 Hz downwards: my 101s are super old and have no bassreflex box, which current 101s have; MBL themselves suggested pairing with their active MBL 201, but I will try home-made dipoles instead (I find room modes and booming ported box bass rather dilsturbing, reproducing bass that way does not recreate classical concert or opera experience too well).
- Just to clarify “would” or “would not” be compatible?
I like spaciousness of MBLs a lot - they just fill the room. However, they excited vertical room mode, Even with that caveat MBL bass is ok.
Then Gradients showed me that bass can be more tuneful - I am currently using Gradient 1.5 Helsinki, cardioid mids and highs with dipole below 200 Hz. There is a bit of placement difficulty (easy to get decent stereo image, but difficult to get optimal bass), but once in position I like the overall sound quite a bit, I just wish I could have more uniform sound in the room - like with MBLs. With clean dipole bass - like Gradient. Gradient 1.5 have one 12” driver per side. Seems barely enough. So I got something bigger (two BMS 18N862-8 per side).