[Badas]

 
6 months in and no problems with HA-1 and LCD-3c.

How long have you had your LCD-3c for total? I've had mine 12+ months. However they were manufactured 6 months before that. So maybe the driver failure is not as bad as they make out.

 

[imalter]

I have a question (presumably for Hastfur The Yellow) about the spectrum display.
I thought that with a sine signal the display should show just one column with its position depending on the frequency of the signal. But for each single frequency input it shows almost full spectrum, a hump peaked at the input frequency.
Sorry, the forum does not allow me to attach the images.
So, why the display works this way? Is it only a decoration?
 

 

[Davey Wonder]

 
How long have you had your LCD-3c for total? I've had mine 12+ months. However they were manufactured 6 months before that. So maybe the driver failure is not as bad as they make out.

 
Mine were manufactured in January, 2013.

There appears to be no connection between failed LCD drivers and the HA-1. Don't get excited!

 

[Mediahound]

Anyone know where I might get one of those HA-1 stands? 

 

[Badas]

Mine were manufactured in January, 2013.


There appears to be no connection between failed LCD drivers and the HA-1. Don't get excited!

Nah! Not getting exited. Just interested in how long yours has lasted. I don't think these driver failures are as bad as reported. HA-1 drives the Audeze bloody well. With the power in the HA-1 they are almost made for each other.

 

[Smarty-pants]

  I have a question (presumably for Hastfur The Yellow) about the spectrum display.
I thought that with a sine signal the display should show just one column with its position depending on the frequency of the signal. But for each single frequency input it shows almost full spectrum, a hump peaked at the input frequency.
Sorry, the forum does not allow me to attach the images.
So, why the display works this way? Is it only a decoration?
 

The spectrum display isn't really precise, but more of an estimated accuracy and a display that is more fun to watch.

 

[Smarty-pants]

  Anyone know where I might get one of those HA-1 stands? 

They were initially only made available to customers in the UK I think.
After some customers in the USA inquired about buying one, Oppo made some available via special request.
I'm not sure if they still have any available, but you can try to contact them and ask for yourself.
http://www.oppodigital.com/ContactUs.aspx

 

[vnmslsrbms]

  How are you guys going on the LCD range? There has been reports of a lot of driver failures.
 
My LCD3 is the classic version (non-fazor) and it has been robust. No issues.
 
There has been talk about amps being a issue. I primarily use a tube amp but on occasion use the HA-1.
 
Members who use the HA-1 and LCD regularly how is it going? Any issues?

My LCD 2.2 works fine.  I drive it balanced with no problems.  

 

[x RELIC x]

Yeah! I wrestle with the displays. Both are nice. That vid made me jump up and change it tho. I should stay on VU as I have tubes and a turn table right next to the Oppo.

I will be very interested in your DAC review.

I've been using the Oppo a fair bit of late. Turn table into Oppo. Vinyl and Class A amps are a heavenly match.

Here are my FIRST IMPRESSIONS LINK in comparison to the HA-1 after about 6 hours of listening and comparing.

After a week of listening and comparing my impressions stand.

The short story is the DAC-19(10th Anniversary edition) wipes the floor with the HA-1 DAC. It's not a matter of more or less detail (well perhaps it is) as both units present the same level of detail to my ears. The biggest differences are in the approach each DAC uses to convert the signal coming in. The DAC-19 simply sounds like real life and the HA-1 sounds digital/plastic in direct comparison. I wasn't expecting this kind of a difference but I'm glad I found it. Cymbals, for example, have a much greater impact with an extremely natural falloff that sounds much more like real life, not the usual digital splash I'm used to hearing from all my other sources.

The subtle cues from the DAC-19 give me a sense of the room or space the music was recorded in a much better way than the HA-1. There seems to be no approximation of the recording but rather a true looking glass in to what is in the track. The timbre of the music is turned up a significant amount while retaining all the micro detail I'm used to hearing. There is more going on in guitar string reverberations. More happening with piano key strikes. More subtlety in the air of the music. More texture and impact in the bass as well as the mids and treble. More separation. More layers. It's uncanny and difficult to pinpoint. Again, real life vs reproduction is the focus here.

