[joespride]

Warning Im not big on audio speak, I will say I have been on a DAC quest for a very LONG time. I actually blame you all . It all started with the original Schiit Bifrost, then Uber, Centrance, Metrum,MHDT, Border Patrol, Aqua, ANK, Lampizator, Audial, AGD, Cherry, and several more that dont come to mind.

My goal which I am sure you hate seeing is to get as close to vinyl sound as I can afford. I want the layering, 3d stage, weight, and organic sound that vinyl affords without the hassles of setting up a cartridge (Very hard to do with an essential tremor)

I was eyeing an Abass DAC but with the happenings of late in Ukraine I thought it best to steer clear, I dont have 2+ K to lose.

Research and a used add on USAM led me to look at the LAB12. Abass likes the TDA chips the 1541 specifically, The Lab12 uses 8 of the 1543 chips ( sort of like Kingwa's Master 7, and the 1704. which I had and enjoyed very much, But the price on the new M7 is out of my range here in the states and I wont trust shippers ordering directly) When I took into account that the LAB12 uses 8 chips and that they were the TDA1543 I took a chance.

So Far with 25 hours on the DAC and swapping the EH 6922 out for a pair of Amperex Orange label A-Frames I had laying around, all I can say is "WOW" This DAC has the organic sound of Vinyl, It has weight, It has layering, It has Detail, and it has Great extension on top and bottom. I have an ANK4.1LE on the way in a couple weeks it will have to perform some mighty tricks to oust the LAB12................The SAGA continues, Though I think I am near the end of the hunt, time to set back and enjoy the MUSIC

If your in the market for a NOS DAC you might give Lab 12 a look

 

[Garak]

At this price range, if you want NOS, I'm surprised you never tried Holo Audio Spring 3. Even the KTE model is less expensive!

 

[joespride]

I gave Holo a thought, but having had Denefrips And could not sell it fast enough. I basically feel like, Holo, Denefrips, Art etc....are all more or less coming from the same Chinese Factory. I did not want any part of that ilk again.

 

[kingoftown1]

To each their own, but Holo and Denafrips are nothing alike other than that they have r2r products and are from China. Circuit design & methodology, chassis design, fit & finish, etc are very different between the two, speaking from experience. The lab12 stuff does look interesting though. A bunch of it popped up on The Music Room recently, would be interesting to audition.

 

[joespride]

I also prefer Tube output, TMR is supposed to be a dealer for Lab12

 

[stuart1927]

Hi folks. I've had my Lab 12 DAC 1 reference for about 3 months or so. It replaced a chord qutest DAC with an mru LPS, and offered a significant improvement, especially in staging and improved timbre/tonality. I also purchased a Pontus II to handle the relatively few higher res files I have. The lab 12 still bests the Pontus II, but it's quite close and they do things in quite a similar way. Overall, the lab 12 just sounds that little bit more musical and keeps you listening longer. Bass in the lab 12 is also slightly better, both in terms of extension and control. My view is at this level, differences in DACs are very subtle and folks tend to pick up things that may be more imagined than real! I have spent a lot of time doing detailed A to B listening between my DACs, so think my observations are real....to me anyway! I did roll in some 1975 reflectors to the lab 12, which are considered the holy grail of tubes of this type. They were definitely a step change up from the stock tubes. It's a pity that more people don't use their own brain and make some independent decisions when buying audio gear. It would be a pretty dull world if everyone took the safe option and bought a holo spring dac. Good as that DAC undoubtedly is, I personally enjoy seeking out left field options....sometimes you can find gems, and the lab 12 is definitely in that category.

 

[Loftprojection]

This is a really interesting and tempting DAC. I own an MHDT Orchid which is also built with an TDA chip and tube buffer. The Lab12 with 8 chips instead of 1 in the Orchid should sound quite a bit better. Would be great to have a bit more info on this relatively unknown candidate. Their HPA tube amp is interesting as well.

 

[joespride]

This is a really interesting and tempting DAC. I own an MHDT Orchid which is also built with an TDA chip and tube buffer. The Lab12 with 8 chips instead of 1 in the Orchid should sound quite a bit better. Would be great to have a bit more info on this relatively unknown candidate. Their HPA tube amp is interesting as well.

I have owned the Orchid, there really is no comparing it to the Lab 12 IMHO

 

[Gazza]

You mention Aqua as one of the DACs you tried but weren't impressed by. Curious as to which model that was as myAqua La Scala MkII is incredible. Closest thing I've heard to analog through digital while still hyper-detailed and musical.

