I felt strongly that I wanted to inform the Gon members about a new DAC that ranks with the very best on the market regarding performance, but costs around $2,000.00. The Lab12 DAC1 SE was compared to three reference level DACS that retail for over $12.000.00 in my review for hometheaterreview.com and was at least on the same level sonicly, if not better. This DAC from Greece is not just "good for the money" but competes with virtually anything on the market regardless of price!
For all the details about the Lab12 DAC1 SE performance and what other DACS it was compared to take a look at the review. If you are shopping/looking for a new digital front end to drive your system, you owe it to yourself to check this DAC out, unless you like to spend tons of more $ without getting better performance.
@teajay What is the name you use for reviewing and where are your reviews published?
As I have suggested to others including @audiotroy in the past, it helps everyone when those in the industry sign their posts identifying themselves as such, (e. g. Terry, reviewer, xyz magazine). Cheers, Spencer
My name is Terry London and I review for hometheaterreview.com. Yes, my AudioGon name is teajay, however in real life all that know me well call me TJ, not Terry. It's been a known fact from the beginning here who I am and who I write for.
Teajay, I echo David_ten's comments regarding your contributions to fellow Audiogon members. I believe that quite a few people appreciate you discovering exceptionally good audio components and bringing attention and exposure to them. Keep it up.
It's bewildering to me why some people take such offense to the idea of affordable, high value components that are capable of providing high quality sound. This really seems to bother some people for some odd reason. While I subscribe to the idea (in a general sense) that you get what you pay for. I've learned that in High End audio there are clearly exceptions to this axiom.
There is not a strict linear relationship between price and performance in the realm of audio products. When someone such as teajay who has vast experience with upper tier products and then touts a lower cost product as competitive, this should be greeted with joy and appreciation.
What is particularly peculiar is the immediate derision and negativity from people who haven't heard the product at all but dismiss it due to its affordability. An unreasonable and unjustified reaction in my opinion. Charles
Agree with everything that you said Charles. It's very human to share your knowledge and excitement, and that is one of the main purposes of these forums. I contacted Mike Kay on Saturday via email, and received a prompt response. I am really interested in this DAC, and I'm getting ready to sell a few things in order to get it.
Hello Roxy54, Teajay used the Concert Fidelity DAC as his reference source for quite a long time and consistently preferred it to other highly esteemed DACs. Granted it's just one man's opinion but it does provide some means of a comparison/reference point. I've heard the Concert Fidelity DAC in several different systems and can attest to its terrific sound quality,
That teajay finds the Lab 12 DAC1 SE equal or even better sounding is at the very least a notable development given that it is roughly 1/5 the cost. If you do decide to purchase this DAC let us know your listening impressions. Charles
Regarding Teajay's credibility as a reviewer, I can add a data point based on actual recent experience. I very recently purchased a Pass XA25 amplifier (from Mark at Reno Hi-Fi, who of course was completely wonderful to deal with), motivated in part by the glowing reviews and comments it has received from Terry and many others, and in part by the fact that my VAC Renaissance 70/70 amplifier developed a problem and is back at the factory for repair. Although I've had the XA25 for just a bit more than a week I can say that in my system, at least, the detailed characterization of its sonics Terry provided in his review were absolutely spot on in every respect. And in fact were more focused, meaningful, and accurate, IMO, than the comments in the comparably glowing review Herb Reichert provided in Stereophile.
Thanks for your excellent review, Terry; I expect to enjoy this amplifier for many years!
Thanks Charles and Al. I have always felt that I have to trust people at some point without rock solid confirmation. I believe that he is telling the truth, and I intend to buy the Lab 12 as soon as I sell my Audio Note Kits 2.1 which I have loved for several years now, and a couple of other things. I don't know how long that will take, but I will be sure to give my impressions Charles if/when it all works out.
Hello Al, I’m not surprised that you find the Pass XA 25 a very good match with your efficient and easily driven Daedalus Ulysses speakers. Is the Passgoing to replace the iconic VAC Renaissance 70/70 or will you retain both? Pure class A minimalist circuits (tube or transistor) consistently produce a natural high quality sound. Charles
I respect all those who offer their genuine opinion of their listening impressions of audio equipment, regardless of the circumstances whereby they audition the gear.
