i-Audio Lambda Review

Nov 19, 2005 at 4:52 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 9

spinali

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 26, 2003
Posts
1,602
Likes
12
Z-AUDIO LAMDA REVIEW



After positive feedback like http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=147038, it seemed time to put this product through the mill.

It should be noted that all the evaluations here were made well before a thorough burn-in period.

I used a 3g Apple iPod as source, since I'll be using it mostly portably. I used two different headphones: the Beyer DT-880 and Westone UM2 IEM with custom earpieces. These two earphones have such widely different sounds that offer a revealing look into the capabilities of the Lambda. I used the Sky Blue mini-to-mini interconnect and the SIK RAM DIM (a direct line-out), but noticed no difference in sound quality between the two with my setup; this isn't what you'd expect, but it's a sad reality of my current setup.

The music included a range of styles, from rock and pop to instrumemtal. All mp3s were encoded between 192 and 320kb/s. I eschewed .wav and lossless files because (1) I have a Mac and .wav files aren't useful to me, and (2) there's no noticeable difference in tone quality between 320kb/s and lossless on this particular iPod. Please be aware that my evaluation may (or may not) be handicapped by these variables.

ORDERING
I sent two emails to Tyler inquiring about the amp, and both were answered within minutes; this happened every time I asked for help or support. Ty is clearly very customer-centered, and he makes every reasonable effort to meet your specific amp needs. Within two days of ordering, the amp had arrived at my front door.



APPEARANCE
The Lambda chassis is made from extruded aluminum, and the edge panels are black plastic. All in all, it has a feeling of solidity. It's about 4 x 3 x 1.5 inches, and weighs eight ounces with two alkaline batteries installed. It has a bright blue power light, and an on/off toggle that's partly sheltered by the volume pot to reduce the chance of accidentally powering up.

BATTERIES
Seating the two 9V batteries can be a challenge. Ty offered immediate help, saying that you can push the batteries into the back tray by shimmying them into place.

Ty's then pointed out an easier way: if you unfasten all eight screws and push from the back (never from the front), the battery panel slides forward, and inserting the two cells becomes rather routine. (You're advised, for your convenience, to keep the PCB board in the Lambda's grooved inner chassis.) This became my preferred method.

My main difficulties with the Lambda occurred with this whole process. Sliding the PCB board into its slot can be a bit annoying, as is having to deal with eight screws every time you charge. If you decide on the attractive options of a recharging circuit and external power, you won't have to open the case, but don't count on using the unit more than three hours until it needs more juice. Less if your rechargeables are getting old.

Changing op amps is a very attractive aspect of this amp. The op amps and buffers are set really close to one another, so its hard to shimmy up the op amp without damaging the pins unless you're very careful (or experienced).

Since you'll be changing batteries regularly, using NiMH rechargeables may save you money in the long term. They last about 6 or so hours before you'll need a recharge. On a Maha recharger, it takes about two hours, so invest in four batteries so you'll never have to wait.

This amp can also be fitted with a power source for charging in the unit and a wall adapter. In the process, you'll give up one battery slot; the bonus is that you never have to open the amp unless you really need to. Contact the maker for these options. My unit doesn't have these (yet).

During transport with batteries installed, the PCB board may bump against the top of the inner case, but this in no way affects the sound. The noise can be easily dampened or ignored. I ignore it.

THE SOUND
Basically, the default sound of the Lambda is relaxed and forgiving, though it has an appealing snap and punch when needed. I detected a noticeable hiss in the background when I powered it up, but it was not really an issue in any of my listening sessions. The Lambda easily powers IEMs like the UM2, but also excels with the hard-to-drive DT880 with volume to spare. The AD823 op amp offers some nice impact.

The z-Audio Lambda allows you to roll both the op amp and buffer. I have a tray filled with anxious op amps, but that comparison is for a later post. This amp is set up for dual op amps.

SAMPLING IPOD MP3s ON THE BEYER DT880 AND WESTONE UM2
The Beyer DT880 headphone is hardly portable, but helps define what the z-Audio Lambda sounds like at its very best. I fastened the Lambda and iPod together with a Scunci poly band (size 18, shown), available in most department stores; it holds firmly and doesn't budge.

The Byrds - "Eight Miles High"
DT880: The guitar picking has a wonderfully crisp attack, the vocals mellow and evocative. The recording itself has occasional tape hiss, which the Lambda was able to render accurately. The presentation is quite musical and easy to listen to. with warm vocal harmonies in counterpoint with detailed guitarwork.
UM2: There's a similar and perhaps equal quality of sound here. Set at Treble Boost, all bass haze vanishes to give an incisive sound. With this track, and others with extremely good stereo separation, the difference between the two earphones is fairly negligible. Congested tracks are another matter, but that's further on down the road.

