Lampizator DAC by Lukasz Fikus

kwwong wrote:I am a beginner in tube. The moment I turn on my tubed DAC, I got noticeable bzzzz and hiss. But that just last only about 15minutes. I guess because it is still new, need some warm up.

That's weird. I don't have that problem with all my tube stuff. Can immediately play after switched on. No hiss or humm. Just that the sound getting better once they warm up enuf.

It happens only on these Russian tubes in the diy customized tubed DAC application like ours...normally does not happen in most amplifiers or pre amps, maybe its the home ' brew ' thing.. hea hea hea

arremie wrote:

kwwong wrote:I am a beginner in tube. The moment I turn on my tubed DAC, I got noticeable bzzzz and hiss. But that just last only about 15minutes. I guess because it is still new, need some warm up.

That's weird. I don't have that problem with all my tube stuff. Can immediately play after switched on. No hiss or humm. Just that the sound getting better once they warm up enuf.

Arremie, that happen only in when the new tubes are in use for the first time (virgin), after that no more that problem. No bzzz or hiss when I turn on now. Everything is good.
I agree with you on the warm-up for better sound, actually is getting sweeter by day. Every CD is like a new purchase now.

cool

Slight 'off track' here.
Anyone has 'lampized' their CD player?

i once asked octave to do it for me, they said it would be expensive...too bad

What isn't from actave? Hehe..
Might try to 'lampized' mine and see. Will try with JFET first then the tubes..

CT-Boy wrote:Slight 'off track' here.
Anyone has 'lampized' their CD player?

Lampized one of my Eastsound E5 Reference Platinum cd player using the CS 4390KP DAC.

wsyam wrote:i once asked octave to do it for me, they said it would be expensive...too bad

Go to decware.com and under Tube gear, under DIY kits, you can consider their Zkit 4 and Zkit 5 together and build your own anode follower circuit to do any player. Rather simple.

dixchen wrote:

wsyam wrote:i once asked octave to do it for me, they said it would be expensive...too bad

Go to decware.com and under Tube gear, under DIY kits, you can consider their Zkit 4 and Zkit 5 together and build your own anode follower circuit to do any player. Rather simple.

Where do you 'steal' the signal from? Can use the 6N14P if drop heater voltage to 6.3V?

Thanks dixchen! Zkit4, $49 without tube. Pretty good.

Dixon,
it's sound interesting, if I would to put up a tube stage in my marrantz cd60 which circuit should I go for?

Definitely, go for the SRPP stage definitely especially for the TDA 1541A DAC. Go for transformer based I/V conversion for an even better result. Most of the time people will use resistors to do it only.

Where can I get the trans i/v?

Get it from sowter .co.uk model 9762 if I still remember la best thing about it is it has a ground screen for zero digital noise isolation now British pounds cheap undervalue when ship by their royal mail no tax for sure

CT-Boy wrote:Thanks dixchen! Zkit4, $49 without tube. Pretty good.

You need the zkit 5 too for the power supply to complete it...

dixon
u kena customs when u purchased yr dac?

thks

Nope, never ever did..

kwwong wrote:I am a beginner in tube. The moment I turn on my tubed DAC, I got noticeable bzzzz and hiss. But that just last only about 15minutes. I guess because it is still new, need some warm up.

You need L-Pad before ur signal into the tube gain.

Why do we need L-pad for?? Does it will affect our sound quality.
I think kwwong's tube dac just don't have muting circuit. It's normal to have some bussing sound when the tube is warming up. To maximize the perfomance of a dac, normally we don't built muting circuit into it.
Kwwong u may have an option to turn the tube heater, let the tube warm up then only turn the tube b+.

Cheers,

Yes, I have the L-pad at the CD side.
Now it is ok already, no need warm up also no buzzing but, but sound a bit cold and uninspired if compare to after warm up about 10min.

kwwong wrote:Yes, I have the L-pad at the CD side.
Now it is ok already, no need warm up also no buzzing but, but sound a bit cold and uninspired if compare to after warm up about 10min.