 

[joespride]

I had an early Lascala MKII Optologic it was finicky at best. Sound was good when it was acting right. I find once a product is bothersome / problematic, I can not relax, I am always looking for the next problem instead of listening to the music..............For me a DAC must perform seamlessly as well as sound good. If it can not do both, I do not want it. Audio is about relaxation not irritation

I have no problem with loading drivers etc... but I have no time / patience for searching out solutions to connectivity etc...I feel like today any manufacturer should be able to produce a product that is plug & play with PC and MAC at a minimum

 

[Gazza]

That's a shame you had issues with an earlier model. I can only speak for myself but mine has worked flawlessly, connected to both a streamer (Naim NDX via BNC co-ax) and my PC (via USB).

 

[Loftprojection]

I have owned the Orchid, there really is no comparing it to the Lab 12 IMHO

Even more interesting then cause I love the sound of the Orchid! Can you tell us a bit more, where did you feel the Orchid was lacking versus the Lab12, resolution, tone...?

 

[joespride]

Im not big on audio speak, But Ill give it a go. I feel like the Lab12 is more real, more organic, has more weight. The Bass has more authority and the highs are clearer. Cymbals sound like cymbals and when they decay they maintain shimmer (dont sound like static) as always YMMV

Listening to some acoustic Music this eve. Avett Brothers, I and Love and You. Hearing quite a bit more nuance, the strings sound real, I can hear the PIC on the strings, The backing vocals are a surprise super isolated in there own space, not smeared in as is mostly the case. The Guitar Tone is very natural and spot on to my ears. Also listening to Uncle Tupelo March 16-20, 1992. Best I have heard either LP to date. It so odd getting a feeling of the performer being an actual person in the room. I can actually visualize the body, not just a flat wall. Depth is much better portrayed, back up singers are actually BACK UP. I can tell for probably the first time the backup singers are actually farther back in the presentation. As this DAC burns in it is getting better. I have never been a believer in burn in making a big difference, I stand corrected

 

[Loftprojection]

Im not big on audio speak, But Ill give it a go. I feel like the Lab12 is more real, more organic, has more weight. The Bass has more authority and the highs are clearer. Cymbals sound like cymbals and when they decay they maintain shimmer (dont sound like static) as always YMMV

Listening to some acoustic Music this eve. Avett Brothers, I and Love and You. Hearing quite a bit more nuance, the strings sound real, I can hear the PIC on the strings, The backing vocals are a surprise super isolated in there own space, not smeared in as is mostly the case. The Guitar Tone is very natural and spot on to my ears. Also listening to Uncle Tupelo March 16-20, 1992. Best I have heard either LP to date. It so odd getting a feeling of the performer being an actual person in the room. I can actually visualize the body, not just a flat wall. Depth is much better portrayed, back up singers are actually BACK UP. I can tell for probably the first time the backup singers are actually farther back in the presentation. As this DAC burns in it is getting better. I have never been a believer in burn in making a big difference, I stand corrected

Nice thanks for this info. Wonder why they went with the TDA1543 chip, probably the one they were able to get in volume since they use 8 in each DAC. The Orchid is based on the supposedly « legendary » TDA1541. My old Paradisea, the first MHDT made was based on the TDA1543 if I remember well. On the other had, they use a 6922 based tube buffer which is what the newest version of the Orchid use, so it must be nicer sounding then the first version I have.

Anyway, hopefully LAB12 gets a bit more attention soon, some pro reviews and stores in NA selling their stuff.

 

[joespride]

I thought seriously about getting the Lab 12 Pre but went with a well known to me Pre instead (Emotive Audio Sira) I dont know a lot of the technical on DAC builds. According to some very well known folks in the DAC realm a LOT of the differences in how a DAC sounds is in the design of the output stage (Dan Wright and Paul Mcgowan are examples) With the LAB 12 using twin 6922 it lends itself to tube rolling a TON of tubes. I must admit I have never been huge on Tube Rolling. I dont find nuance shifting worth the effort. I had a pair of orange label A frame Amperex laying around that frankly were super microphonic in another DAC and yet its not an issue with the Lab 12. All I know is the DAC must be burnt in because last night was really something special in my listening history using DAC's and digital files

Lab12 does seem to be picking up steam, Price will probably start picking up steam as well (sadly that seems to be the way of things)