Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Lavry DA10: the clock really works or is only advertising? Youtube videos
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lavry DA10: the clock really works or is only advertising? Youtube videos

post #1 of 18
3/23/08 at 10:07am
Thread Starter 
I was googling about Lavry and jitter when I found those 3 youtube videos who shown that the producer declarations about clock are not true.
YouTube - dominikpeklo's Channel
I decline ever responsability about the veraciousness of those tests, I only post here the link, but I would like understand if they declare true.
Somebody knows more about that?
Tia
Reply
post #2 of 18
3/23/08 at 10:23am
I like your English. I'm guessing you used a web translator. English always sounds better when spoken by foreigners. Except Americans.
Reply
post #3 of 18
3/23/08 at 10:50am
This was an intermediate reading of a circuit from someone who did not understand the complete design of the unit.

When this was being discussed in the forum which produced this video it was clear that Dan Lavry, the designer of the circuit, was being goaded into revealing his "trade secrets" of the "CrystalLock" circuitry that he uses on his higher end equipment. To which, in that forum, they have gone on to define what would be in a "CrystalLock" circuit based on their understanding and further have designed some circuitry to mimic what would be required to implement it.

If you want more information concerning the Lavry DA10 and actually have an interest please go to the Lavry web site and click on their forum to which you can search on these and read what Dan Lavry said about this issue.

That would provide you the best response to your question rather than someone like me giving you some half way or quarter answer to what was going on.

Here is the link to the Lavry web site. If you are interested in an answer rather than supposition you will register for their forum and do some due diligence. Lavry Engineering - Unsurpassed Excellence
Reply
post #4 of 18
3/26/08 at 5:07am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarkovsky View Post
I like your English. I'm guessing you used a web translator. ..
Hehe, it's evident eh?
btw thankyou
Reply
post #5 of 18
3/26/08 at 5:09am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by slwiser View Post
This was an intermediate reading of a circuit from someone who did not understand the complete design of the unit.

When this was being discussed in the forum which produced this video it was clear that Dan Lavry, the designer of the circuit, was being goaded into revealing his "trade secrets" of the "CrystalLock" circuitry that he uses on his higher end equipment. To which, in that forum, they have gone on to define what would be in a "CrystalLock" circuit based on their understanding and further have designed some circuitry to mimic what would be required to implement it.

If you want more information concerning the Lavry DA10 and actually have an interest please go to the Lavry web site and click on their forum to which you can search on these and read what Dan Lavry said about this issue.

That would provide you the best response to your question rather than someone like me giving you some half way or quarter answer to what was going on.

Here is the link to the Lavry web site. If you are interested in an answer rather than supposition you will register for their forum and do some due diligence. Lavry Engineering - Unsurpassed Excellence
Thankyou very much slwiser, I will do.
Reply
post #6 of 18
3/29/08 at 1:01am
I am not so sure that actually was the outcome of that discussion. You might recall that Lavry changed their manual after this incident. The original manual stated that the DA10 offers a non resampling mode but this statement has now been removed.

I have an early version of the DA10 and mine resyncs itself once in a while in the first 5 min of operation so I assume my unit might still use synchronous dejittering in crystal mode. However, I have not opened and measured the conversion clock that to confirm since I just like the unit as it is.

If I recall correctly the finding was that the firmware on newer units always resamples similar to the DAC1 which is consistent with these videos. In any case the whole affair was an example of how to not handle communication with your customers. In contrast, Glassman has done a lot of really good posts on this forum.

Slwiser, if you have any other hard information like measuring the conversion clock on your DAC chip on a recent DA10 that would be good news to distribute.

Cheers

Thomas
Reply
post #7 of 18
3/29/08 at 2:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by zigo View Post
I was googling about Lavry and jitter when I found those 3 youtube videos who shown that the producer declarations about clock are not true.
YouTube - dominikpeklo's Channel
I decline ever responsability about the veraciousness of those tests, I only post here the link, but I would like understand if they declare true.
Somebody knows more about that?
Tia
Related thread: DIYHiFi.org- Lavry DA10 DAC & CrystalLock

I think in that thread (or a related one), slwiser even back then suggested that this was about goading Dan Lavry into revealing "trade secrets", but I didn't see anything in the discussion that suggested it was premised on that. It seemed to be a genuine inquiry into CrystalLock's functionality (or lack thereof). I found the thread pretty interesting, overall.
Reply
post #8 of 18
3/29/08 at 6:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Filburt View Post
Related thread: DIYHiFi.org- Lavry DA10 DAC & CrystalLock

I think in that thread (or a related one), slwiser even back then suggested that this was about goading Dan Lavry into revealing "trade secrets", but I didn't see anything in the discussion that suggested it was premised on that. It seemed to be a genuine inquiry into CrystalLock's functionality (or lack thereof). I found the thread pretty interesting, overall.
It is a fact that soon after the conversation there and on another thread their discussions essentially went on to working to clone the supposed "theory" of the CrystalLock design using a buffer approach.

