MHDT Orchid or Lampizator Amber 3?

The Amber 3 along the long burn in time is sounding more full bodied and less "wake up" your system in my opinion. I found the Amber 3 too vivid and "wake up your system" sounding up to some 120 hours. That is now changing and the unit is sounding more and more full bodied and organic. This dac needs time, plus 200 hours, to really hear what she sounds like. This is my belief based on my experience.

If forced to give a final judgement at 120 hours, then I would have said the Amber 3 is just too vivid for me in the presence area for long term listening. Right now, closer to 180 hours, I no longer feel this way based on listening.
So I do not think we are saying different things. Just a matter of timing and burn in realities. I really cannot deal with bright or tipped up midrange and highs.

I also think system synergy is playing a role here. My system has been tweaked and voiced to be full bodied, slightly warm and never forced or forward sounding. The Amber 3 placed in my rig would most likely sound less bright or vivid than in another system that is voiced to be more revealing and detailed.

@facten I don't think there's much inconsistency there, despite the apparent discrepancy at first glance.  My speakers err on the side of detail and liveliness, and it seems that Bill's may instead start off on the side of liquid smoothness.  Add in more smoothness to an already smooth system and you may end up with too much.  As such, a dac that's a touch more lively could be a better match.  And, of course, perhaps I just couldn't keep the Amber long enough to fully hear it come into its own.  That said, a number of positive reviews for the unit have mentioned its dynamics and energy.  I don't think the AM is lacking in those qualities, but they're also not features that I need my upstream equipment to emphasize given the realities of my speakers.  

Like Bill and @rx8man , I prefer a warm, liquid sound, but have to fight a bit against the Coincident's accuton ceramic drivers to get there. I certainly know *every time* that a component (or cable, or fuse, or capacitor) pushes me too far towards analytic or detailed.  The AM is really key to bringing that liquid character that I want, while maintaining a wonderful, holographic imaging that I also value.  

@grannyring And I would love to share the AM with you.  If you ever have an alternative dac (another modified Orchid??) on hand to send my way while you're using the AM (or I end up travelling for a couple weeks), I'd be happy to work something out.  Always happy to try out new gear... plus we've already both bought equipment from each other, so it feels nice and safe.

Bill and Chris, thanks for providing all the info on these 3 wonderful (by all accounts) DACs.   I'm thinking seriously about giving one of these three a try before the end of the year.  

I've read that R2R chips tend to handle complex musical passages better (less congestion) than Delta-Sigma chips, and since I listen to a lot of orchestral music, that is a big issue for me.   I'd be especially interested in any thoughts either of you might have regarding how the Delta/Sigma Amber stacks up vs either the Orchid or the AM, which both use R2R chips, as far as handling complex passages.
 
Thoughts on this issue?

@brownsfan Unfortunately the closest I get to classical on a regular basis (or during my auditioning) is electronica, so I don't really have much to say.  Hopefully Bill has some thoughts.  I started to write about the imaging/soundstaging of the two dacs (Amber = wider, AM = deeper), but I don't know that that really relates.  As you've seen in my comments, I did find the Amber to be more incisive and could imagine that relates to a better delineation of many instruments playing at once.  Wish I'd given some classical (or maybe some complex instrumental rock like Battles) a listen.

I will note that across the DACs I've experienced in my system, I've heard Wolfson, DS, ESS, Analogue Devices R2R, a FPGA, Brown-Burr, and Shiit's multi-bit implementation of two AD chips.  Unfortunately there's not much overlap there, but I did find the two AD chip based units sounded very different from one another (more so than the AD R2R - Audio Mirror -  vs. Brown-Burr - iFi iDSD Pro- for example).  Much like amplifiers, I suspect there's more to the implementation than the chip specifics.  I know Lampizator doesn't want your DS prejudices to color judgments of their products (and hence are hesitant to even note what chip they use).