MHDT Orchid or Lampizator Amber 3?

One last quick note about Colin @ Gestalt Audio... during my demo I had a cable catch the serial number sticker on the back of my unit and scratch it up.  He was super gracious and just took the personal loss on that.  Small and insignificant "damage", but still something that impacts selling cost as we all know.  He deserves your future business (and mine).  Really a class act.  

I'll end with a quote from our correspondence:  "One of the reasons I wanted to become a dealer is so I could help others have better experiences than I had when I was on the customer side of this hobby."

The Amber 3 now has 170 hours on it and is really starting to come into its own.  I hear better top to bottom cohesiveness and a filling in of the stage between the speakers. The unit is no longer forced or forward sounding. I am hearing a more organic tone and that was really missing for many of the initial burn in hours.  

I am traveling until Thursday night and will report back then. The unit will have some 230 hours on it then and should be almost fully settled in.  I plan to drop in an Orange fuse and nice Mullard tube at this point and describe the impact of these "upgrades". 

I purchased the Mullard 12au7 as I desire a little more of a buttery tone and this tube should be just the ticket. 

Right now the Amber 3 has proven to be a keeper for me.  Is it better than the upgraded Orchid? I would say it is in some ways and not in others. It throws a bigger and better delineated sound stage. One area the Orchid still excels is its easy to listen to "unfussy" approach to most recordings. The Orchid just sounds right on more recordings. The Orchid's bass is amazing and on par or slightly better than the Amber 3. 

The Amber 3 sounds so intimate and real on good recordings. There are moments when this unit is just mesmerizing. I think the fuse and tube upgrade as well as more hours can make this happen more consistently. We will see. 

I was just discussing the dac shootout with another member via PM and the conversation highlighted one of the key differences in my experiences with the Amber 3 and the Audio Mirror T3-SE. If you find yourself wanting to get more detail or "wake up" your system, I think you would prefer the Amber 3. If you find yourself having to tame system brightness or edginess, then you'll likely prefer the AM-T3 as I did.  

I just looked up a review of my Coincident PRE's and grabbed this line:  "The PREs are quick, agile and dynamically uninhibited..." vs. "the Epicon 6 speaks for itself on this matter: I do not think anyone listening to it, audiophile or no, would fail to observe how pure and liquid is the sound..." 

I have not heard the Epicon's, but given those quick one-line summaries, I'm not surprised that Bill and I ended up making different decisions.

Please send me your AM SE to compare to my fully broken in Amber 3 with upgraded tube in my rig next week. Pretty please :)

System synergy is always the trump card and deciding factor. Secondly, one's sonic preferences and priorities also play a key role. My preference is for full bodied warmth over detail. 

I may be misinterpreting what each of you are saying about the Amber 3 but it seems like to distinctly different takes on this DAC's sound

cal3713 - " more detail or "wake up" your system, I think you would prefer the Amber 3."

grannyring " My preference is for full bodied warmth over detail"

Feel free to correct me