View Full Version : Lampizator Level 3 Gen 4 Versus Jolida Glass FX DAC II
Will assess these properly over the coming days and post some thoughts. Comparing one against the other is unfair due to the price difference. Or is it? We'll see.
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g436/User_211/DACs/SDC14317_zps138deb09.jpg
realysm42
11-07-2013, 19:29
:popcorn:
Versus MF Tri-Vista Versus old Demon CDP.
EDIT: always hate autocorrect. Denon.
I look forward to your thoughts Justin and suspect that little Jolida DAC will not in any way embarrass itself..it's a stunner ;)
Yup - after the 20 year old Denon CDP backup I've been using it was a sign of relief and a real shock TBH. Put it this way I could sit down and listen to it and genuinely enjoy it. In a system where price wise, it is completely out of it's depth. Needs further evaluation before I make any bold statements, though - only 3 hours on the clock so far. I spent about the same amount of time with the Lampizator last night.
I must say I was expecting the Lampizator to look rubbish from what I'd read and seen elsewhere. When I unpacked it I was surprised. I think it is a really nice piece of kit. Super plain styling, but is that a bad thing? I think a lot of hi-fi looks pretty dreadful, really. Sometimes less is more, and for me, I think the really rather nice brushed aluminium facia is very presentable. I had perceived the on/off switch to be a cheap affair but no, it is very nice, with a good feel and a nice off white glow to it which harmonises well with the facia. I'll take some better pictures of it and post them later.
After 3 hours with the Lamp, I feel it is safe to say Lukaz isn't deaf.:) The sounstage is huge and the reaction of the Apogee bass panel to the lower frequencies being passed on by this DAC was both huge an full. It is hard to describe it but this unit has BIG bass. It is almost as if the bass panel size has been increased. Don't get me wrong it isn't excessive, it just sounds BIG:)
One thing I say with absolute certainty - neither of these DACs seem to have the immediacy or get up and go speed of the MF Tri-Vista. They are both a bit more relaxed in their presentation.
Yup - after the 20 year old Denon CDP backup I've been using it was a sign of relief and a real shock TBH. Put it this way I could sit down and listen to it and genuinely enjoy it. In a system where price wise, it is completely out of it's depth. Needs further evaluation before I make any bold statements, though - only 3 hours on the clock so far. I spent about the same amount of time with the Lampizator last night.
I must say I was expecting the Lampizator to look rubbish from what I'd read and seen elsewhere. When I unpacked it I was surprised. I think it is a really nice piece of kit. Super plain styling, but is that a bad thing? I think a lot of hi-fi looks pretty dreadful, really. Sometimes less is more, and for me, I think the really rather nice brushed aluminium facia is very presentable. I had perceived the on/off switch to be a cheap affair but no, it is very nice, with a good feel and a nice off white glow to it which harmonises well with the facia. I'll take some better pictures of it and post them later.
After 3 hours with the Lamp, I feel it is safe to say Lukaz isn't deaf.:) The sounstage is huge and the reaction of the Apogee bass panel to the lower frequencies being passed on by this DAC was both huge an full. It is hard to describe it but this unit has BIG bass. It is almost as if the bass panel size has been increased. Don't get me wrong it isn't excessive, it just sounds BIG:)
One thing I say with absolute certainty - neither of these DACs seem to have the immediacy or get up and go speed of the MF Tri-Vista. They are both a bit more relaxed in their presentation.
....or could it be Justin that both these units are actually more accurate/normal? IME all MF DACs/CDPs, including the excellent MF M1 Dac are all a fair bit brighter than the norm. The only MF CDP I could stand to listen to was the A5 but even then, care in system matching is still needed. MF for some reason always seemed to produce very forward sounding digital sources, even in their higher end stuff.
One more thing I think I can safely say - of all the sources, the Lampizator sounds the most convincingly real. It is gong to be very hard for me to get away from that apparent fact.
....or could it be Justin that both these units are actually more accurate/normal? IME all MF DACs/CDPs, including the excellent MF M1 Dac are all a fair bit brighter than the norm. The only MF CDP I could stand to listen to was the A5 but even then, care in system matching is still needed. MF for some reason always seemed to produce very forward sounding digital sources, even in their higher end stuff.
Yeah I think I agree. I'm not sure the MF is accurate on the speed/up front presentation - but it certainly has it.