Audio reviewers should clearly state their conflicts of interests, including a statement of the price paid for any reviewed samples.
The way you shared your opinion, "should clearly state their conflict of interests" is setting up a false/invalid assumption. I have no "conflict of interests, I'm not censored by the man I write for, I do not have to protect any companies, and there is no alternative motive (s), just sharing my opinions about gear I listen to/review to readers here.
Yes, reviewers to get a "industrial accommodation" regarding price if we purchase the review demo. If it's a small boutique company that has a very small profit ratio the discount is much less then a much larger well known/established company. The pricing follows just about what an importer or retailer would pay for a piece of gear. However, I don't agree that anyone, including a reviewer, "should/must" disclose what they payed for what they purchased.
@Charles1dad Thanks, Charles. I suspect that I’ll eventually sell the VAC, but I won’t decide until sometime after I receive it back. The XA25 is definitely a keeper, though, for the long term. It comes amazingly close to the VAC with respect to dimensionality, imaging, liquidity, and other traditional fortes of high quality tube amps. It’s a bit less rich sounding than the VAC, but I interpret that as an increase in accuracy, which is fine as far as I am concerned.
There are also some non-sonic factors favoring the XA25, including the likelihood of greater reliability in the years ahead considering the age of the VAC; the fact that even though both amps operate in class A the XA25 puts only 240 watts of heat into the room compared to what I believe is upwards of 700 watts for the VAC; and the cost that would be involved in re-tubing eight 300Bs if and when that were to become necessary.
This is the first time I’ve had a high quality solid state amp in my system in about 25 years, and I believe I’ve picked the right time and the right model with which to do so again. Thanks in part to Terry's review.
Al, Your rationale is easily understood. The only reason to keep a tube amplifier is if it's clearly superior sonically to the solid state component. In your assessment of the Pass XA 25 it is the sonic equal of the VAC. That is an obvious compliment for the XA 25. Charles
The manual for the XA25 states that it takes about an hour to fully warm up, and that coincides with the amount of time I have observed it to take to reach a stable temperature on its heat sinks. So rather than leaving it on 24/7 my usual practice is to simply turn it on about an hour or so before I do any critical listening.
For break-in purposes, Mark at Reno Hi-Fi had suggested leaving it on 24/7 for 5 days to fully break it in. But out of an abundance of caution, especially given that it is a brand new amp, I left it on for most of the 24 hours of each of day, until it reached 120 hours, but not while asleep or when no one was home.
@teajay I appreciate your viewpoint. A “no conflict” statement is easy to make for publications, so why the pushback? It’s simply a general statement that reviewers should make about what their conflicts of interest are with respect to products under review, particularly when they are making statements in a commercial, for-profit, publication that might lead to inducing others to make a purchasing decision, as this thread amply demonstrates in spades. This is common in even scientific publications, where no commercial transaction is even contemplated. If none exists, then so state it. Period. End of story.
And with all due respect, stating something is an economic, high value product sort of depends on what the value is to that person. That is, the cost to them. The publication can make its policy a blanket statement that applies to all reviewers. But to endorse a product with the statement, “I bought the reviewed product” suggests that the price offered to ordinary consumers was paid. Your audience is not like-minded reviewers who can get the gear at your cost, but folks who pay full price for their gear.
Truth be told, I never turn off SS amps including the XA-25, except if I'm going on a long trip. Yes, the XA-25 comes mainly back on song after about a hour. However, to get to the pristine level of performance it can offer takes a lot more time in my experience.
I had a pair of Threshold SA-1 mono-blocks that remained turned on for close to 20 years and the caps were still good and going strong. I believe that my never turning off the amps the caps last longer and are less likely to dry out.
I think nearly everyone who reads this is aware that reviewers get a substantial discount, and the "high value" comment assumes that the reader is looking for a component that is in the price range of the piece under review. If it isn't in the readers price range, they are likely reading the review just for entertainment. I do that frequently.
