Thanks stewg, Grannyring and I were a little concerned about that procedure. I have four extra NOS 1964 Siemen Halske E88CC gold pins for my Cal Audio Aria. Looking through my storage, I found six NOS Marconi 6SN7s, there’s also an adapter for those, but that’s another story down the road.
I believe Amber 3 can play native DSD 64 and 128 files unlike Orchid. Has anyone tested different file types (high res flac & DS) and their impression?
Well if the socket enables one to roll tubes that sound better than the WE, then wonderful. I would check with MHDT as these other tubes will have varying voltage requirements.
It should be noted that some if not all DACs accel at a specific connection/input
Comparing just spdif for example across the board is pretty limiting or at least can be as many designs put everything into say implementation of their USB and that particular DAC will perform best at. But if spdif is the connection type one wants then you need to consider that variable significantly. Again regardless of connection type, or one’s preferences, it’s all about the DACs implementation of said connection type.
I haven't had a chance to compare the 6Dj8 to the Western Electric tube in the Orchid. However, 213cobra apparently has done that comparison and it was his idea of trying out this adapter and his opinion was that the six DJ eight variety was better. I can't really say. I just know that it sounds great.
I forgot to share my final thoughts of the Amber 3 vs the upgraded Orchid. The two are really wonderful and I could live with either and not feel like I miss the other.....if that makes sense.
The Amber 3 is a little more resolving and throws a bigger stage. The upgraded Orchid is still less fussy of recording quality and just makes you smile. Both are beautiful sounding with great dynamics and bass. The upgraded Orchid’s bass is just a tad better. More impact and slam.
I don’t think either one is an upgrade over the other, simply a slightly different set of relative strengths. The Amber 3 however is twice as expensive after the fuse and tube upgrade. If you love a very large sound stage with extraordinary detail presented in vivid beauty with a touch of warmth, then the Amber 3 will please you greatly. In addition the Amber 3 remains a bit more composed at high volumes of over 88db or so. This maybe important to you.
The upgraded Orchid sounds a touch more full through the lower mids and packs incredible bass slam and weight. It does a better job of dealing with the digital nasties like glare that can rear it’s ugly head on certain recordings. It just sounds right folks. That special piece of gear that helps you enjoy your music library easily and fully.
The stock Orchid is outclassed by the Amber 3 after full break in as an FYI. The Amber 3 simply delivers more nuance, scale, drive and resolution.
Not sure why one would need to go the adaptor route when the $69 Western Electric tube is so fantastic and miles ahead of the stock GE tube? Just seems unnecessary? However, if you love tube rolling have at it!
I have heard the PSAudio dacs a long time ago and I once owned the Schiit Yiggy. The Schiit is a fine dac (not my cup of tea) and while I really like Paul and his no nonsense but considerate demeanor, I don’t believe either of these dacs belong in the same conversation with the Amber 3. Again, my system, my ears, YMMV.
Back to the original topic: the Orchid and the Tubadour are both terrific dacs at their respective pricepoints, the Amber 3 is at another level entirely. Peace.
@jzzmusician and I were talking and he asked me to post the following on this thread because it could easily have been overlooked on the MHDT Orchid tube rolling thread elsewhere on this Forum. I read with interest 213cobra’s idea of using a 5670 to 6DJ8 socket adapter to allow substitution of a 6DJ8 in place of the GE 5670 tube or Western Electric alternative, so I purchased one of those adapters on the ’net and swapped in an Amperex made-in-Holland 6DJ8 for the GE tube. I think it is a very worthwhile upgrade. I’d describe it as on the scale of moving from the sound of a Baldwin piano to a big Steinway or Bosendorfer. Tonally the music is more fully fleshed out with a gorgeous midrange. Soundstage is larger, note trails and decays are clearer and more interesting. The music is warm, beautiful, illuminated, nuanced, emotionally rich.
If you’re interested in reading more on this please seek out the thread here on Audiogon titled something like MHDT Orchid tube rolling. There’s also a nice long thread on this topic on Head-fi.
I have had the directstream in my system and I feel that the other options are superior in every way. I used it daily for a month, so it was well burned in. I’ve had difficulty reconciling my experience with other reports (e.g., the stereophile class a rating). It just didn't work in my system.
