Lavry DA11 DAC og Hodetelefonforsterker

[ardilla]

På tide at min favorittdac-amp får en egen tråd


Jeg er veldig glad i Lavry DA11. Den er primært en DAC, men er også en durabelig hodetelefonforsterker. Som en kompakt alt i ett løsning er den et utmerket valg.

Den har mulighet for balansert (XLR) og ubalansert ut. Innganger: Toslink, SPDIF Coax, AES/EBU, USB.

DA11 går for å være detaljert, med et hint av varme.

DA11 har ikke dedikerte RCA-utganger pga. plassmangel, men det følger med gode adaptere.

DA11 har PiC (Playback Image Control) - en cross-feed funksjon som er ganske unik, slik at man kan justere lydbildet mer mot midten. Dvs. at hvis man hører på materiale hvor det bare er feks trommer i venstre kanal, blir noe av lyden "lekket" til høyre kanal også, slik at lydbildet blir mer sentrert. Dette gjøres digitalt på DA11 og man kan stille det inn gradvis. Eller velge å ikke bruke det.

DA11 har også en angivelig svært god volumkontroll (digitalt styrt analog sådan) - og flere brukere bruker DA11 som volumstyrer. Man setter da volumkontrollen på Stax-forsterkeren opp mot maks, og styrer volum med DA11. Har man volumet på maks i hodetelefonforsterkeren trenger ikke signalet gå like lang vei gjennom potmeteret, og det blir mindre forringelse av signalet. Hvorvidt det er hørbar forskjell er jo en annen sak.

DA11 kan brukes med programmerbar fjernkontroll.

DA11 er også en UTMERKET og ganske strømsterk hodetelefonforsterker. Jeg har brukt den med LCD-2, LCD-3, HE-500 og HD650 med stor suksesss.

Linker:

Lavry Engineering

6moons audio reviews: Lavry Engineering DA11

Lavry DA11 review | Hi-fi accessories Reviews | TechRadar

Lavry DA11 DAC Review

Lavry DA11 Review | Headfonia

The Lavry DA11: For your ears only

Dan Lavry om DA11

HELLO from Lavry Engineering:
We are pleased to be here!

After attending your convention in San Jose a couple of years ago, I came home and decided to do a product that will optimize the experience of listening though headphones. Thus DA11 was born!



PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

DA11 Features:​

• 
  [*=left]4 inputs: XLR, Optical, USB and RCA
  [*=left]USB up to 24 bits, 96KHz, recognized as "Lavry DA".
  [*=left](no driver needed), Works with Windows and Mac OS.
  [*=left]"Remote ready" for use with any universal remote control devices.
  [*=left]User selects balanced, unbalanced, Pin 2 hot or unbalanced pin 3 hot from the front panel, NO need to open chassis and move jumpers.
  [*=left]User controls signal inversion, display dimming, OUTPUT ON/OFF (for real panel output signals - HEADPHONE STAYS ON)
  [*=left]User friendly parameter setting:
  • Last setting stored in a memory for a future power up.
  
  [*=left]"Loud click elimination" protects both headphone and rear panel analog output during power up and power down.
  [*=left]UNIQUE FEATURE is PIC (Playback Image Control).
  • Lavry Engineering

COMMENT:
A whole industry optimizes the stereo image based on assumptions. The mastering engineer works hard to provide great stereo, but the outcome can be less then optimal when listeners' home setup does not emulate the mastering studio setup.

Many people do not (or cannot) follow such ideal guidelines for speaker placement. And of course, anyone who wants to listen through headphones may get a very different stereo image than the one ntended by the mastering engineer.

Why? With speakers, the left signal gets to BOTH ears (similarly for the right signal). However, with headphones, the left signal reaches ONLY the left ear (and the right signal ONLY to the right ear). The PIC provides correction for headphones and for speaker location. The user gets to correct the image at the listening space, AFTER the music has been prepared. It is only the end user that can make the final adjustment for their specific case, thus PLAYBACK Image Control.

MORE ABOUT DA11:
While in most cases one would set the stereo image width with the same setting for Left and Right, I decided to offer separate Left and Right control, mostly for asymmetrical speaker setups. There are 6 settings for the left and 6 for the right.

+2 - widest (red)
+1 - wide (red)
0 - normal image (green)
-1 - narrow (yellow)
-2 - narrower (yellow)
-3 - narrowest (yellow)

Image switches operate horizontally making the "hand motion" of setting the image correspond to what one hears.