Hi almarg, To bad you didn't wait for the new First Watt SIT-3. I'm on the waiting list. Should be getting it in October, hopefully. Nelson is only making 250 of them. A few reviewers think very highly of it. Stating that the tonal balance is quite tube like but, still providing detail, bass, and control like good SS provides.
You do say interesting things in very peculiar ways. To address your statements:
1) I believe most people in this hobby know that people in the industry, including professional reviewers, get discounts on what they buy for their personal use. This is not breaking news.
2) If I had to pay full price I still would have purchased the review pieces that brought my system and enjoyment of music to a higher level. My great interest is finding killer products for reasonable amounts of money.
3) My definition of value is build quality/performance compared to price and if it out performs much more expensive pieces, it's a great bargain.
4) I do not understand your statement at all regarding "investors in boutique audio companies" The owners of these companies have nothing to do regarding the reviewing process. For a matter of fact, the boutique companies that I have historically setup reviews with did not seek me out at all. I got wind of their products and was highly motivated to review their gear. The small guys cannot pay for the slick advertising, the website I review for does not tie in advertising dollars as way of getting a review done at all, therefore they are excited and take the risk of a bad review to get the public to know about their product.
Thanks for your comment, Joe. I had considered the possibility of waiting for the SIT-3, but I decided that it wouldn’t be suitable for my purposes.
One reason being its VERY low gain (spec’d at 11.5 db), which would make it a non-starter for my system.
Another being that its power capability (spec’d at 18 watts and 30 watts for 8 ohms and 4 ohms respectively) is probably marginal (or worse) with my speakers, when listening to the many classical symphonic recordings that are in my collection that have been engineered with minimal or no dynamic compression, on labels such as Telarc, Reference Recordings, Sheffield Labs, Chesky, etc. In fact I might not have purchased the XA25 were it not for John Atkinson’s measurements which indicated a maximum power capability (presumably after leaving class A) of 80 watts and 130 watts into 8 and 4 ohms respectively. (My speakers are spec’d at 97.5 db, with a nominal impedance of 6 ohms, and are said to be close to that impedance throughout almost all of the frequency range).
I'm on the list to get the SIT3 for review. Everyone, that I trust their ears liked it very much. However, it's a very different amp compared to the XA-25 regarding what speakers you can drive and control over the bottom end and overall dB levels.
My SIT2 is a wonderful amplifier, however it has to be used with the right speaker to really be able to shine. The SIT3 has more watts then the SIT2, so it's more flexible regarding what you can drive with it.
Almarg, I have Horning Eufrodite Ellipse speakers, which I run with 300b's and Pass XA-30.8. My Supratek Sauvignon has adjustments for gain, so I should have no problems.
Teajay, looking forward to your review once you get the amp.
Check out Audio mirror this Vacuum Tube model is Very goood and the New MK-2 SE model can be bought for under $1500 and its naturalness is pretty eye opening . I have had several more expensive models .$$ dollar for dollar you are getting a lot . they are upgrading their website ,writeto them directly and do a web search . Another model from Mod squad is also high value.
The Lab12 DAC that we are discussing on this thread is the newer version called the SE. I do believe that the DAC chips and basic overall design is the same, with better/different internal parts in the circuit in critical places that improve the sound. For more details contact Audio Archon or Lab 12 directly.
It's a little confusing as they seem to have been using the same nomenclature for a long time (in DAC years). It would be interesting to know more about the improvements - I might reach out to the company directly, as you suggest.
I reread this review before scheduling a visit to the Libertyville shop that carries this DAC. It appears that the review’s critical listening commentary pertains to the DAC fitted with a NOS CCA 1962 Siemens tube rather than the DAC fitted with the stock 6922 tube.
Since consumers are going to audition the stock unit, I’m wondering whether Terry might provide additional insight about his listening impressions of the stock unit.
I could not find a supplier of the NOS CCA 1962 Siemens cited in the review. So it will be challenging to capture all of the sonic qualities reported in the review.
1) I scored my NOS CCA 1962 Siemens from Brent Jesse.