The R2R DACs can't do DSD but I won't miss DSD as I hear no difference (absolutely none, zero, zip, nadda) when I down sample from DSD to 24/96. Believe me, if I knew the truth about the 'why and how' of how DSD came to be and what it really represents I would never have made it a blip on my audio radar in the first place. I'd rather have a DAC that doesn't throw away all the original samples to only approximate what it receives, so no more Delta-Sigma for me. There is a difference and it isn't subtle to me.

For now I'll keep the HA-1 as it really is a convenient (and well implemented for a Delt-Sigma DAC) piece of gear, but I can say that once my Liquid Carbon comes in I think it may be regulated to a backup solution, a bedside rig, or on the for sale forum. I'm ruined now for everything that isn't an R2R / multibit / ladder DAC implementation. There is a reason why people become fanatical about this type of DAC. I can clearly hear it now.

Edit: This is a good, easy to read, blog on the different implementations - Delta Sigma vs R2R.

http://www.mother-of-tone.com/conversion.htm

 

[Mediahound]

^ Yeah, I've never been a fan of the ESS Sabre 9018 DAC. I've heard some call it bright. It's not bright per se, just very detailed but lacks a bit of mid presence. I returned my HA-1 during Oppo's 30 day return window. 

 

[x RELIC x]

^ Yeah, I've never been a fan of the ESS Sabre 9018 DAC. I've heard some call it bright. It's not bright per se, just very detailed but lacks a bit of mid presence. I returned my HA-1 during Oppo's 30 day return window. 

In direct comparison it's not a difference of bright vs dark vs mid presence. It's much more than that. Read the link I provided in my edit for a better understanding of what I'm talking about.

The DAC-19 is actually brighter/more impactful on cymbal hits than the HA-1, and just like in real life they can be quite present/forward in the track, but they also sound so natural where on Delta-Sigma DACs they really do not. Like furniture covered in plastic it just doesn't feel the same.

The DAC in the HA-1 is a very good implementation to my ears but again for a Delta-Sigma DAC. They rely on noise and complex algorithms to approximate the incoming signal to convert to an analogue signal (surprisingly well actually). R2R DACs do not, they pass on what they receive. Completely different approaches.

From the link.......the top two images are Delta Sigma sine waves the bottom one is from an R2R sine wave. Which one looks right to you?

 

[vnmslsrbms]

This is beyond my comprehension, but why aren't you comparing 16 bit sigma delta to 16 bit R2R?  I thought the Sabre is a 32 bit DAC?  And when you say R2R just passes it on, I don't quite get that as I'm pretty sure somewhere they have to convert digital to analog like you described for a sigma delta.  If both are taking USB inputs, I'm not sure where the difference is.  
 
Although I do agree that the Sabre DACs sound pretty bright, there are good DACs that are implemented well that can utilize the good parts and provide a well matched analogue portion.  What's the reason that most brands have moved to ESS Sabre?  Is it easier to use (development wise)?  

 

[x RELIC x]

This is beyond my comprehension, but why aren't you comparing 16 bit sigma delta to 16 bit R2R?  I thought the Sabre is a 32 bit DAC?  And when you say R2R just passes it on, I don't quite get that as I'm pretty sure somewhere they have to convert digital to analog like you described for a sigma delta.  If both are taking USB inputs, I'm not sure where the difference is.  

Although I do agree that the Sabre DACs sound pretty bright, there are good DACs that are implemented well that can utilize the good parts and provide a well matched analogue portion.  What's the reason that most brands have moved to ESS Sabre?  Is it easier to use (development wise)?  

It's not a simple matter of a numbers game. By the way, the DAC-19 accepts 32/192 through USB. And yes, it's significantly cheaper to produce Deta-Sigma DACs, one of the main reasons everyone uses them.

I posted the blog/article so people can get answers if they are interested. There is an abundance of information about the differences and the shortcomings of each implementation.

From the blog/article:

Spoiler: About R2R

"In the CD-format chapter you have seen that digital numbers are translated into a staircase signal, and by rounding the steps, we get something that pretty much resembles the originally captured signal.

This translation process from numbers into voltage steps, is what happens in a R2R DA converter which is sometimes also called a "ladder-DAC" or "multibit-DAC", as resistors (the R's in R2R) are configured as an ascending series of voltage dividers.