Cross-referencing the Jolida with the MF reveals that the MF seems to have a mid to upper mid range boost - hence the subjective speed? The Jolida sounds more balanced top to bottom. And it isn't a slouch either, nor is it soft.
It doesn't have the BIG bass of the Lampizator - but the Lampy bass sounds a little bit soft to me. More control in the Jolida.
The Jolida is fab.
jandl100
12-07-2013, 14:28
Ah - interesting. Your loaned Lampi looks rather different to the Level 4 that I did a 2nd opinion review (http://hifipig.com/lampizator-dac-level-4-review/#more-1707) on. The one I had had a volume control - and a corresponding knob and display window, which looked a bit clumsy. The one you have looks a lot neater, Justin.
I have to confess to liking the Lampi very much soundwise. Quite possibly the best digital I have heard, but yes, a little loose in the bass. (I've not heard any Jolida gear.)
I think the casework for gen 4's got better. You may have had a level 4 gen 3. I understand the level 4 cases at gen 4 are better than the level 3s.
Level 3 is the same as the level 4 but with no foo parts. Most of this one is Russian in origin. I bet the foo in level 4 makes a difference.
Ali Tait
12-07-2013, 17:51
....or could it be Justin that both these units are actually more accurate/normal? IME all MF DACs/CDPs, including the excellent MF M1 Dac are all a fair bit brighter than the norm. The only MF CDP I could stand to listen to was the A5 but even then, care in system matching is still needed. MF for some reason always seemed to produce very forward sounding digital sources, even in their higher end stuff.
Yep, agree with this, I've heard the M1 dac, and it's a good dac, but a bit forward for my taste.
Just trying to sort the Lampizator USB interface out properly. I've been using an MF VLink and I could hear timing issues.
I've tried USB to SPDIF solutions from M-Audio and MF and I have ALWAYS had issues. The MF maybe async USB, but that is only to the VLink itself. What comes out in SPDIF format I have always had timing issues sync'ing DACs with. Same with the M-Audio.
I have found the best interface to DACs is via my laptop's HDMI port, into the back of a Samsung TV which outputs SPDIF optically. Sounds very non-audiophile but in practice I have never had any timing issue this way.
The reason I haven't been using USB is the driver quoted in the Lampizator manual for Windows turns out to be a 64 bit one. Think I have found a 32 bit one on the web now... will try it later.
I'd post some more photos but Photobucket is down. Situation normal then:D
The place to go for Lampizator USB drivers I am told then is: Amanero (http://amanero.com/drivers.htm). I've posted this for Lamp users who may have the same issue in the future or now. Hopefully Google will lead them here:) At the time of postng there nowt on the Lamp website that I could find. Nowhere obvious anyway.
Onto the Jolida.
I have had a fair few digital sources in my system that are listed below. It has become apparent that how much is spent on a digital source has virtually no bearing on whether I like it or not. More than anything I think it is purely down to fluke factor. A DAC has to appeal to a certain set of ears and blend well with a system. Even with the same system, people will disagree on which source they prefer.
I can quite confidently state I prefer the Jolida to the following:
20 yr old Denon CDP (no shocker)
AMR DP777
Accustic Arts Tube DAC II SE
My own MF Tri-Vista SACD player in DAC mode (Stereophile A+ rated - first digital source to get the accolade)
A Nagra CDP (can't remeber model)
Young DAC
I am not sure I prefer it to:
Doge 6 CDP
I think the following better (on bit of extra thought:))
EMM Labs CDSA
Audio Note DAC 4.1 (not a Sig)
The last three are all quite different designs but they all sounded great to me.
I got the Jolida on loan from Paul at Reference Fidelity Components as a demo unit to evaluate. OK I know him but that has no bearing on what I think of this DAC. If I thought it was shite I would have told him and returned it. As it happens, I think it is excellent.
A particular strong point is a very even handling from top to bottom. The DAC just somehow manages to sound very balanced and not in favour of any particular frequency. Despite being a tube design, bass is tight, very well controlled and has good subjective speed and articulation.
Imaging is very good in all planes. It doesn't have the scale of image of the Lampzator DAC, nor does it have the character of the Lampizator DAC. To me it sounds very natural and unvoiced. It also has excellent apparent resolution of fine detail. In short, I find it incredibly good for the money.