2) All the details regarding how the DAC sounded/performed presented in the review apply to Lab12 with the stock tubes and the Siemens.
3) Yes, with the Siemens you get a little more of an "organic" sound then with the stock tubes, but either way the DAC sounds wonderful.
4) Mike Kay (Audio Archon) has at least three different excellent NOS 6922 tubes that he can provide, along with the standard stock tube, to tailor the sound to your personal taste. However, with the stock tube it's a great musical presentation.
Interesting with all this interest in a simple DAC. Anyone can build a "fantastic" DAC. When it's all about speakers and the room. I'm perfectly happy with a Yamaha WXC-50 feeding my ATC 150 ASL. Yes, I also got more expensive ones and a Diana from 1992 (will crush all others...).
Teajay- I can’t believe what you said in your response: “This NOS Phillips DAC chip is extremely held in high esteem by many listeners/designers because if used in the right way”. So you are saying that only 1 manufacturer can perform magic on a budget/cheap chip to make it sound much better than all the more common chips used in 99% of the other well known dacs.
I didn’t make my comments up, if you do a search on your chip, you will find a lot of people indicating it’s a cheap budget chip.
when I did audition many dacs years ago, most of the top manufacturers used a common set of chips.
Like I said, if a dac doesn’t use FPGA, I won’t even look at it, so no, I didn’t review your dac and I didn’t claim I did.
It’s been a long time since I read and/or reply on all of this A-n b.s.))) I actually surprised to see that in 2018 so many people still wasting their time reading all this b.s. by paid writers/reviewers instead of listening to YouTube audio/video samples that proves such claimsof “ and disregarded those “legends” that are not supported by said samples.
dvac, Let me understand this...are you actually saying that listening to audio systems on your computer speakers is a good way of evaluating their sound quality?
Also in 30 years of professional sales experience we have seen products that have performed well for less money like the Auralic Vega but again that was a $3,500 dac that matched in some ways a $7,000.00 Meitner but again, not a $2k dac that is sounding close to a $10k one.
Pardon my ignorance, but I’m having a difficult time trying to figure out how we are getting to 10k with a DAC. A $20 chip, a nice $200 case, maybe another $100 for a special power supply...sorry just not understanding the parts breakdown in relation to the final cost.
Seems that 2k could get you a top shelf product. I realize that we are talking very small batch products. I imagine a company making a 10k DAC might only sell 20-30 of them. Defining better might just be defining different.
I remember back in the early 90s the Sony walk man cd player was using a good digital converter ever a few reviewers mentioned it as a option to hook up to your system. a great builder of this Phillips chipset .Jerry Osmet- Audio Logic fame . I owned 2 of his units .my brother still has 1 .look on the used market for one maybe $1k or under.
Has the Lab 12 DAC1 SE been born again? Still wondering why all the fuss over a 5 year old DAC. Not saying being 5 years old is necessarily a bad thing, just can’t understand the comments about it being "new". It’s not the only DAC with great reviews that uses the cheap Philips chip - the Border Patrol DAC is another.
Always enjoy reading about the new DACs on the market here with you guys....and have listened to many. Most on this forum have been overlooking iFi Audio's "Black" Micro iDSD DAC that at $550 has been reigning superior for a couple of years in my book. However iFi just released their "pro" DAC a couple of months ago that comes in at around $2500. Hands down the best DAC I have ever heard in my life and brings my system to life like never before. Can I get a witness?! -Captain E
captelee, I'm sure that the ifi pro is a good modern DAC, I just went to the website and had a look, but to me, there is nothing that compares to the natural sound of a good, non oversampling DAC like the Lab 12.
I checked out online some pictures of the The Lab12 DAC1 SE... It does not even offer balanced capacity. Not an XLR output to be found.. A DAC like the Yggdrasil being fronted by a good tube preamp should produce more accurate sound...
The iFi Pro iDSD DAC "may" oversample if you choose that option, but it is certainly not recommended. I've never heard any DAC that can compare to the iFi Pro iDSD, regardless of the costs.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