Green Day - "American Idiot"
DT880: It's hard to mess up this tune, and the z-Audio Lambda renders it with exceptional clarity and accuracy. I'm finding that with pop music, I prefer this amp with the iPods treble boost, which preserves a song's punch and sharpness without losing any bass. Everything sounds integrated.
UM2: On this IEM, there's an increase in bass quantity and a loss of articulation that can be annoying when unamped. The Lambda aims for a sonic middle ground that makes the UM2 sound near its best on this track.

Various enka tracks
Enka is a type of Japanese pop music (like the kind you hear in some sushi bars) that has strings and a combination of other instruments. These songs are always well-recorded and sometimes almost symphonic.

DT880: The songs have a wonderful texture, and this amp tends to flatter female vocals in particular. There's an elegance to the mp3 tracks I sampled, and they could be enjoyed just as well with Flat EQ instead of my usual Treble Boost setting. This genre can get tiring after a while, but this amp injects a sonic "thrill factor" - thanks to the crystal clear tone and dramatic instrumental flourishes.
UM2: Even without EQ, the songs have good articulation. Treble Boost would sometmes bump them into sibilance, and this IEM didn't seem to work perfectly in any EQ setting, even flat. This is, of course, more of a commentary on the UM2, whose deep bass response is very difficult to handle. In this case, the synergy wasn't there. I suspect that one would have more satisfactory results with an Ety or Shure E4C IEM, whose bass has already been tamed. Although I tested the UM2 with enka, my results would probably apply equally to acoustic or jazz tracks.

Various reggae tracks
DT880: Reggae, especially the vintage variety, sounds evocative with the z-Audio Lambda. There's a relaxed sense of correct proportion that works well with the laid-back selections in my iPod. Even bass-heavy dub selections came out sounding fresh.
UM2: As you'd guess, the bassy UM2 is at home with reggae, no matter the production values. The amp falls into the background (as it should), and finding a suitable EQ that emphasizes the bass line can be a key to enjoying these tracks. On occasion, the UM2 prevailed over the amp with a sense of "muddiness"; since many of these tracks are rather old, little fidelity was lost in the process.

I'm growing increasingly convinced that a larger amp like the Xenos 3HA, with its treble and bass conrols, is the best solution fo the UM2's bass, though different op amps in the Lambda might change my mind.



But my opinion changed somewhat when I installed the OPA2227 op amp; all of a sudden, there's more clarity and sparkle, and the UM2's bass haze is all but vanished (with Treble Boost). I could get used to this sound. Soon, I'll be getting my brown-dogged AD8620 op amp in the mail; the amp is said to sound at its very best with these.

CONCLUSIONS
1. Though not super-compact, the z-Audio Lambda is easily small and light enough to store in a backpack or briefcase for portable use. Yet, it has the general feel of a home amp - occupying a nice middle ground.
2. The sound is clear and non-fatiguing, with a well-controlled bass and, at its best, lovely, sweet trebles. With good headphones, you always get the feeling that the music is being rendered accurately.
3. The opportunity to roll the op amp and buffer, while not tested extensively here, opens a potential for varied sound signatures, making this a surprisingly versatile amp. Perhaps z-Audio Lambda owners would like to post their results on the z-Audio discussion group if they've done this kind of experimentation.
4. In track after track, the Lambda strikes a middle ground designed to make a variety of music sound better. Terminally congested recordings should be played at lower volumes to reduce noise - the same as with most amps.
5. To reduce the inconvenience of battery replacement, this amp would would profit handsomely from internal charging. With those who use rechargeables (like me), this goes double. A user should seriously consider the external charging option.
6. Although it's fairly simple to use, a user's guide would be useful to some owners. (Or you can simply print out this post.)

I'm very pleased with the z-Audio Lambda, and excited that it sounds so good even before a full burn-in; I hope that in the interest of speed I haven't done the z-Audio Lambda an injustice. It's a strong player in its price range. But the hidden bonus - and I speak from experience - is Ty's fast, patient customer service.
 
Nov 19, 2005 at 6:02 AM Post #2 of 9
Quote:

I used the Sky Blue mini-to-mini interconnect and the SIK RAM DIM, but noticed no difference in sound quality between the two with my setup.