Few pics of the little Jolida:
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g436/User_211/DACs/SDC14313_zpsba80a83a.jpg
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g436/User_211/DACs/SDC14312_zps8ab65bf4.jpg
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g436/User_211/DACs/SDC14311_zps233298de.jpg
Lampizator butt shot:
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g436/User_211/DACs/lampback_zps47a36ac5.jpg
Switch toggles between USB and coax. The Lamp should get some extra listening soon.
.
I have had a fair few digital sources in my system that are listed below. It has become apparent that how much is spent on a digital source has virtually no bearing on whether I like it or not. More than anything I think it is purely down to fluke factor. A DAC has to appeal to a certain set of ears and blend well with a system. Even with the same system, people will disagree on which source they prefer.
.
That is also my experience.
That is also my experience.
Yup - but it is rather annoying to note the two that seem the best to me are expensive.
Anyway, back to the Lampizator. Said driver works and I've been swapping between the Lampizator and Jolida's USB inputs without a frigging MF VLink in the way. Surprise, surprise zero timing errors. In practice I think the MF VLink sucks pretty badly. It just doesn't work properly with the kit I've used.
Of all the digital sources I've listed above the Lampizator is closest to the AN DAC 4.1 sonically. However, the Lamp is a laid back affair in my system. It doesn't get too excited about anything - it just replays stuff in a very listenable fashion. Of the two DACs the Lamp is the least likely to sound sharp or intense and I'd say the mind tends to drift more towards the music than the hi-fi.
If you like electronic music or heavy rock presented in an exciting fashion it isn't the DAC for you. I think the AN DAC 4.1 is quite a bit livelier than the Lamp L3 and as a consequence more engaging. It is also much more expensive.
The Lamp L3 is a more "forget about the replay just give me the music" kind of DAC, one you can comfortably relax with - almost to the extent of "whatever the source". It IS pleasant but for some degree of excitement volume crank really is required.
I think some would consider the Lampizator to be a far more refined sounding DAC. If someone said that I'd know exactly what they mean, because in some ways that is exactly what I think too.
It is pretty tempting to buy both DACs and switch between the two every now and then. They are markedly different enough to make that exercise worthwhile.
One thing I am thinking, though, is that the L3 Gen 4 MUST sound quite a bit different to the L4 Gen3 Jerry heard. Because I don't think an L3 Gen4 would be Jerry's cup of tea at all.
The presentation of the Lamp L3 is more consistent than the Jolida, which alters it's sonic presentation more depending on the source. This is interesting and you have to wonder precisely why that is. Is one closer to the truth and the other fibbing? Who knows...
realysm42
14-07-2013, 19:31
Have you tried different tubes with them?
Nope - Jolida uses Tung Sol ECC83 (Russian) and Lampy uses 6N6P - which my 211s happen to use as a driver tube.
I used to have a load of ECC83s but sold them. There isn't much in the way of rolling options with 6N6P. If I was going to change the Tung Sols I'd go for Mullard CV4004 as a first stab as they seemed a nice, neutral tube in an Air Tight ATM2 I had a while back.
jandl100
14-07-2013, 22:55
Lampizator butt shot:
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g436/User_211/DACs/lampback_zps47a36ac5.jpg
Switch toggles between USB and coax. The Lamp should get some extra listening soon.
Whoa - that Lampi L3 Gen4 has a much prettier butt than the L4 Gen3 I reviewed - that one was defo of the industrial variety. Lampizator is obviously responding to feedback that their gear needs to look better as well as sound good. :thumbsup:
Valve dac's possibly a compromise too far?
Look at the principle design of the dac why would it need valves unless to introduce some pleasant harmonic distortion?
Correct and careful implementation of the design is always the best way of making the product in the first place, pacing sticking plasters after the event in not really cricket old boy!
jandl100
15-07-2013, 13:59
Well, it's an alternative for the buyer - and judging by the sound from the Lampi that I heard, it can work very well, imo.
Perhaps you should stock them, Mr C! ;)
Ali Tait
15-07-2013, 16:06
Well, how about simplicity?
In the dac Nick built me, the differential signal is taken straight from the dac chip to the grids of the valves.
realysm42
15-07-2013, 16:41
Why are valves on DACs frowned upon so much here; don't they all add some form of colouration/distortion in the chain, regardless of location?
purite audio
15-07-2013, 17:02
Does Mr Lamp provide a FR plot with the dac?
Keith.
