New Lavry DA11 DAC

[Dan Lavry]

The only thing I don't like is that up-down toggle volume control, which I notice is also on the DA11. But I'm sure this is a dead-horse topic by now.

The up/down toggle switch for volume offers some advantages. The volume control interface is digital, but the volume control circuitry itself is analog. You can call it "digitally controlled analog volume":

1. When attenuating by analog means, you do not truncate digital bits.

Say you have a CD with 16 bits resolution, and you want to attrenuate the signal by 24dB. You end up losing 3 bits so you are listning to 13 bits... Figure for each 6dB attenuation you lose a bit.

2. The matching between channels is far better then a dual analog pot,

and it holds its accuracy over the whole range.

That is a lot bigger issue then many realize. Say you want a pot to "work well" over 40dB range. The number 40dB does not sound like much, but dB describes the ear sensitivity to volume. The pot itself is not an ear, so you really need to change the resistance by a factor of 100:1 ratio. If the range is 60dB then we are talking 1000:1 ration. A stereo volume control calls for dual pot on a single shaft. So you need to have 2 mechanical devices with a common shaft. The tolerances of the mechanical parts alone should be a fruction of 1% to end up with good matching to 40 dB range. Add to it the pointer (contact) touching the resistive surface (carbon, cermet or whatever), and you are way off...

The switch method I use offers better then .1dB accuracy over the whole range, and the stereo matching is even better then that.

3. Unlike analog potentiometers, when you set the gain with a digital

display, you get reliable and predictable level (such as 56 mean 24dBu, 55

means 23dBu...). When you move an analog pot, you lose the calibration.

My digitally controlled analog volume is a lot more expansive (and sohfisticated) then a dual pot. I did what I did for the above reasons.

Regards

Dan lavry

[Elephas]

Thanks for the detailed explanation about the volume toggle. I remember the audio shop people saying something similar when I bought the DA10.

The shop has demo units of the DA10 and Benchmark DAC1. I've spent some time there doing some AB comparisons, and I always ended up being disappointed by the Benchmark each time. I think the DAC1 lacks refinement.

[HeadphoneAddict]

Thanks for the detailed explanation about the volume toggle. I remember the audio shop people saying something similar when I bought the DA10.

The shop has demo units of the DA10 and Benchmark DAC1. I've spent some time there doing some AB comparisons, and I always ended up being disappointed by the Benchmark each time. I think the DAC1 lacks refinement.

Maybe I'll have to look at a used DA10 when peeps upgrade to the DA11, or my budget says may I should stick to the Pico DAC-only like originally planned for my second rig.

[padam]

I had the chance to try a DA10 for a few days. I like it a lot. Is there anything more or less similar in this price range that is worth looking at or should I just get a DA10 or DA11?

[blessingx]

The Lavry sound changes a decent amount based on on volume/attenuation, balanced pins (and associated cables where you can go non-attenuated at 56) and to a lesser amount even PLL settings. Often I think the Lavry gets a bit short thrift because listeners don't dial in their preferred sound (though still similar signature on any setting). Have recently had a short couple hours test with DA10, Neko D100 MKII and Benchmark DAC1 (non-HDR/Pre/USB), and it was kinda interesting to soften up the top/overall dynamic punch to be more Neko-like (backing off to ~50-52). There were times (w/Peak+Volc and HD800 or especially balanced HD580 out back) the Benchmark and Lavry were nearly identical (didn't test headphone jacks). Certainly came away with more respect for the Benchmark after (and the Neko since acquiring a turntable and getting used to vinyl again). Now I'd possibly pick which had the functionality I more needed. If adjusting the volume often I may recommend the DAC1. If jumping back and forth between digital and vinyl the D100. I don't ever plan on purchasing a DAC without sample rate indicators though, so those are out for me. As always, these impressions are based on bang for buck. Can obviously do better if money no object. Eyeing that PWD.

I'd also toss in the less adjustable, much cheaper used Parasounds you already well know in a similar sound family to DA10 on 56/PLL crystal. And it was so nice to be able to run balanced and SE.