With all due respect.

This may be seriously mistinterpretted by a reader unfamiliair with Ipod connectivity.

I think a fairer comparison would be is the cable was used via line out directly rather then headphone out? Sik Din is a line out correct? So the comparison was between a hard wired line out versus an interconnect via headphone out?
pocket dock or turbo dock thing thats been springing up lately, may have been a fairer comparison
wink.gif
or better yet a hardwired line out versus hardwired line out.

smily_headphones1.gif
just thought I should point that out, since it wasnt mentioned. Generally headphone outs have a higher level of distortion over line outs.

bit rate compression information would also add greatly to the review as it is also very informative to a reader. i.e. IMO loss less and WAV via line out would probably be best suitable for critical listening with DAPs


Thanks!
God bless,
myo
 
Nov 19, 2005 at 6:37 AM Post #3 of 9
You're correct. Sometimes it's easy to presume that we live in an iPodded world, when in fact many may be unfamiliar with this terminology.

You bring up an interesting point about lossless files. I'm sure that some players have better audio fidelity than a 3g iPod. But with my iPod, I cannot distinguish the difference between 320kb/s and lossless files; this may be a function of my ears, but I'm more certain it's the iPod's limited frequency response. (My naked ears can easily tell the difference between tracks encoded at 320kb/s and lossless, but not when played on an iPod. (Maybe I should upgrade, eh?)

The main downside to all this is that that lovely Sky Blue cable isn't being used to its full stereophonic capacity.
wink.gif
 
Nov 19, 2005 at 9:12 AM Post #4 of 9
Thank you for the datailed if portable oriented review.
smily_headphones1.gif



May I ask you if you know whether the sockets for the opamps (not the buffers) are 2 or 3 ? I guess 2 because the AD823 is dual.

I'm interested to know because I'm pondering what opamps to use with it (I also have my own drawer of anxious opamps
redface.gif
). AD843 x3 would be my preferred upgrade, if only I didn't need to buy the Browndog to fit 2 into one socket. Otherwise, I would probably do AD8620 (L&R) plus say AD843 (G) ... or something alike. I also have a pair of BUF634 so I could stack the buffers either for L&R or for G.
cool.gif
 
Nov 20, 2005 at 5:05 AM Post #5 of 9
Quote:

May I ask you if you know whether the sockets for the opamps (not the buffers) are 2 or 3 ? I guess 2 because the AD823 is dual.


It might be a better idea to email the the maker on this one; I'm comparatively less informed on electronics, and he might be able to do something for you.
 
Nov 20, 2005 at 8:37 AM Post #6 of 9
Alright, good idea.
 
Nov 20, 2005 at 10:43 AM Post #7 of 9
Quote:

Originally Posted by spinali
You're correct. Sometimes it's easy to presume that we live in an iPodded world, when in fact many may be unfamiliar with this terminology.

You bring up an interesting point about lossless files. I'm sure that some players have better audio fidelity than a 3g iPod. But with my iPod, I cannot distinguish the difference between 320kb/s and lossless files; this may be a function of my ears, but I'm more certain it's the iPod's limited frequency response. (My naked ears can easily tell the difference between tracks encoded at 320kb/s and lossless, but not when played on an iPod. (Maybe I should upgrade, eh?)

The main downside to all this is that that lovely Sky Blue cable isn't being used to its full stereophonic capacity.
wink.gif



I have a 4G 40GB iPod. It's fun and I use it alot, but it's simply not a great source. Not only doesn't it resolve the difference between 320 and lossless, but low bass clips severely at times (blat!). Sometimes the thing sounds lovely, but it is severely limited as an audiophile device.

[...to add a little rant: I have a 1990 D555 Discman that has optical out, but the 2006 iPod and Powerbook don't. Huh?!]

I wonder if the latest vPod has better, same or worse SQ? Will have to ask Jahn after he's had his new toy for awhile.
 
Nov 20, 2005 at 2:28 PM Post #8 of 9
Quote:

I wonder if the latest vPod has better


I've heard good things about both the Nano and vPod, but I'd hold off on buying an iPod just yet. Not too long ago, Apple patented a new custom EQ technology, and it will make its way into an iPod -- hopefully soon. (No schedule yet.)
 
Nov 21, 2005 at 6:31 AM Post #9 of 9
Excellent review, thanks!

And do mention anything possibly "negative" about the amp you find, I'm always looking for ways to improve the design! i.e. the difficulty of fitting batteries, the clunking around inside of the batteries, that sorta thing.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top