Such a R2R converter is a static device, in that it is able to generate a clean voltage (with 16 bits resolution there are 65536 different voltages) and hold that voltage until another number is converted, or if numbers repeat - for an infinitely long time, while maintaining an extremely low noise level.

In order to achieve a certain level of performance, the resistors (R's) inside the converter chip must be precisely trimmed, which can make a device very expensive to manufacture, especially when true 24-bit resolution is required.

Some companies were famous for their R2R converter chip designs, such as Analog-Devices, Burr-Brown and Philips."

And this:

Spoiler: About Delta-Sigma

"In order to avoid the required precision in the manufacture of R2R converters (and save manufacturing costs), another conversion technique became very popular.

In this conversion technique, a single switch replaced the precision resistors of the R2R DAC, and it was believed (and shown to a certain extent) that if only the switch was toggled fast enough, one could also achieve many different voltages.

If for example the switch is more often switched to 5V than to 0V, and if that switch-signal is run through a low-pass filter then the output voltage will also be closer to 5V, than to 0V, plus lots of noise.

This fast switching technique is employed in sigma-delta conversion and it is also the technical foundation of the newly introduced SACD or DSD format.

As a 16 bit R2R DAC is able to generate 65536 different static voltages, and a single switch can only generate 2 different voltages (hi and low), a high switching frequency (usually in the range of a couple of MegaHertz, and achieved through oversampling) is necessary for proper operation and thus, much noise will be produced by the switching process in a sigma-delta converter.

In fact, for any practical application, the noise-level is much higher than the signal that is to be reproduced."

Spoiler: Also this......

"In fact, the total noise-output is never stated in the data-sheets, and measurements only mention in-band-noise up to 20kHz, suggesting that higher frequency noise has no effect on fidelity.

Of course with this eye-closing practice only those can be fooled that also have closed ears.

In plain english: sigma-delta DACs are coarse noise-generators and when measured the way they should be measured they never make it to 16-bit resolution, don't even think about 24 bits."

"In plain English: sigma-delta DACs are coarse noise-generators and when measured the way they should be measured they never make it to 16-bit resolution, don't even think about 24 bits".

I'm not 100% sure about this statement but I will say that after listening and researching about the differences I'm convinced that I don't care about 32bit resolution or DSD and the like. I'm finding that is more of a numbers game for marketing or to boost shortcomings than to actually provide more fidelity and better music reproduction. Actually, I get now what Schiit Audio is saying when they're promoting their multibit DACs vs Delta Sigma.

I know that many will get cranky with what I've just posted, but this is what I'm finding out at this stage in my audio journey. Like I've mentioned before the HA-1 has one of the best DAC implementations I've heard up until now, but I won't be seeking out Delta-Sigma implementations anymore.

 

[Badas]

^

I have to back you up. Not too much. I don't want to get into too much trouble. Many know my views.

The HA-1 gets a bit screachy, sparkly in the high treble. As many may know I use a Arcam DAC instead. That uses Burr Brown chipsets. The Burr Brown and the Arcam is as smooth as butter in the treble area. A pity the Burr Browns are not use so much any more.

As I have always said the HA-1 is sweet in all other areas. The total package. I have been using it a fair bit lately with vinyl and vinyl digital rips. Vinyl does not extend as high in treble and has notable deeper bass. So it matches beautifully with the HA-1.

It pisses me off how much the music industry has stuffed up digital formats. Most back catalog music has had the treble extended and bass stripped to accomodate ear buds and car stereos.

I have compared many artist on multiple formats and most digital formats can't compete.

 

[vnmslsrbms]

Well that explains what I hear then.  It is a sharper DAC.  Like the highs actually get noisy.  My new Vega does a lot better in curbing that, making music more enjoyable.  I thought I was set but probably need to try out a R2R one.  Can't really afford the MSB Select DAC at 90k USD!
 
That said, I think it still works well to pair the HA-1 as a DAC with a softer sounding preamp/head amp.  My LCD2.2 also takes care of the screechy treble pretty well.  It seems like the HD800 was developed for DAC tech before the ESS9018.