As dixchen said, 6n6p is lazy n mellow. i used them when playing lazy vocal, not for instrument at all.

If u want more transparent, 6n23p is good for it. slightly high gain.

lga775, is 6n6p swap with 6n23p a direct swap without changing other thing?

Happy birthday Rick!

I wonder any kaki ever direct transformer couple with 1541 dac chip?
Cheers,

tycham wrote:Happy birthday Rick!

Thank you.. hehe

kwwong wrote:lga775, is 6n6p swap with 6n23p a direct swap without changing other thing?

it is higher gain. i think u have to step down more at the l-pad.
6n6p also very good for oldies, it covers the harshness of oldies!

Dixchen wrote:
"Anyway not to get too carried away, getting my hands on such a unit allowed me to complete my long delayed modification of my own TDA 1541A DAC that I started more than a year ago! ( Still my favourite DAC) . Together with Audio Note's patented use of its transformer based I/V conversion ( actually sold by Sowter U.K now ) as well as the know how off Lukasz's site to date, I managed to built a very powerful and analogue sounding tube output TDA 1541A DAC combining all his work and ideas together. "

I have been exploring building a TDA 1541A based DAC similar the one you have described using transformer based I/V conversion as described in the AN US patent but using a pair of TDA 1541A in complementary mode (driven by true and inverted data) and a transformer such as a SOWTER type 9055 with twin primary windings to improve cancellation of quantisation noise. Dixchen have you explored this possibility? Also curious if you built your DAC from scratch or based your project on a DAC module such as SATCH or similar?

Yes I have, I took the Satch board and inherently modified it as I felt that the circuit on the board itself was very well made but needed significant changes around it to really make it sing.

Brian Sowter suggest I took the 9762 instead and it still had an isolated secondary winding but you would have to get 2 instead. I don't see why the 9055 cannot be used in this case. For me, this is the best and purest way to perform any I/V conversion for current output DAC's.

I have made this A B comparison versus using the best resistor made today by Vishay ( the Z foils) and the difference is not even worth mentioning in the quality of the sound that it produces. Another advantage of doing so, we can inherently vary the signal output on the secondary side ( via an output loading resistor) of the transformer instead of varying it on the primary side where the signal source of the DAC is, as you probably already know that that its not a good practice to perform I/V conversion directly at the signal output of the DAC itself, thus doing so at the secondary provides an isolation from such as well as a total digital noise isolation due to its ground shielding. This in turn helps maximize the I/V conversion signal of the DAC but yet remains flexible at the output via the above.

The Audio Note guys certainly know what they were doing when they had Sowter built them these trans...excellent idea and platform if you'd asked me again.

Another alternative is build external tube output, so that you dont need to squeez the tube inside the DAC casing, and use have choice to use or not use the tube output. Only issue is the preamp must have high enough gain if not suing tube output since the gain will drop a lot/signal very small if the DAC had bypass OPA.

I'm currently using 1541A dac by thomas(tube lover in diyaudio), but set to no reclock, NOS, have remove saa7220 and so on.

Not really, the I/V resistor dictates the output signal output for the 1541A dac, though in theory you can violate compliance of the max allowable V out conversion value using a too high value resistor causing noticeable distortion in the signal.


Amplification value of the tube type dictates also the output signal gain you can have.

For me the best solution is to run a pair of Sowter I/V trans where you can exploit maximum voltage conversion at the primaries then step it back down at the secondary to adjust your output levels as desired using a quality output bypass resistor shunt to ground.

For those who still have not heard the true sound of the TDA 1541A dac after a proper implementation of the tube output schematics will never imagine the sheer power, dynamics and musicality that this DAC can really produce. Outclasses anything and everything out there... even Lampizator's own superb DAC that he sells now...

dixchen wrote:Not really, the I/V resistor dictates the output signal output for the 1541A dac, though in theory you can violate compliance of the max allowable V out conversion value using a too high value resistor causing noticeable distortion in the signal.