Edited August 13, 2011 by blessingx

[padam]

I used it at 56 since it is not mine it did not want to try the internal bypass but thanks for noting. Also I just used the default crystal setting so far.

Unfortunately what I hear is less refinement from the Parasound, it is musical and dynamic but not as smooth, clear or detailed and the soundstage is narrower. It is nice for rock but not that good for classical, etc. so I will be sad to give it back.

Tomorrow there might be a comparison against the DAC1 which I heard before and it was also better in the technical sense but also a bt too clinical to me (even if the CEC does make things warmer) and the Lavry seem to strike the balance between quite neutral and not too analytical but we'll see since I did not hear the two together yet it might be close.

There is still a slightly metallic quality to the treble (have to use the unbalanced stock cable as there is a problem with the other and I know balanced drive is much better, especially in bass dynamics and soundstage) but aside from that I really like the sound and I was surprised because I expected the Parasond to hold up a bit better.

[Torpedo]

I also prefer the Lavry to the Benchmark. The DA-11 is a pretty decent sounding piece of equipment, full of features for the price.

[blessingx]

Yeah the Parasound is a bit 'thicker' no? I'm sure if you had the volume at 56 without distortion you've got the pins set correctly for output, but a couple of us didn't for an awful long time.

I suppose the PS Audio DAC III should be brought up as in the price range and some prefer, though upsampling, which seems a larger no-no now, than when it was first released.

Edited August 13, 2011 by blessingx

[padam]

Yes, my other 'fun' headphone (HD250II) might be preferable with that. There is much less technical difference as it seems to strengthen its own character while the Lavry softens it which can be considered better objectively but I don't consider it to be better. I might even go for a worse (or just different) cable than APS with that one because of the same reason.

Pity I did not hear the SR-Omega with the Lavry I think I would have liked it much more than I did.

[Currawong]

I thought the DA-10 had a slight "metallic" sound using the optical input, so I can't help wondering if that would change using a good USB to S/PDIF converter.

[HeadphoneAddict]

Yeah the Parasound is a bit 'thicker' no? I'm sure if you had the volume at 56 without distortion you've got the pins set correctly for output, but a couple of us didn't for an awful long time.

I suppose the PS Audio DAC III should be brought up as in the price range and some prefer, though upsampling, which seems a larger no-no now, than when it was first released.

[sorry for the rambling post]

I thought the PS Audio DL III was a nice DAC for the price ($699), and in 96K upsampling mode it sounded identical side by side with a Stello DA100 Signature with upsampling on ($895). They both had a nice warm smooth analog-like sound. I played with the two together for about 3 hours and found only a few differences - in 192K mode the DL III soundstage seemed to be slightly expanded and the treble was slightly brighter or more present. They were very subtle changes but really appreciated if I was listening to a darker sounding rig. Interestingly my Perfectwave DAC doesn't seem to change in tone when I switch between various upsampling modes like the DL III did, and I just leave it set for "native" all the time.

Before I got the DL III, plaidplatypus brought his Lavry DA-10 to my house for a mini-meet and it gave me the urge to try something else. I thought it sounded slightly better in my GES/O2 rig than my mini-DAC's 1/8" output, and I wanted one - but I ended up with the DL III because the price was so much more affordable. We used a Jensen Transformers ISOmax to convert the DA-10 to single ended for the GES, and it worked really well.

The DL III in 192K mode seemed to help improve the recessed treble in my GES/O2 rig and give it crisper sound that felt more spacious and open, while I was happy with the Apogee everywhere else. But in the end I just didn't think the DL III was as refined and musical as the Apogee so I upgraded it to the PWD. I also think the Apogee mini-DAC balanced out sounds a little better than it's 1/8" single ended output, and comparing the Apogee XLR > ISOmax RCA conversion vs the DL III RCA output was another improvement over the DL III.

