Quantcast

Lyngdorf discussion

Rkosak

Active Member
I don't care about measurements. For me the actual sound is the most important criterion to determine if I want (or prefer) some audio device. I had opportunity to test my Lyngdorf amp before purchase and no ”bad“ measurement would not changed my opinion, back then or now. Note that Peter Lyngdorf himself said that perfect measurement is not equal to perfect sound (cant find that video right now, but it was about RP).
 

indus

Distinguished Member
I don't care about measurements. For me the actual sound is the most important criterion to determine if I want (or prefer) some audio device. I had opportunity to test my Lyngdorf amp before purchase and no ”bad“ measurement would not changed my opinion, back then or now. Note that Peter Lyngdorf himself said that perfect measurement is not equal to perfect sound (cant find that video right now, but it was about RP).

You might be conflating. I'm assuming Mr Lyngdorf was referring to measurements relating to frequency response not the measurements/issues that Amir refers to.
 

arisholm

Well-known Member
I like the analogy that an ideal amp is a "wire with gain", requiring no 20kHz AUX-0025 LP-filter (or even the 40kHz AUX-0040 filter Amir uses) to prevent out of band (noise shaping + switching) noise from being included in THD+N calculations... Like in the old days, when my Yamaha amp could reproduce DC-100kHz without an increase in noise above 20kHz, inaudible or not. On the positive side, with compatible piezo-electric tweeters, the ultrasonic noise of class-D can double as a pretty efficient mouse repellant (or bat repellant, depending on the model).
 
Last edited:

DT79

Well-known Member
Is it possible to reset a single input back to its default name on the TDAI-2170, and If so, how do you do it please? Thanks!
 

larkone

Distinguished Member
As far as I know only a factory reset sets it back to the default names. Or you could just manually rename it to the original name
 

DT79

Well-known Member
As far as I know only a factory reset sets it back to the default names. Or you could just manually rename it to the original name
Thanks, the trouble is knowing which is which, that’s the reason I want to do it!
 

larkone

Distinguished Member
Time for a reset then. Mind you it gives the option to run RP again - just in case you can improve it over the last run.
 

arisholm

Well-known Member
Now here is a nice album to assess whether your bass, stereo perspective, timing and dynamics are okay. Voices should be in your face, so to speak... Try it with a glass of wine, then for some unknown reason it sounds even better:
1579281954768.png
 

Rock Danger

Distinguished Member
Did you put the proper fuses in your wine?
 

arisholm

Well-known Member
Ah, yes of course I did! maybe that's why the wine works so well!!
edit: special NOS edition of a high-end fuse compatible with the Veneto region actually, but with a scent of walnut to integrate better with the Tannoys :)
 
Last edited:

DT79

Well-known Member
Time for a reset then. Mind you it gives the option to run RP again - just in case you can improve it over the last run.
No thanks! I can figure it out with trial and error if I have to. I was just hoping for an easy way.
 

orange55

Well-known Member
Do anyone know if the MP-50 supports hapless playback over UPNP?

My test show no, but want to check if I missing something.

Thanks in advance fellow fans.
 

Sajihassan

Standard Member
I am planning to buy Denafrips Ares 2 R2R dac to go along with my Lyngdorf TDAI 2170. Will there be any noticeable improvement in the sound quality or the dac in the Lyngdorf is better. I have seeing lot of good reviews about the Denafrips Ares 2 dac. Also I have sent my oppo 203 to oppomod to upgrade the femto clock as well as some upgrades in the dac boards.
 

anjan

Active Member
I had the Denafrips Terminator (and have a Lyngdorf 3400). I ended up selling it. It was superior to optical input but not that different to sources connected by AES. Because the 3400 is a digital amplifier, it effectively reconverts the analog output from the Denafrips DAC to digital, amplifies it and then does its own d/a conversion. I don't think this can be bypassed.

Some here have reported significant improvements with other 'high end' DACs, so I guess your mileage may vary.
 

Sajihassan

Standard Member
I had the Denafrips Terminator (and have a Lyngdorf 3400). I ended up selling it. It was superior to optical input but not that different to sources connected by AES. Because the 3400 is a digital amplifier, it effectively reconverts the analog output from the Denafrips DAC to digital, amplifies it and then does its own d/a conversion. I don't think this can be bypassed.

Some here have reported significant improvements with other 'high end' DACs, so I guess your mileage may vary.
Did you try it with rca connection.
 

sanderweb

Active Member
I am planning to buy Denafrips Ares 2 R2R dac to go along with my Lyngdorf TDAI 2170. Will there be any noticeable improvement in the sound quality or the dac in the Lyngdorf is better. I have seeing lot of good reviews about the Denafrips Ares 2 dac. Also I have sent my oppo 203 to oppomod to upgrade the femto clock as well as some upgrades in the dac boards.
My advice is to try before you buy, if possible of course. Opinions about this will go all over te place, especially on a Lyngdorf thread with the majority of the group saying that 'how could introducing extra A/D conversions lead to improvement on an all digital architecture?'. They live in the bubble that all TDAI's - as a DAC - are at least as good or better compared to high-end DAC's.