Amplification value of the tube type dictates also the output signal gain you can have.

For me the best solution is to run a pair of Sowter I/V trans where you can exploit maximum voltage conversion at the primaries then step it back down at the secondary to adjust your output levels as desired using a quality output bypass resistor shunt to ground.

For those who still have not heard the true sound of the TDA 1541A dac after a proper implementation of the tube output schematics will never imagine the sheer power, dynamics and musicality that this DAC can really produce. Outclasses anything and everything out there... even Lampizator's own superb DAC that he sells now...

Dixchen,
With the datasheet below of the 9762,
http://www.sowter.co.uk/dacs.php
it states 200 ohm i/v resistor.
Did you use that 200 ohm to shunt on the primary side of the trafo?

cheers.

dear dixchen,

agree, signal depend on the resistor value, for 1541A current mode, resistor need to be <100R, otherwise may have distortion. Some prefer to use smaller value which the signal become smaller.

i'm suing 5687 srpp so gain is ~18 only, your rusian tube gain is 100 right?

Frankly, i like the 1541a with tube output very much. Can't go back to use the OPA627 anymore.

how's your 211? the SAC OPT installed?

My friend lent me his brand new Lampizator because his amp blew up the day before the DAC arrived. It is a Lampizator Level 4 (about RM12.5k+), compared to a Playback Designs MPS-5 (about RM49k). Here are some pics in my system:







The unit is still new and has not been burnt in. It already sounds different this afternoon, compared to this morning. Will give it a bit more time.

Wikin wrote:

dixchen wrote:Not really, the I/V resistor dictates the output signal output for the 1541A dac, though in theory you can violate compliance of the max allowable V out conversion value using a too high value resistor causing noticeable distortion in the signal.


Amplification value of the tube type dictates also the output signal gain you can have.

For me the best solution is to run a pair of Sowter I/V trans where you can exploit maximum voltage conversion at the primaries then step it back down at the secondary to adjust your output levels as desired using a quality output bypass resistor shunt to ground.

For those who still have not heard the true sound of the TDA 1541A dac after a proper implementation of the tube output schematics will never imagine the sheer power, dynamics and musicality that this DAC can really produce. Outclasses anything and everything out there... even Lampizator's own superb DAC that he sells now...

Dixchen,
With the datasheet below of the 9762,
http://www.sowter.co.uk/dacs.php
it states 200 ohm i/v resistor.
Did you use that 200 ohm to shunt on the primary side of the trafo?

cheers.

NO those values act only as a guide and you don't want to shunt anything to ground on the primary. Let the I/V conversion perform at maximum on the primary then shunt it on the secondary side to adjust according to the signal level that suits your system.

This way you optimize the best signal to noise ratio.

Good luck...

WongKK wrote:My friend lent me his brand new Lampizator because his amp blew up the day before the DAC arrived. It is a Lampizator Level 4 (about RM12.5k+), compared to a Playback Designs MPS-5 (about RM49k). The unit is still new and has not been burnt in. It already sounds different this afternoon, compared to this morning. Will give it a bit more time.

So, what are the differences between the two DAC?

tycham, the Lampizator DAC is not fully burnt in yet. But the difference between the two is HUGE.

The Lampizator has much better bass, almost too much bass. My system is tuned for my CD player, and I had to wind the subwoofers down. Either it means that my CDP is not making enough, or the Lampizator is making too much. Impossible to tell. As they say - if one is right, the other is wrong.

The MPS-5 is more neutral, and the Lampizator has a more rich sounding midrange. Female vocals sound more silky on the Lampizator, with more body. Beneficial on some discs, but not on others.

The Lampizator has better macrodynamics than the MPS-5. Transients seem to explode out of the system with more ferocity. With microdynamics, the MPS-5 seems to be better - when a singer varies her volume with the song line, it is much more obvious on the MPS-5.