Image control, as well as volume and mute can also be set from a remote control.

Digitally controlled ANALOG volume control in DA11 is the same as DA10.

SUMMARY:

DA11 is an improved DA10 with some new features. The main three features are Playback Image Control (TM), USB interface and remote control. The front and rear panels tell much of the story.


Regards
Dan Lavry​

 

[ardilla]

Dan Lavry om volumreguleringen hos DA11

The matching between channels is far better (!) then a dual analog pot,
And it holds its accuracy over the whole range. Say you want 60dB range. That means 1000 to 1 resistance range. Now take 2 pots and mount them on a single shaft (dual pot). The mechanical tolerance plus the resistor matching needs to be at least 10000 to 1 to get 10% matching over the range... The results are way off the mark. I could add fuel on the fire by mentioning that the pot resistance is semi logarithmic curve...

Now, with my scheme, you get .1dB absolute accuracy over the whole range, and the matching between channels is even better then that.

Also, 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. Some people want such accuracy (mastering engineers, hearing tests labs and others)

Digital attenuation also provides accuracy but digital attenuation causes loss of bits (around 1 bit loss for each 6dB attenuation). When attenuating by analog means, you do not truncate digital bits.

Also, the digital controlled analog attenuation does not have the wear and tear of a mechanical pot:
With analog pot, the signal itself passes through the pot contact (friction between a conductor and the resistive material).
With a switch, the contact resistance can deteriorate to 100 Ohms (don't worry it will not happen), and everything still operates like new. The switch does not pass analog, it is just an "up one" or "down one" command.

Rotary encoder is also a friction based device, and while not as bad as a pot, it does pass the signal and it does wear out over time. Doing a rotary for 56 positions at 1dB steps may not be practical. Some analog attenuators use 2 rotaries, such as for 1dB step and the other for 10dB steps. Say your setting is at 20dB and you want to change it to 19dB. You first need to attenuate to 10, then you need to do 9 steps to 19dB... This is not user friendly way... The switch is better - note that the switch controlled volume speeds up when you hold the switch up or down.

The digitally controlled analog attenuation is much costlier then a dual analog pot. I chose that method for the above reasons.

The Lavry DA11: For your ears only

 

[ardilla]

Dan Lavry om hodetelefonutgangens design

Quote:

Originally Posted by USAudio Here: Lavry Engineering I see in the features list of the DA11 it lists "High power discrete headphone output". Can someone more technically minded than myself explain exactly what that means? By "discrete" I assume that means it's a discrete audio circuit and not an IC? By "High power" I guess that means it will easily drive headphones from anywhere between say, 30 and 700 Ohms?

Ideally, the waveform is the same for all analog audio loads (destination device). The waveform “tracks” the air motion (the sound). While the ear response to air motion. The air “moves” with the music, the motion changes over time. The electronics itself utilizes electric signals such as voltage variations over time (moving electrons, not air molecules).

But keeping the wave shape identical is where the similarity may end. One can “keep the wave shape” and do so at different voltage levels, current levels and power levels.

Devices that need to regenerate sound (convert electrical signals to air motion) require more power then devices that simply receive and process audio. Passive speakers are real power hungry devices. Headphones are second in line. The input ports of power amp, mixers, AD’s, EQ, reverb and similar gear do not require much power.

The impedance range of headphones is very wide, but all have much lower impedance then a line level and pro gear device, thus they calls for more current drive then an ordinary OP amp can supply. They also typically operate at lower voltages then most other audio devices.

A typical OPamp device is a higher voltage and lower current device, thus not suitable for headphones. There are “specialty” semiconductor devices that can drive lower voltage and higher current, but I did not find one that is good enough, so I made my own from discrete parts.

For low power applications, there is nothing inherently wrong with OP amp, and there is nothing fundamentally advantageous about discrete. The difference is mostly about packaging. But when making higher power circuits, semiconductor solution cause very high temperatures (a lot of localized heat), and discrete circuits spread the heat over many devices. Spreading heat over larger area and many devices lowers the temperature very significantly. High temperature is not a good thing for best performance and for reliability.

But the main reason I made my own circuit is the headphone itself:
Most audio loads are resistive. When a driver is “looking at” a load that behaves like a simple resistor (or nearly so), the wave shape of the voltage and the wave shape of the current are nearly identical for any audio signal.