Ali Tait
15-07-2013, 17:17
Why are valves on DACs frowned upon so much here; don't they all add some form of colouration/distortion in the chain, regardless of location?
Any amplifying device will. Directly Heated Triodes are still the most linear amplifying devices yet made.
Whoa - that Lampi L3 Gen4 has a much prettier butt than the L4 Gen3 I reviewed - that one was defo of the industrial variety. Lampizator is obviously responding to feedback that their gear needs to look better as well as sound good. :thumbsup:
Considering the price I think the build quality is very satisfactory now Jerry. It is very nice. I should have put an underside shot up - maybe I will. You can see it is built on a wood sub-chassis and the tubes are upside down underneath. Even the wood looks nice. I'd love to take the lid off it but I have it on loan and don't want to mark the screws etc etc.
Does Mr Lamp provide a FR plot with the dac?
Keith.
No Keith. Nothing in the box apart from a USB lead, but that is probably because it is a demo unit.
Valve dac's possibly a compromise too far?
Look at the principle design of the dac why would it need valves unless to introduce some pleasant harmonic distortion?
Correct and careful implementation of the design is always the best way of making the product in the first place, pacing sticking plasters after the event in not really cricket old boy!
What a bizarre post. I've just followed a link to your website and you're selling Pure Sound valve kit. Is all that stuff a compromise then? Confused.
How much is the Lampizator one? I thought they were £4k or somefink?
Lampizator prices (http://www.lampizator.eu/newdac/lampizator/Orders,_Prices,_Bank.html)
So a 3 is half the price of a 4. The Level 3 Gen 4 looks better made than the old Level 4 Gen 3 Jerry had. A lot better made.
Hello Justin
Why would you consider this a bizarre post?
I was merely expressing a personal thought regarding this, Guy's design does indeed use valves in the output stage of A8000 as do quite a few other brands. It delivers a very pleasant and involving sound that many people can associate with and appreciate.
For myself personally I am looking for purity of sound and getting to heart of music without extra's and certainly without any form of grain or harshness. Adding valves in the digital replay chain can and does give a very favorable presentation (Again if designed correctly) that appeals to audiophiles who on the whole have had bad experiences with solid state designs, looking to get away from that 'digitalis' edged sound and have a relaxed and entertaining sound of this I have no doubts about Justin.
I am not in any way anti valve, we do retail valve amps and other equipment which does sound musical and atypical toward the valve stereotypical perception of soft, syrupy all mid band, loose bottom end and rolled off treble.
Quality valve amps are so far from those descriptive terms it makes me smile, so I am well aware of the benefits of correctly implemented thermionic designs. My personal favorites are 2A3's and 211's.
My point on the dac front, concerning valve output stages, why add something that is not required I the circuit has been correct implemented at the start point?
With the advent of 24/96Khz music files and above, audio systems (if they can muster the resolution to resolve this) are having to perform to a higher level of transparency, openness, overall top to bottom cohesiveness / linearity together with a far greater sense of correctness. This effects all of the components in replay chain.
Now many an occasion I have read on numerous forums across the audio spectrum of gents trying 24/96Khz and higher sampler rates to no avail!
"Whats all the fuss about I can't tell a difference" has been read on many a forum.
They can be many reasons for this starting with the obvious one "Its all a con, there is no difference"
System transparency is not capable of resolving the extra information generated by these newer formats
Speaker placement is hampering overall system performance not just higher resolution material
Incorrect amplifier / speaker impedance matching again will effect the whole system performance not just high res.
Room mode (s) effects
Placement of large objects between the stereo speakers (Racks / TV's etc)
So called audio PC's generating far too much EMI /RFI smothering the true potential of the digital transport system
The list goes on.
I digress, my personal views on PC digital transports / high end streamers delivering a grain free wide open, texture, layering with dynamics and depth with a musically involving sound.
In recent years I found that certain valve dac's while making a quality sound which is well regarding, to me do not fully recreate the sonic benefits gained by using higher bit and sample rates.
Being fortunate to have owned some very interesting equipment over the years including a AN Dac 5, Audio Aero, , Air Tight, Audio Research, Copland, Kondo etc.
In recent years there has been a resurgence in the main stream of the NOS (non over sampling) style of dac particularly the Metrum Octave and also a DIY unit the DDD1794
Utilizing multiple dac chip-sets in dual differential configurations up to eight (8) dac chips per channel this to achieve high signal to noise ratio and greater resolution.