FWIW, I owned and sold that Yggy dac, the slightly modded Orchid sounds way less bright and digital to my ears and in my system.
Since the Amber 3 has come into mention by grannyring (who modded my Orchid) Bill and myself would say it’s pretty darn unanimous the Amber 3 along with Orchid sound way more musical and natural to our ears.
I have well over 225 hours on the Amber 3. I also installed and SR Orange fuse and very nice Mullard/Amperex Long plate 12au7 tube. Both the tube and fuse have 65 hours on them. The sound out of the Amber 3 is now so effortless, natural and beautifully intimate.
My system sounds just as I had hoped. Huge luscious stage with great depth. I hear further into the recording and space then I have ever experienced before. I love how smooth and easy on my ears and mind the sound is. Music just floats out and swells bigger and bigger as the volume is turned up. Not a hint of forced or overly forward presentation. Not a hint!
Brownsfan, I will report back on complex material and how the Amber 3 handles it. Thus far I find the Amber to be very composed easily sorting out all instruments in their appropriate space.
The Amber 3 has always excelled in dynamic drive and bass, that has not changed.
kalali and rx8man, Congestion during complex musical passages can be caused by a lot of different things, and I can't know with any certainty what is causing it until I make a change that mitigates the problem. For all I know, the problem may be a function of the recordings and not my system. Complex orchestral passages are as challenging to record as they are to reproduce.
In my case, I'm using the excellent Coincident CSL line stage, so I'm dubious about the preamp being the culprit. Also, my amplifiers are Atma-Sphere M-60's which drive my 92.5 dB efficient speakers without breaking a sweat, so I'm not inclined to implicate the amps. It may well be my speakers that are the problem. But I've put a lot of effort and money into rebuilding the crossovers and treating the room, so a decision to change speakers with no guarantee that they are the offenders could prove to be an expensive and painful experiment. What is left as most likely (in my opinion) is the Sony. It is 2014 vintage technology, which is ancient given the rapid rate of change in digital playback technology.
I recently read an interesting article (or advertisement) that discussed R2R vs Delta-Sigma with respect to congestion during complex passages in some detail. Unfortunately, I can't find it.
My current system is very good, and I'm not going to spend 10's of thousands chasing down a minor issue. But if I get a promising lead on one of these very good DACs, I might just roll the dice.
@brownsfan Bill, at least Audio Mirror offers a 10-day home trial, so it's low risk to audition (also true of the Amber 3 from Gestalt). And it's clear from our amplifier and speaker history that we share some presentation preferences. As I noted, however, I don't really listen to classical (but I do wear an Ohio State hat every day).
I never attributed the notion of "congestion" to how a DAC chip or a DAC in general affects the sound. For me, I always felt (or thought) the speakers were the limiting factor when playing complex orchestral passages, particularly loud transients. The partnering amplifier also plays a key role but the exhibited shortcoming is more of a harshness and edge rather than congestion. Same with DACs, some are fluid and musical and some are dry and boring.
Chris, you are absolutely correct in observing that implementation is key. Also, there is never going to be a single DAC that is unequivocally better in every attribute. It is enough for most of us that it checks most of our personal boxes, and mates well within the context of our systems. In my case, my ModWright Sony lacks only in one respect, that being how it handles complex musical passages. Tonal correctness, imaging, vocal articulation, air, liquidity, dynamics, virtually every other attribute that I value, is very satisfactory. Hence, any DAC that becomes congested when asked to process a Mahler full orchestral onslaught is not going to find a home here. The AM that you are keeping is still a serious contender for a mid to late 2020 purchase. So anything that you can offer in that respect would be extremely useful information.
Certainly possible, although I also felt that the two dacs sounded very different from one another. Obviously Lampizator thinks you can get a pretty good idea of what the Amber offers within 7 days. And as Bill pointed out, everyone's impression is so totally system dependent. If there were one single best answer, this forum wouldn't even exist.
I don't have either DAC, but wonder if your assessment of the Amber might have been different had you had the ability to get it to the 200+ breakin hours given comments grannyring has made about its sound has he has gotten closer to those hours
@brownsfan Unfortunately the closest I get to classical on a regular basis (or during my auditioning) is electronica, so I don't really have much to say. Hopefully Bill has some thoughts. I started to write about the imaging/soundstaging of the two dacs (Amber = wider, AM = deeper), but I don't know that that really relates. As you've seen in my comments, I did find the Amber to be more incisive and could imagine that relates to a better delineation of many instruments playing at once. Wish I'd given some classical (or maybe some complex instrumental rock like Battles) a listen.
I will note that across the DACs I've experienced in my system, I've heard Wolfson, DS, ESS, Analogue Devices R2R, a FPGA, Brown-Burr, and Shiit's multi-bit implementation of two AD chips. Unfortunately there's not much overlap there, but I did find the two AD chip based units sounded very different from one another (more so than the AD R2R - Audio Mirror - vs. Brown-Burr - iFi iDSD Pro- for example). Much like amplifiers, I suspect there's more to the implementation than the chip specifics. I know Lampizator doesn't want your DS prejudices to color judgments of their products (and hence are hesitant to even note what chip they use).
Bill and Chris, thanks for providing all the info on these 3 wonderful (by all accounts) DACs. I'm thinking seriously about giving one of these three a try before the end of the year.
I've read that R2R chips tend to handle complex musical passages better (less congestion) than Delta-Sigma chips, and since I listen to a lot of orchestral music, that is a big issue for me. I'd be especially interested in any thoughts either of you might have regarding how the Delta/Sigma Amber stacks up vs either the Orchid or the AM, which both use R2R chips, as far as handling complex passages.
@facten I don't think there's much inconsistency there, despite the apparent discrepancy at first glance. My speakers err on the side of detail and liveliness, and it seems that Bill's may instead start off on the side of liquid smoothness. Add in more smoothness to an already smooth system and you may end up with too much. As such, a dac that's a touch more lively could be a better match. And, of course, perhaps I just couldn't keep the Amber long enough to fully hear it come into its own. That said, a number of positive reviews for the unit have mentioned its dynamics and energy. I don't think the AM is lacking in those qualities, but they're also not features that I need my upstream equipment to emphasize given the realities of my speakers.
Like Bill and @rx8man , I prefer a warm, liquid sound, but have to fight a bit against the Coincident's accuton ceramic drivers to get there. I certainly know *every time* that a component (or cable, or fuse, or capacitor) pushes me too far towards analytic or detailed. The AM is really key to bringing that liquid character that I want, while maintaining a wonderful, holographic imaging that I also value.
@grannyring And I would love to share the AM with you. If you ever have an alternative dac (another modified Orchid??) on hand to send my way while you're using the AM (or I end up travelling for a couple weeks), I'd be happy to work something out. Always happy to try out new gear... plus we've already both bought equipment from each other, so it feels nice and safe.
The Amber 3 along the long burn in time is sounding more full bodied and less "wake up" your system in my opinion. I found the Amber 3 too vivid and "wake up your system" sounding up to some 120 hours. That is now changing and the unit is sounding more and more full bodied and organic. This dac needs time, plus 200 hours, to really hear what she sounds like. This is my belief based on my experience.
If forced to give a final judgement at 120 hours, then I would have said the Amber 3 is just too vivid for me in the presence area for long term listening. Right now, closer to 180 hours, I no longer feel this way based on listening. So I do not think we are saying different things. Just a matter of timing and burn in realities. I really cannot deal with bright or tipped up midrange and highs.
I also think system synergy is playing a role here. My system has been tweaked and voiced to be full bodied, slightly warm and never forced or forward sounding. The Amber 3 placed in my rig would most likely sound less bright or vivid than in another system that is voiced to be more revealing and detailed.
Yes, cal3713, please send your dac to Bill next week! I'd love to hear how he thinks it compares to the modded Orchid dac as well, which I also have. Inquiring minds need to know. :-)
Please send me your AM SE to compare to my fully broken in Amber 3 with upgraded tube in my rig next week. Pretty please :)
System synergy is always the trump card and deciding factor. Secondly, one's sonic preferences and priorities also play a key role. My preference is for full bodied warmth over detail.
I was just discussing the dac shootout with another member via PM and the conversation highlighted one of the key differences in my experiences with the Amber 3 and the Audio Mirror T3-SE. If you find yourself wanting to get more detail or "wake up" your system, I think you would prefer the Amber 3. If you find yourself having to tame system brightness or edginess, then you'll likely prefer the AM-T3 as I did.
I just looked up a review of my Coincident PRE's and grabbed this line: "The PREs are quick, agile and dynamically uninhibited..." vs. "the Epicon 6 speaks for itself on this matter: I do not think anyone listening to it, audiophile or no, would fail to observe how pure and liquid is the sound..."
I have not heard the Epicon's, but given those quick one-line summaries, I'm not surprised that Bill and I ended up making different decisions.
The Amber 3 now has 170 hours on it and is really starting to come into its own. I hear better top to bottom cohesiveness and a filling in of the stage between the speakers. The unit is no longer forced or forward sounding. I am hearing a more organic tone and that was really missing for many of the initial burn in hours.
I am traveling until Thursday night and will report back then. The unit will have some 230 hours on it then and should be almost fully settled in. I plan to drop in an Orange fuse and nice Mullard tube at this point and describe the impact of these "upgrades".
I purchased the Mullard 12au7 as I desire a little more of a buttery tone and this tube should be just the ticket.
Right now the Amber 3 has proven to be a keeper for me. Is it better than the upgraded Orchid? I would say it is in some ways and not in others. It throws a bigger and better delineated sound stage. One area the Orchid still excels is its easy to listen to "unfussy" approach to most recordings. The Orchid just sounds right on more recordings. The Orchid's bass is amazing and on par or slightly better than the Amber 3.
The Amber 3 sounds so intimate and real on good recordings. There are moments when this unit is just mesmerizing. I think the fuse and tube upgrade as well as more hours can make this happen more consistently. We will see.
One last quick note about Colin @ Gestalt Audio... during my demo I had a cable catch the serial number sticker on the back of my unit and scratch it up. He was super gracious and just took the personal loss on that. Small and insignificant "damage", but still something that impacts selling cost as we all know. He deserves your future business (and mine). Really a class act.
I'll end with a quote from our correspondence: "One of the reasons I wanted to become a dealer is so I could help others have better experiences than I had when I was on the customer side of this hobby."
Thanks for the update. I am in the same boat as you on this Amber 3 in that I need to return now if not a keeper. I have 120 hours on it and it is still changing and getting better. I hear enough signs of greatness that I want to run it for 300 hours before giving final judgement. Some of the recent improvements, if they continue, will yield a spectacular dac. I think it is worth the risk. Talking to another owner who heard a fully run in demo unit in his system vs his brand new one suggests one really does not hear what the unit is capable of before 200 hours.
I also understand the stock output tube is a tad harsh or hot sounding compared to the richer and more buttery Mullard long plate or Brimar NOS options.
I will wait and work on extracting the most out of the Amber 3 for now. I have never heard a larger stage and the dynamics are stellar. The organic tone I desire more of is starting to come and teasing me to wait. Ha!
Dali Epicon 6 w/upgraded crossovers The Truth Preamp heavily upgraded Innuos Zen 3 Clayton Audio S40 pure class A amplifier Ton Of Perfect Path Audio & Mad Scientist tweaks My own brand of cabling - Acoustic BBQ and High Fidelity CT2 ICs
@grannyring Interesting. I had 150 hours on the Amber, unfortunately my trial ends tomorrow, although I'm very comfortable sticking with the Audio Mirror after hearing all of these sources over the past month.
Cable wise, I've got a mix of silver and copper in the system. Silver before the amps and copper after. VH Audio's 5N cotton covered silver DIY interconnects between the DAC & Preamp, Ocellia silver reference between pre and amps, and then tinned-copper Duelund out to the speakers. I've been thinking about grabbing some of the Tempo Electric silver cables and seeing what going further in that direction sounds like. Haven't heard my speakers with anything besides the Duelund and some old anti-cables.
And thanks for the compliment Bill. The system is slowly getting there. The Coincident PREs have an opinion about everything...
Based on my current experience with the Amber 3 at some 80 hours of burn in, I would say your Amber test unit is not burned in fully. Your comments about brighter and lack of depth point to this fact. If the unit only has 100-120 hours, then it needs more time. Mine is still changing and breaking in at 80 hours and other owners tell me it will take 200-300 hours. I believe it based on how this unit is changing day to day. Can you try to compare to the AM unit after the Amber has some 250 hours? I would like to hear your comments at this point. Possible?
