Lampizator questions

[firedog]

It wouldn't eliminate the advantage, but I think it would be pointless since the clock is provided on the USB side rather than the data transport side. The USB input at the DAC is the "master" in the master/slave clock relationship in the asynchronous set up, I believe. That is my understanding from reading, but I've no first-hand experience with it.

 

Nope. Reclock the signal before the DAC and it makes the job of the USB receiver on the DAC that much easier. Part of what is behind the improvment heard when using all the USB add-on devices now popular.

[firedog]

How does that work if the clocking is coming from the USB module on the DAC? And I legitimately mean that as a question, not a disagreement. I'd like to understand it if I can. Thanks

 

My understanding is this. The DAC in this case is being fed, essentially from the intermediate reclocking device, and not the PC. So the USB module in the DAC is controlling the clocking as master, but it is controlling the timing/feed to itself from the Regen or other device. If there is no device like the Regen in between, then the DAC controls the timing/feed from the PC to itself.

[firedog]

Another impressive review. Would definitely make you think twice about buying one of the Big7 variants. Lampi may be shooting themselves in the foot here, as it were.

[firedog]

The other way of looking at it would be that not everyone wants to engage in tube rolling, or spend GG money on a DAC. So the review is saying that in stock form, the Atlantic has a sound that is competitive, for a fraction of the price.

 

I have no idea, the GG with certain tubes may sound noticeably better, at least to some tastes. Doesn't mean that the Atlantic doesn't get you almost the same level of performance for much less. And since you say that the tubes are so critical to the sound, it could also mean that for some listeners the Atlantic would sound better, if the Atlantic tubes matched their personal tastes.

[firedog]

 

Latest I heard was that 512 was a bit better. Note that 512 board is "chipless" DSD, while 256 stock DSD is R2R. 2 completely different DSD engines.

 

Interesting, as Lukasz himself says he doesn't think 512 adds anything....

 

As far as R2R DSD engine, how does this work? Is this using an FPGA or something similar to convert DSD to PCM?

[firedog]

3 hours ago, Nikko1960 said:

I posted this question in the HQPlayer forum also.

 

I have placed an order for a Lampizator Baltic 3, and it will be one of the first models to be produced with a volume control in around a month from now.

 

The dealer has dropped off a loaner Baltic 3, which I have connected directly to my power amp.  I am enjoying the sound very much and I use the digital volume control in HQP, and its integration with Roon, to control it.

 

The Lampi I have on order costs a fair bit more than a standard unit, so I am asking myself whether having control of volume in the analog domain will offer superior sound compared to the current setup using HQP volume control in the digital domain.

 

Anyone have any experience please?

 

Thx

 

Nick

 

Not what you want to hear, but you can't know except by comparing it in your system.

I'd go with the volume control anyway. Relying only on a software volume control is a disaster waiting to happen - when you inadvertently have the VC turned all the way up and blast your speakers and ears.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, Lowlands said:

Gang...

I am seriously contemplating moving over to the Lampi DSD camp, coming from the Berkeley PCM camp (current user of BADA MK1, the golden oldy).

I have my eyes on a (i) GG Mk1 end '15, currently getting an overhaul (new JL USB, new fit & finish, new testreport, the works) at Lampizator in Poland and an early '19 Big7 Mk2. Both have same PCM & DSD fitting, both come with premium KR tubes, no real decider there. The price gap is rather small (800 euro).
What would you guys go for & why?

If you are listening primarily in DSD, I'd go for whichever one has the most up to date DSD engine. It's only been improved over the years.

[firedog]

1 hour ago, Lowlands said:

Thx. Makes sense. The PCM ' engines'  have clear denominators (5942, e53), but the DsD engines are just tagged by their max rate. In this case both units are PCM 5942 and DSD 256. Whilst the fist suggest they have the same PCM board, would the latter imply they have the same DSD engine, or is a DSD 256 engine from a more recent date (3.5 years between them) different (likely improved) over an older one?  

Don't know that, maybe someone else here does. I'm sure Lampi will tell you if you ask. I don't know when, but they have changed how they work with DSD at least once.