On another note, I think the Cullen Stage IV modded DL III someone brought to RMAF was noticeably better than my stock DL III, and I suspect it might have been better than the Apogee as well if I had been able to compare them. That had put Wyred for Sound high up on my list of DACs to consider before I bought the PWD.

My main experience with the DA-11 has been with Jude's rig at RMAF and with the Lavry table at RMAF, and I haven't really been able to compare it side by side with anything in the same rig. I did think the headphone out sounded better than my Apogee headphone out, and similar to the DACmini headphone out, and the PIC control was really nice to set up a crossfeed effect or for expanding the stereo stage.

There are so many DACs out there that I haven't heard yet, but of all the DAC's I've heard that cost less than my PWD I think the DA-11 or a Rick Cullen design might be what I'd get.

[HeadphoneAddict]

I thought the DA-10 had a slight "metallic" sound using the optical input, so I can't help wondering if that would change using a good USB to S/PDIF converter.

I actually only ever heard the DA-10 via Coax S/PDIF input. I wonder if the DA-11 would have the same issue for you, or if it was just an issue with the optical transport?

A lot of jitter could make it sound like that, and I experienced that with optical out of Apple TV into the DL III at RMAF. The Cullen modded DL III and my PWD don't have an issue with the Apple TV as transport, but I never tried my mini-DAC with it. But the DL III didn't handle it well at all. I think my old SuperPro DAC707 couldn't lock onto the Apple TV 90% of the time.

[padam]

I don't get any metallic sounds with the balanced HD250II (even though it has quite a bit more treble than the HD6xx ones) so it is probably the stock Qualia cable which I am restricted to now as the other needs fixing... Sometimes I also get interesting out of the head sounds that I didn't get before with the Parasound because of the narrower soundfield.

I hope the DA11 USB input will sound good so I won't need the Halide either.

[padam]

On today's unscientific comparison the DA10 seemed to outperform a the DAC1 USB, mostly in midrange and soundstaging and smoother highs (and this is from a Benchmark owner).

I should add though that with the Halide Bridge plugged into both the differences were considerably smaller. So if the DA11 USB input is not that hot than a DA10 + Halide could be better value for money unless those controls are something special which I am not sure about.

I will tell once I receive it for now I can't wait for that! It is on a higher level than the Parasound imho at least with the Halide Bridge.

Edited August 14, 2011 by padam

[padam]

DA11 in the house (that was so quick!)

I think I might prefer the Halide Bridge slightly because it adds a little warmth to the sound but the USB input seems pretty decent enough. More relaxed than the Parasound and I use it at the 50 setting, maybe I will try disabling it altogether later on.

Operation is a little more quirky (for instance I liked the sample rate leds and simple input switches on the DA10) and I don't feel any need to use the PIC controls either.

Now what to do, sell the Bridge, downgrade to a DA10 or move up to a Chord DAC64 or similar? I know, I fail

[Torpedo]

Live with it for a while, then decide.

[padam]

Fortunately I have to

[Dreadhead]

I'm pretty intrigued by the new Mytek offering that takes DSD. Any thoughts?

[padam]

I guess this is it Looks very interesting for sure, could be the next one to try

[blessingx]

A Sabre design, but something about their store still having the cart software logo would have me concerned about follow through and support.

[Dreadhead]

I wouldn't worry about that (really) they are a big player in pro audio even if they have a unpolished web presence. Their stereo96 I tried out was awesome.

[livewire]

Wow!

The MyTech DAC sure pacs a lot features in a little box for the money.

[grawk]

mytek is definitely not sketchy.

[nopants]

For anyone who still uses the DA11, I had the chance to swap out the stock SMPS for some linear regulators...good results so far. This would also be a good candidate for the DA10.

[RudeWolf]

That's a really good regulator chip. I've been searching forever to find a good deal on these PCB's.

 

After further digging I came to a conclusion that only the positive regs are noteworthy by this guy. The bipolars use postive for regulating the ground. Must be because negative reg chips are like 6 times more expensive.

Edited March 24, 2014 by RudeWolf