But headphones (and passive speaker) are anything but a resistive load. That makes the designer’s life much more complicated. The relationship between the voltage wave shape and the current wave shape is complex. The load (headphone) is not resistive, it complex, it “varies with the music”. The driver circuit must be able to supply the required voltage wave shape while accommodating some other current waveform. That poses additional requirements not normally encountered in transmission of analog audio signals.

I wish I could find a “good enough ready made device”. Instead I ended up with some 2-3 dozen parts. It sure takes some doing to drive a truck, as if it were a race car, but it was real fun circuit to design.

Regards
Dan Lavry

ref: http://www.head-fi.org/t/410565/the-lavry-da11-for-your-ears-only/60#post_5540353

 

[ardilla]

Volumnivåer

Ref.Jude The Lavry DA11: For your ears only

From the DA11 manual:

AES/EBU professional analog line levels:
Set to 56 for 24dBu balanced = 34.72V peak to peak = 12.28V rms
Set to 56 for 18dBu un-balanced = 17.36V peak to peak = 6.14V rms

A typical home power amp or powered speaker:
Set to 40 for 8dBu balanced = 5.6V peak to peak = 2V rms
Set to 46 for 8dBu unbalanced = 5.6V peak to peak = 2V rms

For most consumer equipment, I'd think that the 2V rms settings would be more typical. "56" may be more than your headphone amp or preamp wants to see into its inputs.

Fra manualen

 

[InExile]

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? Jeg tror jeg har lest noe sted at Lavry DA11 også er en god match til Denon D7000, er det riktig?

 

[ardilla]

Har ikke funnet noen direkte sammenligning, men forskjellene er nok små. Jeg har hatt Grace m902 og husker jeg ikke hørte forskjell på dac-delen og analog inngang når jeg spilte fra en Denon CD-spiller i budsjettklassen. Men andre har skrevet pent om den, kanskje digitalutgangen på CD-spilleren jeg hadde var dårlig, hvem vet. m903 er antagelig bedre - i hvertfall USB-delen.

DA11 er jeg som nevnt svæært fornøyd med.

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? Jeg tror jeg har lest noe sted at Lavry DA11 også er en god match til Denon D7000, er det riktig?

 

[ardilla]

DA11 og D7000 på kinesisk...

http://ddrrelmax.pixnet.net/blog/post/31986276-(試聽心得文)當d7000碰上da11...

Brother originally with a friend
to go with a little curiosity Yin Yue
originally intended only to listen DA10
results to see them put the legendary DA11!!
rare opportunity to
audition was a pity!!
So ..
I told my friend soul sold to Lucifer (?
(the fungus audition) ======== When connected to the DA10's when I really only "fantastic" feeling found wasted D7000 but connected DA11 I only Although the three words "true. pass God!!! little brother is the most the ACG song but I was extremely shocked when the singer opening singing I can appreciate the DA10 with DA11 gap DA11 people sound more delicate the instrument cents No picky and there is no hint of retreat. instruct dark sense Music knot like very obvious nutshell brother for the fungus: There is no picky!!!!! Actually, DA10 very good but the DA11 plus some delicate elements sound smoother vocal DA11 is more delicate and docile (my friends listening to, D7000 + DA11 .. he called me to say: you causing me to listen to other headphones listen to not go on ...) also tried with SRH840 DA11 SRH840 first time I felt so brave but vocal warm overall sound is still very very bright but without piercing basically five jump!!! the K701sound or dim strength weak floating characteristics to catch with the K701 just want to listen very obviously did not the DA11 highlighted (Do DA11 is not suitable for K701!!!??) ======= tour of harvest plenty of money is not going to buy DA11 but insight into the D7000 shallow energy original purpose brother given the DA96, but close up but accidentally hear DA11 Tianlaizhiyin tour ~ worth it!!

 

[Moiz Audio]

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? Jeg tror jeg har lest noe sted at Lavry DA11 også er en god match til Denon D7000, er det riktig?

Dan Lavry DAK er mye bedre enn Grace Designs. Eier selv 8 kanaler av 4496..siden 2005..YIKES!

 

[ardilla]

Du har denne: Lavry Engineering og er fornøyd, virker det som?

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? Jeg tror jeg har lest noe sted at Lavry DA11 også er en god match til Denon D7000, er det riktig?