The area where the Lampizator comprehensively loses is detail and high frequency extension. The MPS-5 has better instrument seperation, and imbues each instrument with more timbre. You get a better sense of the recording venue with the MPS-5. However - this was what we heard this morning (when the unit was fresh out of the box). By this afternoon, the disparity was starting to narrow. It might continue to improve.

I haven't mentioned that the MPS-5 is an SACD player. Put an SACD in it, and the MPS-5 sounds obviously better. Smoother, less grain, wider soundstage, better layering, and even more detail. But that is the difference between SACD and RBCD, and not between the DAC's.

Conclusion: the Lampizator is an astonishing DAC with very impressive bass and dynamics. It has a rich sound. The one negative - I will have to reserve judgement for the time being because the unit is still new.

Anyone here know how to make a CD104 a pure transport.... Lukasz did not complete the finding as promised... Even to lampitised it also very difficult to achieve.

WongKK wrote:tycham, the Lampizator DAC is not fully burnt in yet. But the difference between the two is HUGE.

The Lampizator has much better bass, almost too much bass. My system is tuned for my CD player, and I had to wind the subwoofers down. Either it means that my CDP is not making enough, or the Lampizator is making too much. Impossible to tell. As they say - if one is right, the other is wrong.

The MPS-5 is more neutral, and the Lampizator has a more rich sounding midrange. Female vocals sound more silky on the Lampizator, with more body. Beneficial on some discs, but not on others.

The Lampizator has better macrodynamics than the MPS-5. Transients seem to explode out of the system with more ferocity. With microdynamics, the MPS-5 seems to be better - when a singer varies her volume with the song line, it is much more obvious on the MPS-5.

The area where the Lampizator comprehensively loses is detail and high frequency extension. The MPS-5 has better instrument seperation, and imbues each instrument with more timbre. You get a better sense of the recording venue with the MPS-5. However - this was what we heard this morning (when the unit was fresh out of the box). By this afternoon, the disparity was starting to narrow. It might continue to improve.

I haven't mentioned that the MPS-5 is an SACD player. Put an SACD in it, and the MPS-5 sounds obviously better. Smoother, less grain, wider soundstage, better layering, and even more detail. But that is the difference between SACD and RBCD, and not between the DAC's.

Conclusion: the Lampizator is an astonishing DAC with very impressive bass and dynamics. It has a rich sound. The one negative - I will have to reserve judgement for the time being because the unit is still new.

Well described my friend, the Lampizator DAC did the same for my system as well, yes too much bass at times, something no other DAC's can match to date.

Give it at least 100 hours for it to come to song, very sure its output capacitors have not even near completing its burn in period.

Enjoy!

flyfly wrote:Anyone here know how to make a CD104 a pure transport.... Lukasz did not complete the finding as promised... Even to lampitised it also very difficult to achieve.

You can firstly check if it uses the SAA 722OP/A or B digital demodulator since this chip has digital signal out ready at pin 14, from there take it to a 6p14p tube output running a cathode follower circuit. Thats the only way my friend. Good luck..

WongKK wrote:tycham, the Lampizator DAC is not fully burnt in yet. But the difference between the two is HUGE.

The Lampizator has much better bass, almost too much bass. My system is tuned for my CD player, and I had to wind the subwoofers down. Either it means that my CDP is not making enough, or the Lampizator is making too much. Impossible to tell. As they say - if one is right, the other is wrong.

The MPS-5 is more neutral, and the Lampizator has a more rich sounding midrange. Female vocals sound more silky on the Lampizator, with more body. Beneficial on some discs, but not on others.

The Lampizator has better macrodynamics than the MPS-5. Transients seem to explode out of the system with more ferocity. With microdynamics, the MPS-5 seems to be better - when a singer varies her volume with the song line, it is much more obvious on the MPS-5.

The area where the Lampizator comprehensively loses is detail and high frequency extension. The MPS-5 has better instrument seperation, and imbues each instrument with more timbre. You get a better sense of the recording venue with the MPS-5. However - this was what we heard this morning (when the unit was fresh out of the box). By this afternoon, the disparity was starting to narrow. It might continue to improve.

