Recently I found a way to make Lavry DA-924 to sound reasonable driven by my 16-bit CD transport. That made 3 DACs available to AD my 16-bit digital steam: Pacific, Lavry and Bidat. If Bidat and Pacific sound virtually identical then Lavry has very different sound. It is not that it is better or worth – it is very deferent. Objectively Lavry’s Sound unquestionably better, subjectively I am not sure – it is just different. So, I wonder…

Lavry is a Multibit , not the delta-sigma Multibit   but the true Successive-approximation-register Multibit. Engineers put True Multibits in a separate height all together calming large numbers of advantages of True Multibits against any other architecture. Still, I wonder if the True Multibits have “own sound”.  Lavry certainly has own Sound but I do not know if it is what  specific Lavry’s implementation has or it is a characteristics sound for the entire class of the True Multibit  converters.

Keith,

it is not the thread about Lavry Gold DAC I would rather to hear from people who have experience with other Multibits, perhaps with many Multibits, and who would be able to generalize their observation about Multibits vs. anything else. I know technical and theoretical covering of this subject, I would like to hear people’s view about sonic advantages and disadvantages, with reference to a specific models.

Very briefly answering you question, this it is not in the frame of the thread.

Lavry’s SPIDIF interface is not good. Since the only digital cable that I accept was Synopsis, I was trying to use it with Lavry. For whatever it worth the Lavry’s SPIDIF has one extra gain stage to convert the low voltage SPIDIF signal into AES/EBU. Lavry Gold with AES/EBU is much more interesting, practically if a right cable is used.

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=5323

Yes, Lavry slightly greater resolution but in a different way, is it more dynamic but also in a different way. It has better bass and treble extension. It also puts notes together in a different way. It images slightly different – everything is different. It measures way better.

I was wondering if what Lavry does is a property of all SAR Multibits or it is just the characteristic of a given processor. The differences are very much there but some of them they are not so great that it would be conspicuous without having both SAR Multibit and None-Multibit playing alone.

coops wrote:

Romy Hi sorry to have wandered off topic, I  am listening at the moment to an MSB Platinum Dac III, hoiping to get the lavry back for comparison, I believe the MSB is multi bit based on a ladder resistor , with 4 24 bit DAc modules,tremendous resolution and texture, have ordered a prism DA2 , narrowly midded a Pacific Microsonics Model II ( the seller didn't want to sell abroad ) hoping to get all four together, MSB recommends AES connection btw, regards Keith.

coops wrote:

Romy Hi sorry to have wandered off topic, I  am listening at the moment to an MSB Platinum Dac III, hoiping to get the lavry back for comparison, I believe the MSB is multi bit based on a ladder resistor , with 4 24 bit DAc modules,tremendous resolution and texture, have ordered a prism DA2 , narrowly midded a Pacific Microsonics Model II ( the seller didn't want to sell abroad ) hoping to get all four together, MSB recommends AES connection btw, regards Keith.

Dima is keep bothering me with this idea. It is not that he keep bothers – he implanted this notion into my mind and it keep bother me with the feeling that he might be very much right.

He feel that Lavry 924 is the only know to him properly implemented true Multibits DAC (and he knows them all) however he feel that there is much more “interesting” way to use this DAC. The DA924 is no oversampling Multibit at 88K and being Multibit is has no wide-bandwidth noise after the converter. The signal is fully shaped and juts care the residual sampling rate minus the sound frequency – means above 60K noise. So, Dima feel that in this case it makes sense for get rid the output stage and complicated and unnecessary output filter and feed mu load directly from the DAC deglitcher. In fact it is what he used on his Multibit for years and he feel that it is a way to go.

Dima admit that it is not universal solution as the UHF nose would be bad or even damaging for some electronics, particularly if is it uses feedback , however in my case what Melquiades has no feedback and the “grid bias” acts as a mild low pass filter he feels that it would be problem-free.

Probably if I try it I will put still a first order low pass filter after DAC somewhere around 18-10K (juts by hearing) and it will elevate the output impedance. I have 1 feet Dominus that I might use and I might position the DAC very close to load. What I am concerned if anyone who have playback capable for full-scale bass use such an approach. I am afraid that DA924 (that has a phenomenal lower bass now) might lose some of it driver and bass is the one that usually go first… So, it you use the Multibits-driver-through approach and have something to express on the subject then raise your voice…

Yes, I know that 47 Labs and some Audio Note I belie do it but I never knew that they are Multibits, in fact I do not think that they are.

http://www.sakurasystems.com/products/47dac.html

Regardless what they do I am a big fan neither nether 47 Labs nor Audio Note. Though I have them years back and perhaps it might be interesting to borrow a 47 Labs DAC and to try it again. Another reasons is… where did you see a person who use 47 Labs having any bass-able loudspeakers? The 99.99999% of the 47 Labs user drive Fostex and Louther of other “do not fart in my direction and I will get broken” – type of loudspeakers and they use them back loaded into a sewer-pipe sounding horns. Ok, OK, OK, I know what will be hating me now… :-) Still, tall me that I am wrong in my bogus generalization…

What however is I feel important that with 44kHz is it possible that the sapling rate is too close to be auditable - It is what I subjectively hate in Audio Note DACs. At sampling rate of 44kHz  and the 20kHz of Sound signal  we would have 24kHz noise – too closed. At 88.2kHz sampling rate and with 20kHz of “Sound” the noise would be at 68 kHz – much further form the auditable range.