So if desiring to know the essentials of the Lavry design were not the goal of the goading then why attempt the cloning of the alleged concept of "CrystalLock?"
Reply
post #9 of 18
3/29/08 at 7:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by slwiser View Post
It is a fact that soon after the conversation there and on another thread their discussions essentially went on to working to clone the supposed "theory" of the CrystalLock design using a buffer approach.

So if desiring to know the essentials of the Lavry design were not the goal of the goading then why attempt the cloning of the alleged concept of "CrystalLock?"
It seems to me the purpose of the discussion was to verify whether the device worked as was claimed, which a few people in the original discussion appeared to have some doubts about. Testing of the device, and attempts to model or duplicate it, seemed to be incidental to that task.
Reply
post #10 of 18
3/29/08 at 3:26pm
While I have high respect for Dan Lavry, I tend to agree that he did not help his credibility with the reaction to these videos.

It is actually very simple. You switch the input sample rate into the DA10 and in crystal lock what you expect to see is that the conversion clock on the DAC chip switches as well. That is the definition of no resampling.

With the model of the DA10 that was tested that was clearly not working! Any suggestions about not understanding the circuit are simply BS at that point. The fact that the non resampling passage was then removed from the manual seems to indicate that Glassman was spot on and that the DA10 does indeed always resample.

It seemd that the discussion afterwards focused on the firmware which can control this behavior and it was speculated that the original circuit did not operate stable. That explanation seems to be compatible with the behavior my early unit exhibits. After switching it on it works for a while then it burps and resets itself as if looses the lock and then resyncs. After that it runs stable.

However, no matter how the internals work the DA10 is an extremely nice sounding DAC that I would gladly recommend to anyone looking for neutral sound.

Cheers

Thomas
Reply
post #11 of 18
3/29/08 at 3:42pm
Any jitter reduction "feature" is just advertising, be it Lavry or any other DAC. None of this hocus pocus is 1% as important as the DAC chip and anlalog stage implementation.
Reply
post #12 of 18
3/29/08 at 3:47pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by thomaspf View Post
However, no matter how the internals work the DA10 is an extremely nice sounding DAC that I would gladly recommend to anyone looking for neutral sound.
While I can't speak to the technical aspects of the dac or whether it works s claimed. I really don't think that making sure that an item works as advertised is a bad thing. I would think that if an item does work as advertised, especially on something as heavily touted as the Crystal lock, verifying it would definitely be a good thing. After all, it isn't the first time a manufacture has embellished on a products specs.

I will also say that I owned the Lavry for a long time I don't find it to be neutral. While I don't necessarily find it overly offensive, I do feel it dulls down music and thereby leads to unpleasant experience. In my experience, music isn't boring, but the Lavry seems to portray it as such.
Reply
post #13 of 18
3/29/08 at 4:41pm
Well, I guess we will have to disagree on the neutrality point then.

The DA10 clearly does not put any emphasis to the high frequency range or for that matter any band in the spectrum. When recording an unamplified sound source like voice and playing it back on the DA10 that somehow sounds very close to the original. A lot of equiment seems to try hard to improve on the original and in my personal taste that is not what I look for in neutral.

I guess this is a matter of taste. Enjoy whatever equiment you have...

Cheers

Thomas

P.S.: Debunking embellishments on products specs is a function of this forum
Reply
post #14 of 18
3/29/08 at 4:44pm
I agree about the neutral sound of the Lavry and that is one reason I have two units.
Reply
post #15 of 18
3/29/08 at 8:46pm
John Atkinson says that Lavry DA2002's lower midrange had more bloom than usual.
I just curious about if the DA10 have the same "tube-like"character ?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Lavry DA10: the clock really works or is only advertising? Youtube videos