Latest Thread Images

100_1888.jpg
100_1887.jpg
See full thread gallery...
Cavalli Liquid Fire and Schiit Lyr
Mar 24, 2011 at 5:20 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 45
USAudio

USAudio

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 7, 2007
Posts
678
Likes
42
Location
Seattle, USA
Looking at the design specifications of the Schiit Lyr and Cavalli Liquid File with untrained eyes (mine), they appear to be very similar in design?
Perhaps these are just typical design specifications of hybrid amplifiers in general?
 
- Hybrid: JJ Tubes for Voltage gain, MOSFETs for current gain (LF: JJ 6922, Lyr: JJ ECC88, rollable to 6922/6DJ8)
- Fully DC-coupled at input and output
- Separate supply rails for the various components
- Output stage biased to mostly run Class A (LF: 100mA, Lyr: 130mA)
- High voltage gain (LF: 18.5db, Lyr: 20db)
- Opamp DC-Servo
...
 
Cavalli Liquid Fire: http://www.cavalliaudio.com/lf.php
 
Schiit Lyr: http://schiit.com/products/lyr/
http://schiit.com/schiit-faq/about-lyr/
http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/schiit/10.html (lots of design info here)
 
Now the "devil's in the details" with overall design, features, parts selection, build quality, etc., etc. but the simpler Lyr looks like a potentially poor-man's Liquid Fire.
 
Has anyone heard both that they could offer some contrasting impressions?
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 5:53 PM Post #2 of 45
Two different beasts altogether, in the Lyr's case a feral cat compared to the roaring tiger that is the LF.  I have heard the lyr and its folly to compare it to the EHHA or B22 let alone the LF which is far ahead of both those two amps.
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 6:18 PM Post #3 of 45
I'd leave it to someone else with more expertise to comment on the technical side of things, but they are quite different.  I was impressed by what the Lyr was at its price-point. I think it punches well in the "under 1k" bracket, but is just not in the same league as some of the more "performance" amps.  Specifically, while the Lyr has a ton of bass presence, it's not as tight and controlled as the LF or any other amp I've heard in that price range.  It's just not as clean and defined across the board, IMO.  This is from listening impressions either at a meet or late at night after a meet with my LCD-2's.  YMMV.
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 8:16 PM Post #4 of 45
Quote:
sachu said:
Two different beasts altogether, in the Lyr's case a feral cat compared to the roaring tiger that is the LF.  I have heard the lyr and its folly to compare it to the EHHA or B22 let alone the LF which is far ahead of both those two amps.
Click to expand...

Wow, far ahead of the B22 ... I have to listen to the LF someday!  For it's price I would expect it to be spectacular.  Maybe there will be one at an upcoming Seattle meet?
 
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 8:17 PM Post #5 of 45
Quote:
equus said:
I'd leave it to someone else with more expertise to comment on the technical side of things, but they are quite different.  I was impressed by what the Lyr was at its price-point. I think it punches well in the "under 1k" bracket, but is just not in the same league as some of the more "performance" amps.  Specifically, while the Lyr has a ton of bass presence, it's not as tight and controlled as the LF or any other amp I've heard in that price range.  It's just not as clean and defined across the board, IMO.  This is from listening impressions either at a meet or late at night after a meet with my LCD-2's.  YMMV.
Click to expand...

Was the LF designed with the LCD-2 in particular in mind?
 
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 8:46 PM Post #6 of 45
Mar 24, 2011 at 9:40 PM Post #7 of 45


Quote:
sachu said:
Two different beasts altogether, in the Lyr's case a feral cat compared to the roaring tiger that is the LF.  I have heard the lyr and its folly to compare it to the EHHA or B22 let alone the LF which is far ahead of both those two amps.
Click to expand...

I find it's tough to believe this. Better than B22? Would be interested in trying the LF some time in the future.
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 9:59 PM Post #8 of 45
EHHA, B22 are on the same playing field in my book. Choose which you want based on your personal preference. some have chosen the EHHA over the B22 and others the other way round.
 
 
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 10:21 PM Post #9 of 45
For what it costs, the LF should sound like heaven because one can get a balanced B22, GS-X or Zana Deux for less than that.
Any idea on the PSU? Is it in the same chassis with the amp or in separate chassis? Also, what's the attenuator used?
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 11:10 PM Post #10 of 45
I am yet to find an instance where balanced headphone amp helps especially for dynamic and orthos. but lets leave that out of this thread.
 
I believe everything is going to be in one chassis. My information is from whatever is available on the website.
 
As for sonic abilities..i think one needs to hear it before making any conclusions, I am thankful to Alex for letting me have the prototype for a couple of weeks to try it out.
 
Its well worth the price and then some if you ask me. 
 
Mar 24, 2011 at 11:32 PM Post #11 of 45


Quote:
sachu said:
Two different beasts altogether, in the Lyr's case a feral cat compared to the roaring tiger that is the LF.  I have heard the lyr and its folly to compare it to the EHHA or B22 let alone the LF which is far ahead of both those two amps.
Click to expand...


 
Can you please qualitatively and quantitatively provide us with a description of what "far ahead" means please?
 
 
Far ahead in price yes, and unless you provide further information, far ahead in defensive rhetoric as well...
 
 
Mar 25, 2011 at 1:09 AM Post #12 of 45
lacking prat, resolution. Good bottom end weight but lacking definition. Midrange is alright compared to the EHHA or the B22. The LF is even better here.
Restricted soundstaging.
 
Overall the amps listed above are just that much better. But frack..don't need to go all on the defensive just cause i didn't say your schitty amp is equal to something like the EHHA or the B22 let alone the LF.
 
Mar 25, 2011 at 3:33 AM Post #15 of 45
Even as i type this, I am listening to the prototype that was on display at Canjam 2010. To put it simply, the LF makes the other two veiled in comparison.
 
Coming to straight comparisons , detail retrieval is brilliant but yet more engaging, especially so in the midrange. The bottom end of the frequency spectrum its by a fair margin the best that i have heard. The LF is truer to the recording (as in does what an amplifier is meant to do) without embellishing any particular frequency range. The soundstage and imaging too the LF is ahead.
 
The only place where the LF falls short is the total engagement level, the stacker 2 still rules the roost there. Nothing I have heard thus far is quite as (apologies for the lack of a better word) "organic" sounding as the Stacker 2. 
 
Oh and  the LF looks wicked nice with the lights turned way down low :)
 
 
 
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top