Both of designs do not use valves and both produce a very impressive sound (I am in no way affiliated to either of these companies neither do we sell their products).
I know of three people who have sold their AN Dac 4's and 5's to take up one of the above mentioned units.
I still prefer a sound which is closer to the real event, however the personal listening is not me it is you guys, I am just offering a different opinion.
Well that's a long answer Tony:)
Without further justification it seemed like you were writing of a valve approach to digital output stages when you were in fact selling them.
Principally I think your follow up post is still doing that. No matter.
You'll note my rated best digital sources include a solid state and a valve option from EMM Labs and AN. While very different in sound they are both excellent to my ears.
You can put a valve stage on the digital device and use an SS pre, or vice versa. Not much difference in either of these options given similar gain stage implementations I'd have thought. Or you can use both of a kind. Some valve based DACs are very neutral (I actually think the Jolida sounds neutral). Some are not, typically single-ended designs, of which I am sure the Lampizator is. These can sound quite radically different to solid state DACs. A big departure.
Transistors are inherently coloured too IMHO, and there are some nasty sounding SS devices around, no question.
So to my mind, it doesn't really make any difference. Both devices are capable of excellent results.
As to not being able to hear high sampling rate improvements through valve equipment, I think there is absolutely no reason for that to be true given well engineered examples. Voiced examples, well, that is another story. That, of course, is if the perceived improvement really is due to high sampling rates and not just a better produced media distribution.
That's what I think, anyway:)
Hello Justin
Thank you for your reply.
You can indeed include tube stages in pretty much most audio equipment should you wish, and many manufacturers do this whether they feel it is representation of their own personal taste or as a response to market conditions.
As matter of point two of the designs I have been involved with use dual cathode followers in the second pre amplification stage (12AX7's) this gives a sound which many people really show affinity for.
Ed Meitner's designs I find incredibly detailed and open, just leaving me a stone cold clinical sound (others will feel different)
The AN UK designs have a bouncy, fun fruity and entertaining an enjoyable sound for sure.
Which still leaves those NOS designs to look at again.
I may just work out an open day in the next few weeks for a dac sound off, need to check the diary however it should be fun!
Ed Meitner isn't messing around. I heard the CDSA a while back when I was still using Martin Logan Ascents and a Descent. Massive detail and resolution. Stupidly high pricing. Like it or not I think it has to be acknowledged as outstanding.
How much is the Lampizator one? I thought they were £4k or somefink?
If the Jolida is close then the Lampizator DAC sure has some work to do! Should be night and day with the price difference.
If the Jolida is close then the Lampizator DAC sure has some work to do! Should be night and day with the price difference.
Why is that? Why specifically should it be better?
The FXII has seen competition off at many times it's price range. The Jolida Fusion is even better, and is more in the Lamy price range but comments like "it's more expensive so has to be better" are not always the case when it comes to digital sources. It's design and components chosen that count. In fact I'd go as far as to say that the quality of casework and power supplies to one side, there is absolutely no reason that a top quality DAC has to cost many thousands of pounds. Just my view. People who want to spend many thousands obviously can but that is no guarantee of anything night and day better at all in "DAC Land".
no reason[/I] that a top quality DAC has to cost many thousands of pounds. Just my view. People who want to spend many thousands obviously can but that is no guarantee of anything night and day better at all in "DAC Land".
:clapclapclap:
Why is that? Why specifically should it be better?
Hi Paul, I did say "should", and that the Lampizator DAC has work to do - as does any DAC way out of the price range of the Jolida, but that the Jolida runs close to.
The FXII has seen competition off at many times it's price range.
There's a lot of expensive stuff out there that is rubbish, and a lot of awesome lower-priced DACs, I agree, but for me the Lampizator DAC appeared to be an exception. As I haven't even heard this DAC I couldn't pass judgement, but for the price - and with respect to this particular DAC - I would be expecting a significant improvement in sound.
The Jolida Fusion is even better, and is more in the Lamy price range but comments like "it's more expensive so has to be better" are not always the case when it comes to digital sources.
Please don't put words into my mouth I did not say "it's more expensive so it has to be better." I said the Lampizator DAC (in particular) *should* be better. The reason I say this is that it is supposed to be a 'no compromise' DAC. I'm not saying that it is, and it appears that in this case it is not.