I haven't mentioned that the MPS-5 is an SACD player. Put an SACD in it, and the MPS-5 sounds obviously better. Smoother, less grain, wider soundstage, better layering, and even more detail. But that is the difference between SACD and RBCD, and not between the DAC's.

Conclusion: the Lampizator is an astonishing DAC with very impressive bass and dynamics. It has a rich sound. The one negative - I will have to reserve judgement for the time being because the unit is still new.

Hi WongKK,

Lovely equipment you have there!

Would you mind updating your feedback now that you have had another week's experience with the Lampizator Level 4 DAC? Also, can you tell me what generation number and serial number is on the back, so that I can intuit how recently built that Level 4 is? The latest build are apparently even better than Level 3s of a couple months back.

Finally, you can see other feedback at: http://lzdacowners.xtremeservers.at/
Wait a day or 2 as the servers are down.

Thanks

Thanks Wisnon. The Lampizator DAC does not belong to me. It belongs to my friend, who was curious to hear it in my system. I left the thing on for three days before listening to it again, so all up it probably had about 70 hours of burn-in before I had to give it back.

I still think the Lampizator does not resolve as much detail as the MPS-5, although it had improved a lot compared to when we pulled it out of the box. The other noticable difference was the treble - it seemed to sharpen up considerably but it did not ever get tiresome or fatiguing.

Overall, my impression is still the same - a lot of bass, maybe too much bass. A very rich midrange. Explosive dynamics - quite addictive really.

I don't have the serial number, nor do I know the generation number. All I can tell you is that it is a Level 4 DAC, delivered a couple of weeks ago.

One more thing. The large disparity in volume levels between the Lampizator and the MPS-5 leads me to suspect that the Lampizator does not output an industry standard 2 Volts. I did not measure the output, but I need to sound a general warning to anyone contemplating this DAC: make sure your preamp is up to it! In fact, I would suspect that a passive preamp would work quite well with a Lampizator.

Thanks WongKK,

Perhaps you can ask your friend for the serial number when next you speak?

The Dac can be set for anything from 1 to 3 volts and I think Lukasz, the creator, usually sets them to 3V if not specified. Various reports say that the Lampizator Dac be for 6 months on an improvement path until fully broken in. The caps need a long break-in time even if the DAC already sounds pretty good out the box.

If possible, try to get another loaner from your pal in a month or so and see how it has changed by then.

Last thing is that an owner in Thailand has a Level 2 or 3 Dac from 2 months ago. Unusually his DAC had the option of a volume knob (Alps Pot at the output stage) and he connected it initially via an AudioNote Preamp. He thought it was incredible, but later, after connecting it straight to his power amp and bypassing the Pre, he said the sound just exploded! He went from being amazed to being blown away! His blog site is
www.digitalaudioblog.com

The best lukas audio DACs have tube outputs believe to deliver the most uncolored sound possible...
Again this method of output is used to effectively cover up other defects which are already at hand..
One of the worst problems is the fact that in these tube designs, rarely is attention given to Jitter reduction..does he?, or to the filtering of power supplies may be full of digital "trash"

sometime you just cant hear all of the details as that are usually hidden from you when listening to tube output .....

consider to use Battery power option and get rid of "Jitter" is the most effective way to make your DAC sound good at much cheaper way....

1541 wrote:The best lukas audio DACs have tube outputs believe to deliver the most uncolored sound possible...
Again this method of output is used to effectively cover up other defects which are already at hand..
One of the worst problems is the fact that in these tube designs, rarely is attention given to Jitter reduction..does he?, or to the filtering of power supplies may be full of digital "trash"

sometime you just cant hear all of the details as that are usually hidden from you when listening to tube output .....

consider to use Battery power option and get rid of "Jitter" is the most effective way to make your DAC sound good at much cheaper way....

Are you asking or telling?