My Amber 3 started off bright, forward and forced for the first 30-40 hours. From 40-65 hours it became more full bodied to the point of being old school thick and heavy. Now at 80 plus hours the unit is leaning on the lit up side in the highs and the mid bass is now remaining full. I am told it will go south in sound quality before finally coming into its own at 200-300 hours. What a ride.
Finished my dac shootout today... had the Lampizator Amber 3, Audio Mirror Tubadour 3 SE, ifi iDSD pro, and Shiit Bifrost 2 on hand. Previously also had a Matrix x-sabre pro, PS Audio Directstream, and PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC MK2 in the same system. All were fed lossless Tidal with the SPDIF output of a Magna Mano Ultra streamer. Speakers are Coincident PREs, amplified by First Watt F4 monoblocks, and a Don Sach's DS-3 6SN7 preamp (see my system page for full details).
First, I'd like to echo Bill's comments about
Colin of Gestalt Audio. Total class act, and highly recommended for any purchase. He's been responsive, helpful, and not at all pushy. Perfect service.
For review: In my system, the Audio Mirror was the winner. To my ears, it was the most real sounding of the bunch. It has beautiful "meat on the bones" and was the most holographic. The Amber sounded good, but in a very different way. For me, it was brighter and more lively. The soundstage was huge, but had less depth and liquidity than the AM. I also liked the iFi iDSD pro (used in tube+ mode with the bitperfect filter). It had great tonality, but was significantly flatter and less 3-dimensional than the AM. I think more people should give it a shot. The Shiit was good. Very even-handed and competent, but more "digital sounding" to my ears. My friend was listening blind and liked it the second best of the group (behind the AM).
Despite its king-of-the-hill status in specs (see Audio Science Review), I did not enjoy the Matrix x-Sabre Pro. It was very quiet and clean, with a nice mellow sound, but also a bit "grey" and sterile. I also did not like the PS Audio Directream, which just sounded wrong in my system. It felt disjointed. I don't know what the situation is, but for some reason it doesn't work with my ears. Unlike others, I actually preferred the PerfectWave over it (twice - as I tried upgrading two times over a 4 year span).
All in all, it was great to finally listen to a wide range of sources, and I could enjoy most of the ones in the stable. The experience also brought me closer to my AM T3-SE. A beautiful, highly recommended dac.
Well the Amber 3 now has some 60 hours on it. What a burn in ride. The first 40 hours or so were hard on my ears. I really could not settle in and enjoy music as the dac was too forward and forced sounding. It was tight and constricted a tad also. I decided not to listen again unit tonight. I didn’t want to 😕. Well at 60 hours the sound goes from being too forced and immediate to warm like a hot bath! Right now the stage is much bigger, far more mid bass fullness and the upper mids and highs are no longer forced.
Right now the unit sounds a tad too old school tubey and thick. Talk about a 180 degree turn around! I don’t know how folks can possibly say burn in is not real. It is real in spades with this unit.
Comparing the upgraded Orchid to the Amber now is interesting. I still prefer the Orchid’s overall balance top to bottom. The Orchid has more powerful and articulate bass. The Orchid does not sound as thick.
However, I see hope now for the Amber and sense it may be quite good with more time.
I have the Amber 3 up and running. It was nicely packed and in 5 minutes we have music! After 90 minutes of total play time I hear these initial differences compared to the upgraded Orchid dac,
The Amber 3 is more lit up in the upper mids and highs. The Amber is more upfront and immediate. More apparent detail. A little tight and contained sounding
The Orchid is more muscular and full in the mid bass. The Orchid has deeper and more impactful bass. The Orchid is more relaxed and set back in perspective. More open sounding.
I sense the Amber needs to settle in and hopefully sound less forward or forced. Only 90 minutes of play time suggests good things are coming. I know this dac needs close to 200 hours to sound its best. I will update after 30 hours of play time.
I also want to share that my experience with Colin of Gestalt Audio has been a complete joy. Great communication, professional service and just a likable young man. I highly recommend Colin!
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.