It's design and components chosen that count. In fact I'd go as far as to say that the quality of casework and power supplies to one side, there is absolutely no reason that a top quality DAC has to cost many thousands of pounds. Just my view. People who want to spend many thousands obviously can but that is no guarantee of anything night and day better at all in "DAC Land".
Again, yes, totally agree it's design and components that count, which is why I chose my own DAC despite no reviews, no retailers, no marketing, only sold direct etc. Whilst there is no reason that a top quality DAC need cost thousands of pounds, sometimes the components do cost that much. My Audial Model S DAC's output transformers alone cost £70 each, not to mention custom 10x winding toroid, 10x regulated supplies, custom balanced mains transformer, massive casework, Black Gate N caps etc. Additionally there are 'talent' & 'research and development' cost implications involved. I guess my point is that if you're spending thousands on a DAC you'd better be hearing "night and day" or something's wrong!
Neil
not meaning to put words into your mouth, but the the gist of it( as I read it) was "it is more expensive so must be better" or at least, you expected that there should be a night and day difference...same thing really. Just asking why you think that, and why you think specifically that DAC must be better? Innocent question...honest! Until you've heard the FXII, why draw those conclusions?
The Lampizator (well this one) actually uses 6N1P, not 6N6P as I stated earlier.
I've had the Lampizator a while now and the more I listen to it the more I like it. I've seen a few people say the Lampizator sounds analogue-like, but put it this way - it doesn't sound like a record player. No surprises there then.
Sitting in front of it is just very enjoyable. So enjoyable I think I am prepared to cope with it's downside - the bass replay doesn't suit electronic music all that well IMHO. But the bass IS immense is scale, space and extension. It just seems to lack the punch of more conventional sounding DACs. So it certainly isn't a disaster area and it definitely is an interesting thing to hear/witness.
It is tough making choices as all DACs sound different and deciding which one you really like in system that basically sounds f&*^ing excellent (to my ears) with most of them anyway really isn't that easy.
So sod it I'm going to buy either a Gen 3 or 4 with the tube roller's option. Just depends on what the pricing comes back as. I also need optical in, which this unit doesn't have.
Job done:)
Neil
not meaning to put words into your mouth, but the the gist of it( as I read it) was "it is more expensive so must be better" or at least, you expected that there should be a night and day difference...same thing really. Just asking why you think that, and why you think specifically that DAC must be better? Innocent question...honest! Until you've heard the FXII, why draw those conclusions?
Hi Paul, I suppose it's because Lampizator isn't some 'boutique' corporation with huge markups (so £4k gets you very little), but this sort of DAC is passionately produced, independently, with no regard to cost. So I'm not drawing conclusions, but just suggested that £4k should give you a clear step up. Of course I've seen DVD players costing a few hundred reboxed and sold for several grand from cheeky 'high end' manufacturers, so I know it isn't clear cut with regard to 'higher price gets you more'.
However, as you say, I haven't even heard these DACs!
Didn't mean to come across as cranky, peace!
It is probably true to say the more money you spend on a DAC to more the sound tends to differ i.e. there is more difference between the sound of individual units at higher price levels than there is between cheaper more mainstream units.
The Jolida proves making a really good sounding DAC for not a lot is possible. I honestly reckon it sounds better than my old £4000 Tri-Vista SACD player's DAC stage.
Also for the record - the output stage used in the Lampizator is SRPP - shut regulated push pull, for single ended RCA outputs. It is NOT a single ended output stage.
The Jolida proves making a really good sounding DAC for not a lot is possible. I honestly reckon it sounds better than my old £4000 Tri-Vista SACD player's DAC stage.
Of That Justin I have absolutely no doubt at all
Spectral Morn
20-07-2013, 14:52
Of That Justin I have absolutely no doubt at all
now now Tony ;) :lol:
Regards Neil
Neil
I wonder of the heat is getting to you, as next you will suggesting I swap out my current amplification and speakers for MF Titian mono-blocks and Kef Blades :stalks:
You very bad man :wheniwasaboy:
Spectral Morn
20-07-2013, 15:34
Neil
I wonder of the heat is getting to you, as next you will suggesting I swap out my current amplification and speakers for MF Titian mono-blocks and Kef Blades :stalks:
You very bad man :wheniwasaboy:
Certainly not Tony - I just thought it a tad mischievous to have ago at someone's previous/maybe still current pride and joy. What you and I think of this stuff based on experience, perception and behind the scenes knowledge is neither here not there. unless asked directly......