Dan Lavry DAK er mye bedre enn Grace Designs. Eier selv 8 kanaler av 4496..siden 2005..YIKES!

 

[Moiz Audio]

har 8 av ad konverterne også..yeah!

 

[ardilla]

Så da kan du konvertere fra analogt til digital og tilbake. Kult!

har 8 av ad konverterne også..yeah!

Har du noen betrakninger rundt Lavry's produkter av mer utfyllende karakter? Hvorfor er du så glad i Lavry - hva har du av sammenligningsgrunnlag osv?

 

[Moiz Audio]

-systemet er modulært
- Ditherne som er utarbeidet er fantastiske
- tape saturation er en kul effekt
- Dac'en låter flatt og jevnt over hele frekvensgangen

cons:

bare opp til 96khz og ingen planer om å støtte til DSD, som dem burde ettersom korg kommer med DSD DAW.


Obs!

Pass på humøret til Priscilla Lavry


haha!!

 

[CDWMcInSpots]

vredensgnags DAK-sammenligning

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? [...]

vredensgnag sammenlignet for noen år siden Grace Design m902 med flere andre DAKer før han valgte m902. Det svever for meg at en av de andre var en LAVRY, men hvilken modell det var husker jeg ikke. vredensgnag har skrevet om dette iløpet av min tid på HFS. Kanskje i tråden om Grace Design m903, men det kan også ha vært et annet sted, f.eks. i Den store hodetelefontråden.

 

[CDWMcInSpots]

LAVRY vs. Grace Design

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? [...]

Dan Lavry DAK er mye bedre enn Grace Designs. Eier selv 8 kanaler av 4496..siden 2005..YIKES!

Kan du være så snill å fortelle hvorfor, på hvilken måte, hvilke områder etc. DAKene fra LAVRY er bedre enn Grace Design? Utsagnet slik det står forteller meget lite.

Ofte ender en slik svarrunde med at det opprinnelige utsagnet mer er et uttrykk for lydsignaturpreferanser enn objektive kvalitetsforskjeller.

 

[Moiz Audio]

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? [...]

Dan Lavry DAK er mye bedre enn Grace Designs. Eier selv 8 kanaler av 4496..siden 2005..YIKES!

Kan du være så snill å fortelle hvorfor, på hvilken måte, hvilke områder etc. DAKene fra LAVRY er bedre enn Grace Design? Utsagnet slik det står forteller meget lite.

Ofte ender en slik svarrunde med at det opprinnelige utsagnet mer er et uttrykk for lydsignaturpreferanser enn objektive kvalitetsforskjeller.

#12

 

[CDWMcInSpots]

LAVRY vs. Grace Design

Er det noen som har gjort en sammenligning mellom Grace 903 vs Lavry DA11 og da tenker jeg på DAK delen? [...]

Dan Lavry DAK er mye bedre enn Grace Designs. Eier selv 8 kanaler av 4496..siden 2005..YIKES!

Kan du være så snill å fortelle hvorfor, på hvilken måte, hvilke områder etc. DAKene fra LAVRY er bedre enn Grace Design? Utsagnet slik det står forteller meget lite.

Ofte ender en slik svarrunde med at det opprinnelige utsagnet mer er et uttrykk for lydsignaturpreferanser enn objektive kvalitetsforskjeller.

#12

Jeg leste det innlegget, men savner fremdeles en god del, hvilket var foranledningen til mitt innlegg.

 

[RojohII]

Jeg skal ikke uttale meg om DA-11s evner i hodetelefondepartementet (siden jeg ikke har hodetelefoner), men jeg digger den som DAC/(digital) preamp. Dårlig sammenligningsgrunnlag mot andre DACer, da jeg rett og slett føler at denne treffer midt i blinken (subjektivt javisst, dog...), og lysten/behovet for videre uttesting forsvant.

2 ting verdt å nevne:
- Merket forskjell mellom drivverk. Låter habilt og bra på billig Yamaha drivverk/cdspiller, men glitrer virkelig på min Hegel spiller brukt som drivverk.
- Litt knotete betjening hvis man skal skifte inngang ofte. (Mulig man blir vant til prosessen etterhvert?)

Ellers: Virker å være rett så nøytral og direkte (lite pynt), men siden oppløsningen er riktig god, låter det hele riktig i mine ører.