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
bigkidz
3,404 posts
 

@akg_ca (1) Since everything in this crazy hobby is built to a level commensurate with its price-point, I have never yet seen ANY $2K DAC match -- much less "crush" -- a $10K-$12K DAC....full stop. And I’ve attended numerous audio fest paloozas with their A-B bake-offs and comparison shootouts.

I agree, plus price has nothing to do with anything.  To me there is no correlation between price and performance.  Look at cables, some cost more that people have paid for their components and I have yet to hear a cable outperform a component I have owned.

Any manufacturer and place a retail price on something that does not make it sound good.  Most higher priced components also have very nice chassis designs.  The chassis might cost more that the sum of the parts inside.  Most components don't have expensive parts like custom wound transformers, dueland or V-caps, caddock or Vishay resistors, etc.  so it is all in the design then?  Not too much in design that has not already been done IMO.

Crushing something tells me nothing unless I can understand specifically where the one component was better, then I feel educated on the differences one hears.

Happy Listening

teajay OP
1,703 posts
 
Hey bigkidz,

Take a look at my review on the Lab12 at hometheaterreview.com for the details about its performance.  I sold off a 10K DAC for the Lab12 that had been my reference, and compared the Lab12 to three other highly regarded DACS ranging in price from 14K to 20K and the Lab 12 was at least as good and bettered them on certain parameters.  I'm very lucky being a professional reviewer. I get to hear many pieces in the context of my systems, instead of a showroom or at an audio show were you really can't get a take on a specific piece of gear for the obvious reasons.
mzkmxcv
777 posts
 
@steakster

By introducing DSP circuitry from a different manufacturer that is entirely designed to alter the signal created by the source component, your argument for measurements is completely nullified

Not sure how you came up with that. DSP is used to tame room modes and EQ to your target curve, if I’m supposed to hear a note at -10dBFS yet my room modes causes that to be heard as -5dBFS, then I’ll use DSP to reduce that peak. It’s altering the signal so that the sound that hits your ear is similar to how it’s intended.

DSP is digital. Bass traps are analog. DSP alters the source signal. Bass traps affect room reflection points. You’re mixing apples & oranges
They are both used to combat room modes, so no harm in mixing them in regards to how one can get a better sounding system. Treatment is of course the preferred method, DSP is the last line of defense.

In other words, your solution takes into account budgetary factors as opposed to scientific measurable factors.
In terms of describing my setup? Then yes.

Really? Have you had your hearing checked lately?

Have you read the technical differences of copper vs silver speaker wire? If so, you’d know that silver imparts no sound quality differences, so anything you hear is in your head, the one and only benefit is better conductivity, but if talking 10awg silver, then 8awg copper will be better conductive and cost a lot less. If you believe silver sounds different, I would recommend doing a double blind study (best if your speakers have dual binding posts, so you can use speaker cables with banana plugs and easily alternate). You could also record with your phone your system playing both songs, play them simultaneously in a video editor, but I very the phase of one track (due note that everything else, including environemental noise, needs to be identical).

If you have any measurements showing that, if conductivity is matched, silver measures differently than copper, I’d love to see that.


anthonymaw's avatar
anthonymaw
19 posts
 

Gentlemen: A few years ago I was a member of and attending a lecture by the AES Audio Engineering Society and the topic was what actually makes a "good" DAC?. The takeaway that I remembered most was that an accurate DAC starts with a stable and high precision (low-jitter) clock master signal. Here’s an article that provides an objective write-up on the DAC clock jitter issue that is similar to what I heard at the AES lecture. https://www.lessloss.com/page.html?id=33


davehg
85 posts
 
I like reading the measurements to see if they correlate what I hear in subjective listening. But I agree that great measurements alone don’t signal great sound, nor do poor measurements signal poor sound.

Case in point: I’ve owned several great SET and triode amps (Air Tight, VAC, and Woo) which have even been described as measuring “broken.” They sounded wonderful.

With digital, I tend to take the measurements more seriously, including total bit depth, channel separation, noise floor, and jitter. Strong results seem to correlate better with good sound in my experience, and poor results seem to correlate with colored sound. I’ve heard several DACs based on the classic Phillips chips and they tend to have a laid back, mellower sound that, while pleasing, is less dynamic and more colored sounding than modern chipsets, especially those using FPGA implementations. 

Certainly the quality of the analog output stage will have a big impact, more so than the older DAC itself, in my experience, which is why my Musical Fidelity TriVista DAC, with its well regulated power supply and tubed output stage, still gives modern DACs a healthy run for the money despite using a now pedestrian TI1792 Chipset. I’m currently eyeing the Chord Qutest as a possible upgrade, and I am charmed by the sound and dynamics of the FPGA DACs I’ve heard. They measure really well too.

i am sure the older Phillips based DACs have their charms but giant killers? My gut tells me otherwise. You can only tweak and squeeze so much out of these older chip designs. I’d love to compare these in my own system but without the chance, I’ll probably focus on the newer technology.
More to discover