Anyhow, I am far from the theories and I think it would be fun to try to use the Lavry 924 (that is good DACD itself) in drive-direct mode. It would be nice to have this option without defeating the default options…

mark wrote:

this will start to go down next month if john sends his bidat when i return to canada next week.so you see i am on an interesting parrallel path perhaps.

Taking about the parallel paths… My Bidat in Canada as well and I entered my next round of fight for the Bidat lower bass with better diode nad KZ caps.

mark wrote:

if you could elaborate on details of your preferred postdac chip setup on the bidat(gain,analog filter,takeoff point to your preamp board off dac chip?,etc.) i would be educationally gratefull.

I have no “preferred” anything in DAC – I just a user of those things sand I can appreciate and discriminate results. I have only very general understating of the mechanics of process. In terms of Bidat you have not a lot of freedom or chose. John pretty much the man who know what he does – juts do not allow him to staff you your unit with the horror  of Black Gates capacitors.

mark wrote:

for the record i have never owned lowthers and only a fostex tweeter.

I did not mean the Fostex tweeters, they are fine. I meant the Lowthers and Fostex “yellow drivers” about wish I have said so much at my site.

mark wrote:

in the context of the optimal  balanced setup  preceeding the dac chip output(bidat?,lavry,other) could yield potentially great results.

Mark, you can not use Bidat with direct none-filtered out. Bidat is not multibit DAC. I know some people you actually did it and they report good results but I do not believe them.

Romy the Cat wrote:

Very briefly answering you question, this it is not in the frame of the thread. Lavry’s SPIDIF interface is not good. Since the only digital cable that I accept was Synopsis, I was trying to use it with Lavry. For whatever it worth the Lavry’s SPIDIF has one extra gain stage to convert the low voltage SPIDIF signal into AES/EBU. Lavry Gold with AES/EBU is much more interesting, practically if a right cable is used. The Cat

Hi,

Last week I briefly compared my 47 non-oversampling DAC ("low performance" TDA1543), an original Teac player also used as transport (AD1862N-J ?) and a modified Akai (PCM63P or PCM56P ?). This comparison wasn't done with my single driver speaker system but with 3 way B&Ws. ;-)

The largest difference between the non-oversampling design and the other two was it's lack of air: it sounded as if someone had put a blanket over the tweeters... Imaging was closer to mono than stereo and low bass was a bit lacking, although I think that it performs better with the matching transport.

The Teac had more resolution(?) but sound a colourless in comparison, with a sparkly boom, tchiss, boom sound that would appeal millions... (bass was a monotonic sub-woofer like thingy).

The modified Akai had a more neutral tonality (the goal was to make it as transparent as possible), enormous resolution and an incredibly large contrast between pianos and fortes.

I would like to have the resolution of the latter with the SW (Kodak tm - saturated warm) thickness of the first.

I was told that the blanketness is a tademark of non-oversampling designs but I still have to listen to Audio Note's and AMR's players.

Jim, do I know you?

I ask because I know one Jim near Boston who has Lavry DAC and who has the new Thorsten's Abbingdon Music Research. The Thorsten's DAC should be Multibit as. It might be very interesting and I assure you very educational for you if you bring in your default Lavry DA924 (or I can drag my DAC to you) and we will “compare” it with my Lavry DA924++. I have some new very interesting OBJECTIVE methods to “compare” DACs, not to mention that the sound of my new Lavry DA924++ will make you to think. Anyhow, get in touch with me if it is you and if you are interested.

That is a very interesting observation: the rate with notes change in sound it looks like affect my preferences to use or not to use multibit converter.  With music where rate is small I prefer multibit. The small rate does not mean the slow music but it rather means the absence of large change contrasts. With music where sounds jumps a lot across dynamic range I feel that multibit have some overly “gipsy colors” character - it just makes Sound overly mosaic.

The right solution I feel would be would be to do something similar to what Bidat did: use different D/A topology for sound of different rate: multibit for low rate and something else for fast rate.

Romy the Cat wrote:

Jim, do I know you? I ask because I know one Jim near Boston who has Lavry DAC and who has the new Thorsten's Abbingdon Music Research. The Thorsten's DAC should be Multibit as. It might be very interesting and I assure you very educational for you if you bring in your default Lavry DA924 (or I can drag my DAC to you) and we will “compare” it with my Lavry DA924++. I have some new very interesting OBJECTIVE methods to “compare” DACs, not to mention that the sound of my new Lavry DA924++ will make you to think. Anyhow, get in touch with me if it is you and if you are interested. The Cat

Telstar wrote:

Hi Romy, Do you know something more about AMR new DAC? There is no mention on their site.... I would be extremely interested on the results of such comparison.

I a very comfortable with TL0 and it does “rhythm” as no other transport I’ve heard.  If I go for something else it would be the PC-based CD-reader, something similar to what Jessie does:

 http://www.GoodSoundClub.com/TreeItem.aspx?PostID=8300

So far I was not able to accomplish from CD-ROM the quality of the TL0 but who knows, perhaps sometimes I will learn/discover how it might be done, if it might….