I personally wouldn't have the gift of the items you mention :eyebrows:
Regards Neil
Neil
Perhaps a donating that pairing to a charitable cause would be more fitting?
Though I suspect that particular combination may yet be available for your delectation in the not too distant future at a public gathering.
You will have to forgive me, its been a long day with the end of term red tape.
Next up I'll be looking at dusting off the Kondo and seeking some LV's now where's my Robin Hood outfit :idea:
Sorry diverted the thread.
The essence of this thread is how close does the Jolida Glass FX DAC II get to the Limpy MK 4 and can the difference in price be justified?
Feel free to slag of MF - whilst I didn't pay £4000 for it years ago - far from it, I can't escape the fact it is now a worthless pile of junk. The irreplacable transport went years ago, and the DAC has been troublesome for the past - oooh - long, long time. Now it is almost totally knackered - it'll work about one in ten power ups. Not good.
The MF spoutings about the rarity of it's tubes were nonsense as you can pick up 5703s easily on ebay.
Re Jolida versus Lampzator. Is it worth the extra? Well I obviously think so but TBH I could live with the Jolida. All things are relative, however, and some may even prefer the sound of the Jolida. As with all things hi-fi it is just a matter of personal taste.
Justin
The bottom line is very simple here, does it push your buttons?, if it does that is all that matters, as it will be your ears doing the listening not best mate from the other side of town.
Spectral Morn
20-07-2013, 16:50
Justin
The bottom line is very simple here, does it push your buttons?, if it does that is all that matters, as it will be your ears doing the listening not best mate from the other side of town.
Well said.
Regards Neil
jandl100
20-07-2013, 20:27
Lots of baseless mumbling goes on on forums - but it's when a punter puts his money where his mouth is that the rubber hits the road.
Hee hee - I do love a mixed metaphor. :eyebrows:
Well yup gotta spend, spend, spendy every now and then.
BTW: the Lampy sounds great with rock when the volume is at a realistic setting. ZZ Top's latest sounds brilliant. But then that is a superb recording anyway and positive proof that distortion IS good - at least when applied to guitars in the "correct way":)
It is a very good alrounder with most of the stuff I like, but as I say with some punch traded for scale, extension and well... space. You cannot have everything in this game.
And back to the analogue bit - it doesn't sound like a record player, but it does sound "un-digital", or "natural". It is easy going and a pleasure to listen to and those factors conspire to relieve me of cash. I'm sure I'll keep it for a good long while.
I'm told I can keep the unit until the new one pops through. Lovely service from Greg at GPoint there.
Well yup gotta spend, spend, spendy every now and then.
BTW: the Lampy sounds great with rock when the volume is at a realistic setting. ZZ Top's latest sounds brilliant. But then that is a superb recording anyway and positive proof that distortion IS good - at least when applied to guitars in the "correct way":)
It is a very good alrounder with most of the stuff I like, but as I say with some punch traded for scale, extension and well... space. You cannot have everything in this game.
And back to the analogue bit - it doesn't sound like a record player, but it does sound "un-digital", or "natural". It is easy going and a pleasure to listen to and those factors conspire to relieve me of cash. I'm sure I'll keep it for a good long while.
I'm told I can keep the unit until the new one pops through. Lovely service from Greg at GPoint there.
It's very very difficult to get a DAC sounding like "good analogue" instead of "good digital"... probably one of my most important criteria really, "naturalness".
Just ordered a Level 4 Gen 4 with V-Caps rather than the standard Russians (which are in the L3 too). I read V-Caps are fast/dynamic sounding so let's hope they are.
Since I have tube/passive preamp options I figured the DAC rolling option probably wasn't worthwhile as I can roll with the tube pre.
May start a new thread when it arrives.
V-caps are superb Justin, they are one of the top two caps available today, though I would make sure Limpy uses the "Cute" version in your dac rather than the TFTF unit.
They are incredibly transparent and open, they do take an absolute age to burn in unless Limpy did that before installing.
Out of Interest Justin how much is this unit?
Yup Tony they are CuTF.
Dueland and Jensen are options too. I'm put off Dueland cos their room at Munich a couple of years ago was making some very average noises. Only just above bottom quartile of the show IMHO.
Re burn in, well I'll leave the unit on for a month... V-Caps do take ages to burn in by all accounts.
