A few days later and what I have done is create an A/B setup with Roon playing to two endpoints as a grouping, one going to the May and one going to the Lampizator. Each of which is connected to different inputs on my Line Magnetic 805ia SET amp. Same PEQ (but no upsampling!) is applied to both endpoints in Roon with the headroom adjusted slightly differently to level match the volume within 0.1db. So now all I have to do is flick the input on the amp to switch between the two while live - the changeover is absolutely imperceptible in both volume and timing. (One of the cool things you can do with Roon).
There is very little between the two much of the time. The May possibly has a slightly wider, taller soundstage and thus instrument separation, but does not have as much depth and thus less 3-dimensionality to instruments. The May is a bit clearer with more bite (particularly the bass), and has a bit more air to the sound. (i.e. frequency extension no doubt better). Tonally, the May is really neutral across the entire frequency range whereas the Lampi has a bit of that tubey mid-range bloom and richness. The Lampi is a bit rounder and fuller. Timbre is a toss-up. Punchiness is a toss-up. Detail a toss-up. May has a wee bit more PRAT, Lampi a wee bit more romantic. May a bit more forward than Lampi.
Nothing really surprising here given their topologies and builds. My LM amp is rolled with best-of-class tubes such that it’s extremely clean/punchy/dynamic - dare I say almost solid state like (but still with that SET magic). Speakers are very neutral/revealing Spendor D7.2’s. The May and D7.2’s might just be a too much of the same ilk, or maybe I just prefer the slightly smoother/fuller/organic sound of the Lampi tube DAC with my system, giving up very little in other sonic measures. When I first plugged in the Lampi after owning a Schiit gumby I had a huge wow moment and was surprised by how much better it was. Not so with the May, though the gap was obviously not as big. But I do get why many think that the Holo May is a reference level DAC.
Still going to let the May run with music for another week or two before deciding. I do think it has improved a bit since I first plugged it in 100 hrs ago. Will follow up again in a week.
There is very little between the two much of the time. The May possibly has a slightly wider, taller soundstage and thus instrument separation, but does not have as much depth and thus less 3-dimensionality to instruments. The May is a bit clearer with more bite (particularly the bass), and has a bit more air to the sound. (i.e. frequency extension no doubt better). Tonally, the May is really neutral across the entire frequency range whereas the Lampi has a bit of that tubey mid-range bloom and richness. The Lampi is a bit rounder and fuller. Timbre is a toss-up. Punchiness is a toss-up. Detail a toss-up. May has a wee bit more PRAT, Lampi a wee bit more romantic. May a bit more forward than Lampi.
Nothing really surprising here given their topologies and builds. My LM amp is rolled with best-of-class tubes such that it’s extremely clean/punchy/dynamic - dare I say almost solid state like (but still with that SET magic). Speakers are very neutral/revealing Spendor D7.2’s. The May and D7.2’s might just be a too much of the same ilk, or maybe I just prefer the slightly smoother/fuller/organic sound of the Lampi tube DAC with my system, giving up very little in other sonic measures. When I first plugged in the Lampi after owning a Schiit gumby I had a huge wow moment and was surprised by how much better it was. Not so with the May, though the gap was obviously not as big. But I do get why many think that the Holo May is a reference level DAC.
Still going to let the May run with music for another week or two before deciding. I do think it has improved a bit since I first plugged it in 100 hrs ago. Will follow up again in a week.