My experience is that a really good DAC makes a huge difference. In my case a Chord DAVE. You'll need the optional analogue input module on the TDAI though. And I disagree with @anjan that going AES/EBU will level the differences. AES/EBU out from my dCS Network Bridge directly to the TDAI is no comparison to having the Chord DAVE in the chain.

A bit OT but for those who are interested: introducing an Uptone EtherRegen switch before the dCS gave my system an end-game status...
 

Rock Danger

Distinguished Member
They live in the bubble that all TDAI's - as a DAC - are at least as good or better compared to high-end DAC's.
But do you not also live in a bubble laying your claim, or do you have evidence to support otherwise? I've no interest in DAC's but from what I read from all these people in a bubble, it's seems to verge on cable mysticism. Logically I could get behind it more if the products sound reproduction wasn't very good in the first place.
 

hestepare

Member
They live in the bubble that all TDAI's - as a DAC - are at least as good or better compared to high-end DAC's.
Don't count me in that bubble, then – my question would be, "how would a signal be improved if it is DA converted, then AD converted and then DA converted again, instead of being DA converted once?" (assuming that TDAI -> speakers is a DA conversion).

I don't have a fish in this pond/pill in this pudding/crumpet in this tea (or whatever English people say), as the weak link in my own chain is the speakers. I won't be adding a DAC for a good while if ever. I just don't understand how the above would be any better than just converting once. I'd have thought that the TDAI, being the last link in the chain, would mess up whatever benefits the external DAC would bring.

I won't deny that there is measurable evidence that external DACs can be quieter than the TDAIs's, but I just don't get how that would translate except if you used the TDAI as the pre, stuck a DAC on after it and then sent the DAC'ed signal to a good power amp with analogue in.
 
Last edited:

Rock Danger

Distinguished Member
@hestepare

The big reveal will be the fuses in the internal dac, wine soaked, of course.

"I don't have a caravan in this trailer park"
"I don't have any tarmacadam in this driveway"

English people are weird.
 

anjan

Active Member
I’d agree with ‘try before you buy’ ideally with volume-matched blind testing. For me, BACCH-dsp made a huge difference. Terminator DAC and Metrum Amber streamer - not so much
 

sanderweb

Active Member
Don't count me in that bubble, then – my question would be, "how would a signal be improved if it is DA converted, then AD converted and then DA converted again, instead of being DA converted once?" (assuming that TDAI -> speakers is a DA conversion).

I don't have a fish in this pond/pill in this pudding/crumpet in this tea (or whatever English people say), as the weak link in my own chain is the speakers. I won't be adding a DAC for a good while if ever. I just don't understand how the above would be any better than just converting once. I'd have thought that the TDAI, being the last link in the chain, would mess up whatever benefits the external DAC would bring.

I won't deny that there is measurable evidence that external DACs can be quieter than the TDAIs's, but I just don't get how that would translate except if you used the TDAI as the pre, stuck a DAC on after it and then sent the DAC'ed signal to a good power amp with analogue in.
My take on this: key in converting digital files is the reconstruction of the analogue signal and keeping jitter extremely low. Very good DAC's do this job very well and will also have an excellent analogue output stage. In Chord DAC's for instance, reconstruction is done by a FPGA with up to a million taps (when using their up-scaler).

And then there is jitter generated in the DAC itself to cope with. Also very difficult (and expensive) to fight well.

ADC is known to be an 'easier' task to execute well. So I think that my TDAI-3400 performs so good in my system because of it's amplification topology (and lossless DSP/DRC by design), but not because it excels in reconstruction and jitter reduction on it's digital inputs. It does not do a bad job either but it can't compete with the best. In the end you'll get what you pay for. My dCS Network Bridge 'streamer' - essentially an ethernet to AES/EBU converter the way I use it - for instance, easily outperforms the direct ethernet input of the TDAI-3400. Again - probably - due to better clocking and jitter reduction and buffering. But I here you say, bits are bits...

My last post on this matter ;) I advise @Sajihassan to experiment.
 

Rock Danger

Distinguished Member
Surely all these DACs going back and forth can be measured, quantified and their values correlate with what's actually audible to humans?

Not a big DAC person or claim to know a big amount about them, but assuming the source is reasonable, I don't see or have heard any reason to doubt the DAC in the 3400 as being audibly worse than say the Chord, but I'm happy for someone to show me.?
 

Trending threads

Latest News

Britbox now available on LG smart TVs
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Virgin Media TV customers get 18 free channels
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
AVForums Podcast: 6th April 2020
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
BenQ launches new Home Cinema and Gaming projectors
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Acorn TV streaming service to launch in UK
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom