Ah right - I've rather lost the plot with model names. :)
Printable View
Ah right - I've rather lost the plot with model names. :)
I can send you a CII to try, but only if you promise not to use your graphic equalizer in line with the signal path.Quote:
Originally Posted by jandl100
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by StanleyB
OK - that's a deal, Stan. :thumbsup:
No I should have been getting both L7 and B7 at the same time. However, they seem a long time coming, LOL.
Jerry - sure no problem. Be amusing if I discovered what I really needed was a Techie. Last minute sanity check would be most welcome:)
Just e-mailed Greg to find out what is going on.
Did an L7 versus B7 comparison today. Ran both with the same Psvane 211-T 2A3 valves plus the same rectifiers. They are very close - so close for it to be almost if not a non-issue.
However the B7 can run both 45 or 2A3s. This puts it at an advantage. Will say more tomorrow.
I actually wrote the below a few days ago. So here it is:)
The B7 seems to have turned up. I've had it a few days now with Shuguang & Electro Harmonix 2A3s, plus
Emission Labs 45s. This is possible as the unit now has a switch that allows both tube types to be used.
This provides a degree of flexibility the L7 doesn't have - better for tube rolling freaks in other words.
Results with all valve types are really very good. The Emission Labs 45s (note: not the mesh plate version,
which may be better still) are the smoothest sounding of the lot, with the biggest soundstage. The real
surprise is the Electro Harmonix 2A3, which is absurdly cheap compared to the EMLs. It retains a degree of
bite should you feel the need for it, but has excellent characteristics elsewhere too. The Shuguang 2A3-Z
makes the unit sound a lot more like the L7 as I remember it, which had a higher grade Shuguang 2A3-T in
it.
The DAC is remarkably even handed across the frequency range. Detail retrieval, separation and imaging
appears to be absolutely first rate. Transients appear un-hyped and natural.
Referring to Martin Colloms Duetta Signature review from 1988:
"As is the wont with good speakers, this design did not impose itself on first hearing; rather it sounded smooth, unexaggerated and apparently unassuming. If you are looking for superficial excitement, head-banging dynamics, or an exaggerated clarity and attack, the Duetta may well disappoint. It has inner qualities whose strengths can only be realized with the help of the finest sources. It would be easy to misjudge the Signatures, ascribing fault where the blame really lies with the cable, power amplifier, or earlier source components. Despite some minor flaws, this speaker's behaviour shows most clearly that the major aspects of its performance are relatively unbounded, given the present state of the art. By this I mean that the music-making and the information-retrieving aspects of the Duetta Signature are superior to the best of present-day sources and electronics, and thus barely impose any limit upon them. There is clearly scope to accommodate future improvements, while an existing system will perform to its practical limit with the Signature."
Hearing how these speakers behave with this DAC really re-enforces this view, even in 2014. It just becomes
more and more obvious as time goes on that the speakers just reveal anything naff in a source or partnering
amps. Any faults you hear are almost exclusively due to something upstream not being up to par.
So little can genuinely be criticized with this DAC. It doesn't seem to emphasize anything in particular. However,
it's replay characteristics can be fined tuned by changing the valves, just as it can with ny other tube
DAC. Though the extent to which the sound can be altered is of course limited. This means that it is not
absolutely correct. No source component ever will be I suspect.
There is probably some degree of euphony over absolute accuracy, but in this game you never know what absolute accuracy actually is. Sure there are more exciting sounding machines out there, but is this the result of some sort of hype in other machines or is the B7 relatively very slightly laid back in nature? I'd probably wager a bit of both. That doesn't mean to say it can't sound exciting with the right material. It most definitely can, especially with a liberal dose of volume and the right source material.
Every time I switch back to the level 4 for a reality check, I realise the B7 is superior playing the same music.
I could rant on but you've just got to listen to know. And let's face it anyone interested at this level is going to do precisely that.
Excessive bass seems to be far less of an issue with the B7 than the L4. The Duetta isn't perfectly flat in the bass despite the above statement from Martin, which to be fair he mentions later in the Duetta review. Someone who owns a much more expensive MSB DAC prefers the B7 to it. Which kind of begs the question where do you go from here? What is better? Dumb question. Anything you prefer, if you take the trouble to listen. I just think you're going to have to listen to a hell of a lot of expensive DACs to find something genuinely better, whatever better actually means to you.
For anyone interested in Duetta Signatures, the 1988 review can be found at http://www.apogeespeakers.com/. For me, this remains the finest practical domestic loudspeaker I have ever heard or owned. This DAC just further seals or rubber stamps that opinion.
Sorry about the odd formatting above it was a post from Notepad and I just can't be bothered to fix it. I really hate vBulletin's edit controls so we'll put it down to the fact it is just shite, both here and on other forums using it.
Got some 1920s Cunningham CX-345 (45) tubes on the way. I just have to hear how these 90 year old tubes actually sound. And some 6X5GT Raytheon rectifiers coming over the pond too.
A bit more on the tubes. The EML 45 really does have very smooth mid range and casts a huge soundstage. With a pair of large planars this soundstage can get so large it is crazy with some recordings. For me a bit too large sometimes but it is a real ear opener and huge fun to actually witness. It works very well with female vocals and acoustic music in general. Probably great with classical but I'm not into it.
The cheap as chips EH 2A3 - upper mid range bite. Tight bass. More restrained imaging (smaller soundstage) than the EML. In truth the imaging is excellent. Just as it is with the next tube.
Psvane 2A3-T. I think this is possibly the best all-rounder. Lacks the bite of the EH 2A3 but isn't as smooth as the EML 45. A great compromise between the two extremes. Excellent tight bass, nice sized soundstage. Excellent resolution. But all these tubes seem to display excellent resolution in this circuit.
I hope this helps any future L7/B7 owners in their valve purchasing decisions, which is the reason I have posted it, really. What an altruistic fellow:D
Timing is everything! Got my first listen to a Big 7 last night. Just to look the unit is really impressive. Perspex lid allows a glimpse of what lays beneath. It is bloody Big. Largest Dac I have ever seen. Barely any hours on it but as Justin reports above this is very special sounding. I have a L4.5 which sounds lovely to me but B7 is just a big leap ahead of it in terms of density of texture, harmonic richness and huge soundstage. Can't see where you could go after this. Tried it against a Meitner also and while the MA1 probably resolves detail to a 'greater' level the B7 is the one I would pick as a keeper. Would reckon Lukasz has a lot of customers with enough funds beating a door to upgrade to L7/B7 should mean some secondhand bargains for those interested in this flavour of dac. It wont be everybody's cup of tea. DCS lovers will more than likely run a mile but for beguiling and enthralling sound the B7 is the only one.
It's all relative. Compared to a Jolida Glass FXII DAC 8.5/10 VFM is a joke. Compared to similar priced DACs value for money maybe be 13/10, LOL.Quote:
Originally Posted by anubisgrau