2. digital
  3. 138060-3787

A DAC that crushes price vs. performance ratio

I felt strongly that I wanted to inform the Gon members about a new DAC that ranks with the very best on the market regarding performance, but costs around $2,000.00.  The Lab12 DAC1 SE was compared to three reference level DACS that retail for over $12.000.00 in my review for hometheaterreview.com and was at least on the same level sonicly, if not better.  This DAC from Greece is not just "good for the money" but competes with virtually anything on the market regardless of price!

For all the details about the Lab12 DAC1 SE performance and what other DACS it was compared to take a look at the review.  If you are shopping/looking for a new digital front end to drive your system, you owe it to yourself to check this DAC out, unless you like to spend tons of more $ without getting better performance.
teajay
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,902 posts
 
That’s not what Floyd Toole and Sean Olive has found. Toole said people picked the more ideal speaker every single time, no exceptions.
So in one test that you cite, everyone picked the same speaker, which produces the most distortion of any audio component, by a large margin.
That same speaker which was designed to sound a certain way and most likely, pleasing to most, despite what it's hooked up to. 

That's a far cry from what you stated in the previous post about practically everyone picking the best measured device. 

All the best,
Nonoise

mzkmxcv
777 posts
 
@nonoise  
 
No, the speaker that measured close to ideal was picked as the winner. And this is with hundreds of test subjects over decades.  
  
So I don’t see how that’s a far cry from what I’ve been saying. 
 
While Toole has his book, it’s quite a heavy read, if you haven’t seen his lecture available on YouTube and have an hour to spare, it’s worth a watch, as are all the web articles written by him and Sean Olive (and there are others of course, like Earl Geddes for subs). 
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,902 posts
 
@mzkmxcv,

I think you missed my point, which is that no speaker can be ideal as all speakers are a compromise due to the fact that they are the biggest generators of distortion in the audio chain. 

The fact that everyone picked that speaker only goes to show that despite it's drawbacks, everyone liked it due to it's flavoring and the ear of the the guy who designed it. Some designers are better at it than others. 

Show me one double-blind study where the listeners did not pick the best measuring device as the most preferred.
Now if everyone picked the same CDP, DAC, amp or cable, you could have an argument since those would measure theoretically below what you'd argue someone could hear. A speaker can't to a trained ear.

All the best,
Nonoise



grey9hound
1,112 posts
 
mzkmxcv ,
I, like nonoise, understood, that the people picked the one that measured the worst., as the one they liked.
leoniruii
14 posts
 
As usual, this thread has at times deteriorated into a good ol' fashion school yard testosterone-fueled verbiage contest which I sometimes plod on through as I am a masochist at heart.

Oh.... @gray9hound.... thanks for that frequency sweep link. I now know that my 63 year-old hearing apparatus has a fantabulous effective range of about 190 to 9000 hz. What the He!!, might as well just stick with a boom box and sell everything else.
More to discover