I know enough to know caps can wreck an amplifier as I have witnessed it happen on an old Beard tube amp I've owned for decades. Cheap caps = bad sound. Had to re-cap it again after an electronics engineer told me it'd make no sonic difference to use cheap ones. He was wrong - 20+ years ago that is:)
IMHO this unit will NOT sound the same as the L3 because of the caps and other changes. Sometimes you have to gamble but I think the L4 with V-Caps is going to be more towards my taste. If not I suspect the soldering iron will come out.
All the unit prices are on the Lampizator website. So this unit is more than a standard L4 as the V-Caps are are a +360 Euro option.
I went for USB, RCA coax and Toslink connectivity, The asynch USB allows 384KHz.
A haggle may get you a discount... you never know.:eyebrows:
Doesn't the level 4 also use a multibit DAC? Looks like he also uses the Sabre DAC judging by pics on his site.
Hm I haven't tried the Lampizator USB (http://lampizator.eu/shop/viewitem.php?productid=209) cable yet... will give it a whirl as it was included as part of the deal. 1.5m version too:)
Some may find the data transfer speed claim interestng... including me.
Well done for buying one. Sounds like it'll be very good.
R2R multibit I believe.
:popcorn:
Level 4s are made to order with a :popcorn: list.
Well now temperatures have fallen to sane levels and the Apogees are once again operating at the sort of temperature they were tensioned for, I think it is fair to say the Lampy's bass is a bit tighter than I'd heard during the really hot period.
I thought some might enjoy reading Arthur Salvatore's first encounter with earlier V-Caps, as I know it made me smile: http://www.high-endaudio.com/Modifications.html
Then with the later CuTF V-Caps, scroll down to May 2013: http://www.high-endaudio.com/RECENT.html
Um, I'd say he likes them:)
In general, though, I genuinely like what Arthur says about things. and he recommends kit I rate highly too.
It turns out the unit I have here had previously been with Jason Kennedy for an HFC review. I'll be interested to read it when t appears.
The Level 4 should show up next Sunday but that is TBC. Greg kindly offered to bring round the 22 Watt GM70 Lampizator amps, but I have nothing that they can drive.
It has, ahem, magically acquired a tube roller's option in addition to the V-Caps. More details later...
The L3 - I'd swear blind it has just gotten better and better whilst I've had it as Friday's late night session really impressed me. Really curious to try the L4...
:popcorn:Doesn't the level 4 also use a multibit DAC? Looks like he also uses the Sabre DAC judging by pics on his site.
Hallo Neil
Just to make it clear here let me answer this for you ;)
Yes ,generation 4th DACs are all using R2R multibit chips.
Previous generations had been using Delta Sigma DACs.
But none of them is using Sabre DAC. Lukasz tried to use
it of course as all other microchips , but he simply didn't
like the sound .
Prices , to make it clear again, are matching factory list
in Euro re- calculated to £££ on the order day currency.
Please contact me if there is anything else anyone who's
reading Justin's thread would like to ask . All the questions
will be answered shortly and up to my best knowledge ;)
Greg
Txs to all who contributed in to this topic ;)
Me, I think the Dueland caps are the best. I heard they have the musicality of Jensens, with the full range tightness of the V-Caps.
Worth the extra dosh!
One last point - the SRPP versus single ended issue. The website states all Gen 4 are single ended, so Gen 3s were SRPP. That's if anyone really cares:)
If I've got this wrong again...:mental::D
SRPP (despite the PP) is still a single ended stage. or at least its not push pull in the way you might think.
Light Capture
05-09-2013, 13:10
User211,
Can you please recap on your comparison with the Lamp. vs. the Jolida? I took away that they both sound similar with the Jolida having lighter bass and the Lamp having big bass. Did I miss something, or is that all?
Mike read posts 14 & 18. Also read the Hi-Fi Pig review - I think a lot of what Jake is describing about the L4 Gen 3 can be heard in the L3 Gen 4.
If I was going to order an L3 I think I'd make sure I went for the tube rectification. The L3 sounds better when it gets warm, and the rectifier speeds that process up. I also think the rectifier adds to the "3Dness" of the sound. I dunno why but I noticed that aspect improve when I got my tube rectified preamp. With the L3, when it has been on for a while, the soundstage becomes very "walk-in".
I'm not gonna expend anymore effort on it than that, Mike. So read the thread again and see what more you can "dig out" of it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.