Joule Electra LA150 MkII or Lamm LL2 Deluxe?


Hi all, I am looking at a new tube preamp in the $2,500 to $4,000 used range, and I could use your help. I have tried many over the past couple of years, and my current short list includes the Joule and the Lamm. I have a wanted ad posted for the Lamm but no response yet. I have read all the stuff on both, and I am not asking for anyone to tell me what to buy, but I am interested in hearing from users about the characteristics of these two preamps, and certainly from any who have compared them directly or owned both. What to you stands out either in a positive or negative way about either of these units and, if you owned one previously, what made you switch to something else. Important to me are quietness, clarity, dynamics, midrange warmth (at least some), and bass depth, texture, and accuracy. Also, regarding the Joule, are the tubes used in that unit available anywhere else other than from Joule, and are they known for being rugged and quiet? My virtual system is accurately posted, except I am using a Zoe preamp and Cary 500MB monos, instead of the Vibe&Pulse and DNA500 shown. Thanks - Tim
mitch2
To update this thread, I have purchased the Joule Electra LA150 MkII and I am currently giving that a run in my system. My unit is an upgraded MkI, and Jud Barber says there is no difference between that and an original MkII. My first impression is of exceptional clarity and dynamics. This preamp absolutely does not run out of steam at any level. It never breaks up, and never sounds shrill, grainy or lean. However, it does seem a bit more in the neutral camp than I expected. However, this is compared to my former TEAD Vibe/Pulse and my other current preamp the Lector Zoe, both of which are known for having a rich presentation, and perhaps being a bit "dark." The Joule is not dark. It plays what is there, but somehow without a "warts and all" presentation. You get detail and dynamics, without highlighting flaws on lesser recordings. It is very musical. Although I do not have much experience with this preamp yet, I believe its strength may be in the more than ample power reserves and the linearity of the tubes used. It does not candy-coat the music, but it does sound beautiful.

I understand one of the upgrades (or changes) from MkI to MkII involved changing out the internal Purist wire for Cardas wire. It seems the silver wire may have been too much of a good thing, and may have limited the full rich sound that many found desirable in the LA100 preamp. Following that trend, I removed some Purist interconnects that contained silver from the Joule to my amp, and replaced them with pure copper interconnects I had around here (Sonoran). To me, the pure copper wire sounds best with this preamp. I may consider going back to Cardas interconnects or another copper cable that would be a step up from the Sonoran. Any suggestions?

Finally, I still have my wanted ad posted for the Lamm LL2, and plan to purchase one if I find one generally within the A'gon blue book price range. I suspect, from what I have read, that the Lamm may deviate from tonal neutrality (especially compared to the Joule) by being more full and robust in the bass and mid-bass, but I am not a stickler for those things and generally go with what sounds best to me.
Curious Mitch, I was under the impression that the Joule was the reigning champ in the "rich presentation, bass detail & weight camp", that the MKII update was how it got there, and the reason I'm interested in it...please keep us posted.
I owned the LL2 and now own the La-150MKII, and matched with the CAT JL2s and Music Refence RM9 MKII amps it is very rich, with great bass weight and detail, yet also quite transparent - this pre is in no way slow and syrypy - it is comparable to my passive TVC (S&B 102 designed by Kevin Carter) in transparency and speed. I actually can't decide which I prefer between the two, which speaks volumes for the quality of the TVC given it is 1/5th the price. There was quite a gap in time between my Lamm and the Joule so I don't trust my audio memory on that.
Hi Jamnesta, I have had the LA150 MkII up and running for about 5 days now. The only thing I can think of is the preamp simply needed a bit of warm-up to sound its best. The bass is killer, just as described by HP in TAS. I am running from the plate direct output instead of from the Mu follower circuit (this is a simple jumper switch) as recommended by Jud Barber, and I am also running the higher 8dB of gain instead of the typical 4dB, also a jumper adjustment. The preamp is supported on its own feet then on a Zoethecus Z-slab sitting on 4 vibrapods then on an air bladder suspension system. I have a HiFi tuning fuse in it and I am using a 9awg PC with special resonance shielding. After more listening, I put the Zoe back in the system to better note the differences and the Joule definitely digs deeper in the bass. The Zoe has good bass and is dynamic, but in comparison the Joule has bass you feel in your chest. For fun, I put on Morph the Cat and was just about blown out of my chair! Midrange clarity is very good also and soundstaging is wide and deep. I am not sure why I thought the copper IC's were necessary to warm up the presentation, but I put my Purist (Gold,Copper,Silver) IC's back in and it sounds even better - with improved bass definition and sonic improvements across the board, although not too surprising since the Purist cables are much better than the Sonoran's. This is a very good preamp, and very nice looking also. I really like the Standby feature, which keeps things warm but saves tube life. Jud Barber says the tubes in this preamp will last 5 to 10 years with normal use. It is also quiet for a tube preamp. I will provide a further update after I play it some more (maybe I should write a review) and I will also report comparisons to the LL2, if one ever becomes available for sale.
Mitch2, you say " I am running from the plate direct output instead of from the Mu follower circuit (this is a simple jumper switch)" - What does that mean? Is it easy to do? What are the improvements? And, if it is better, why is it not the default setting? Thanks.