The ML 333 images extraordinarily well. Very nice clean bass, midrange, and transparent treble. Seems to bring out the best in a speaker. I've never heard better sound from a Krell (sold my KSA-250 to buy the ML)!

I've owned this amp and it' far to over rated, there is better amps out there for less money,you pay mostly for the name its whats inside that counts.look around.

I've just hooked up this amp to my existing system - SFT1, Genesis Lens, SFD2 MkII, ARC LS2B MkII, Thiel 3.6. It almost brought tears to my eyes. The imaging is very focused, soundstage had expanded, bass tightened, very transparent, and I heard details that I've never heard before as compared to my Krell KST-100 or the Pass Oleph Os. This one is staying!

I was in the market for a new amp, being bitten by the upgrade bug & tried out several amps. My present system
consists of the Aleph 3 & Aleph 2 Monos. Had the chance to A/B
compare the ML 333 w/ the Aleph 3. The speakers were the Gallonucleus
& ProAc response 1sc. The 333 had a better 3D imaging, but thats it !!
The Alephs had much better detail & purity of tone. The 333 sounding more
artificial in comparison. The Harmonic richness in the Alephs was ethereal.
The Bass was natural in the Aleph 2s & somewhat exaggerated in comparison in
the 333s. I would give it 2 stars for what its worth

Levinson needs to re-think the design of the 333. Its sound barely qualifies it for use in the high-end arena. Why? The amplifier uses copious amounts of negative feedback. The sonic ramifications are manifest: a cold, austere sound; thin, tizzy high frequency reproduction; a lack of pace; and perhaps most seriously, a not-so-subtle overlay of grain that permeates the entire sonic fabric. I've heard amplifiers that cost HALF what the 333 does that sound WORLDS better. The sad thing is, most people are so blown away by the looks and build quality of this thing, they convince themselves the amp sounds great. And the fact is, most people really can't HEAR the differences between amplifiers anyway. But they PRETEND they can. The people who buy the 333 do so for reasons of status and acceptance. Music lovers will look elsewhere.

MARK LEVINSON 333 IS AN EXCELLENT PRODUCT. THIS AMP WILL PRODUCE THE FINEST SOUND WITH ALMOST ANY SPEAKERS. THE FREQUENCY RESPONCE FROM TOP TO BOTTOM IS THE BEST YOU CAN GET FROM AN AMPLIFER OF THIS CALIBER. THE HIGHS AND MIDS ARE SO SMOOTH WHILE THE BOTTOM END IS SO STRONG AND POWERFULL. THIS AMP COMPARED TO OTHER HIGHEND AMPLIFIERS , SUCH AS THE KRELL FPB 300, GIVES A BETTER PRESENTATION OF THE MUSIC IN TERMS OF SPACE , DEPTH AND SOUND STAGING. IVE HEARD NO OTHER AMPLIFIER THAT CAN PROFORM AS WELL AS THE 333. GIVE THIS AMPLIFIER A GOOD LISTEN AND THEN YOU WILL REALIZE WHAT THIS AMP CAN DO.

I love this amp, I had the rowland model 8T and I liked it a lot. But the ML 333 is a newer design and It sounded more open with better bass. Now you to use a cheater plug to get the best out of this amp. Everything improves from top to bottom. I do not find this amp bright at all, I have tube recordings and they sound to warm at times, then I have bright recordings and they sound that way.Martin Logan speakers sound bright and I would not ever use a soild state amp with them.

I also will pass on this tip, CinePro makes a balanced line conditioner, run out and buy one. It kills all noise the same balanced interconnect does. I never liked any other of the so called line conditioners, but this one is a keeper. I belive they have a web site check it.

I still like Rowland equipement nothing is built as good, My 8T just got a little old and I wanted to try a new design. Do I like the 333 better, in some ways, I do not think it is built as well, be then $2500 extra will buy you better quiality. Rowland sounds more warmer, closed in, and slower. The ML sounds more open and quicker. I like the ML for now. Is it the best out their who knows, But I can say each recordings sounds totaly different when usinf this amp and that a very good sign.

My system
Sony CDPXA7ES
ML 380S
ML 333
Paragon Regents
CZGEL interconnect
Cardas Golden Cross Speaker Wire
CinePro20 Power Line Balancer

good bass

dark, closed in midrange yet analytical, leans towards the hi-fi spectacular

Look, lets face it, throughout the years this Levinson equipment has been highly overrated. In 1988, I mistakenly bought the no. 23 amp after the diaper wetting review from the misguided Lewis Lipnick (Stereophile). When I first hooked that amp up; major disappointment. Dull (yet tizzy in the treble), lacking in dynamics and failure to give me any sort of presence. When I heard this 333, it was deja-vu. This amp is probably even more analytical than the old 23. It is simply not musical at all and is too recording-dependent, which is very frustrating. However, this unit appears too be better built than the 23, an amp that looked impressive, weighed a ton,but really was cheaply built (and unreliable, the amp smoked for no reason shortly after hookup) Ah, what painful memories. The Levinson 23 was the worst amplifier of the 80's. As for the 333, it's really not a whole lot better than the 23 at a much higher price. Save your money and quit feeding the wallet and ego of Madrigal...

Similar Products Used:

various Krells

By definition, this amp is an overkill for all pratical purpose.300X2 into 8 Ohms. Double its power rating when halves the impedance.
Build quality is the same way. (150 lbs) Moving them into the house
is definitely a 2 person job. Very deep chassis.

Sound quality is neutral sounding top to bottom. Defines
the meaning of tight bass. If anything, it has a very slight warm
sounding trebe. Forms a synergetic combination with Wilson speakers
and my Thiel 3.6.

I CONCUR (with Eric Liu's review). Just one more thing to be added.......DYNAMIC (maybe its because of Eric's Wilson speakers:-), no offends to Wilson owners and admirers), which Eric seemed to have left out about the No.333.Also, the No.333 or for that matter, all current Levinson amps does not seem to have anywhere on the amp that I can safely hold on to when moving it without risking cutting myself by its heat sink.

Note: Please...no flame mails please regarding my comments on the Wilson speakers. I'm just a very light hearted Audio Video enthusiast and frankly, was not impresses with the Wilson Speaker that I have encountered (which included the Grand Slamm at the Hi-Fi 96 show and the Witt at my dealer). I own a pair of ML SL-3 which is way cheaper than the Watt-Puppy, but it won my heart. I guess everyone has their own preference in how they like their Music reproduced. So, my apologies to all that I might have offended.