Have you heard his DAC? Broken in? Super black background via differential summator circuit? Micro info revealed via exclusive use of super detailed receiver chip?

Just asking.

1541 wrote:The best lukas audio DACs have tube outputs believe to deliver the most uncolored sound possible...
Again this method of output is used to effectively cover up other defects which are already at hand..
One of the worst problems is the fact that in these tube designs, rarely is attention given to Jitter reduction..does he?, or to the filtering of power supplies may be full of digital "trash"

sometime you just cant hear all of the details as that are usually hidden from you when listening to tube output .....

consider to use Battery power option and get rid of "Jitter" is the most effective way to make your DAC sound good at much cheaper way....

You can quantumly reduce jitter to a point of unmeasurable ( highly impossible from cd spinners ) and you will still not hear anything MORE if the analogue outputs are still your very commonly used op amp or so called transistor based outputs. THese are by far the biggest ' masking ' culprits of today's modern world circuits in DAC's or cd players.

The transparency of tube amplification cannot be matched by highly far more complex SS transistors today, and thus why the art of using ' pure ' single ended tube output circuits are being carried out by few that still dwelve into this dying art today. Its in fact the quest for the ' lost ' or ' masked ' micro and macro details in our commercially available so called op amped output that Lukasz has actively pursuit tube output circuits.

Batteries to resolve or banish jitter? How and why is that possible?

There is no cheaper way in DAC designs for quality of components cost money and affects sound considerably, PSU designs and the use of a no bull single ended triode circuit be it anode follower or SRPP or cascode all effectively costs a lot of money and do not come cheap. I find most or almost all commercially ' AFFORDABLE DAC's or players out there that claims the use of tube output, merely BUFFERS the preceding op amp circuits that is still unavoidable to provide some kind of ' tube ' flavour. Highly deceiving if you asked me and could well be what you are actually listening when you claimed ' hidden ' in tube output players. Which unit by the way have you in particularly listened to?

Jitter in lay man terms means analogue, a reduction in jitter reduces ' digititis ' or in actual ' digital timing error ' that we hear in all digital spinners today, computer audio that takes away ' PART ' of this jitter in laser spinners and in fact is one CHEAP way available today to reduce jitter considerably. Apart from that, I find it hard to find a corelation between your view of jitter vs the analogue outputs of any DAC's. 2 different topic altogether.

All I can say is that I have previously owned 2 of Lukasz's DAC's ,Version 1 and 4, at the same time other commercial so called branded and expensive DAC's that is built today. ( only for comparison purposes) Have also succesfully implemented my own so called ' copied ' ideas and design ( as a follower of Lampizator's work from the the early beginning years ago) in the PSU and output circuit designs to arrive at a ' super ' TDA 1541A transformer I/V based DAC in SRPP output mode. THe PSU in this unit is quantumly large enough to power a SET amplifier. ( thats how serious this has to go and can well justify the amount of costs involved to build such a design )

Of course if you feed thrash in to it, you will still get thrash out, irregardless of any DAC's being used.

dixchen wrote:
For me the best solution is to run a pair of Sowter I/V trans where you can exploit maximum voltage conversion at the primaries then step it back down at the secondary to adjust your output levels as desired using a quality output bypass resistor shunt to ground.

For those who still have not heard the true sound of the TDA 1541A dac after a proper implementation of the tube output schematics will never imagine the sheer power, dynamics and musicality that this DAC can really produce. Outclasses anything and everything out there... even Lampizator's own superb DAC that he sells now...

dixchen,
Can you elaborate further ? You 1st paragraph and 2nd paragraph is slightly confusing to me. 1st para you claim the superiority of transformer i/v stage and 2nd para claims superiority of tube i/v stage. Which one did you find the best for the 1541?
Or did you put the transformer i/v stage followed by a tube stage ?

cheers.

I find it funny that the Lampizator Dac is questioned about power supply and filtering when , as a very qualified POWER engineer, he pays meticulous attention to this section.

In his own words:
"Power supply:
From Level 3 and up - I build a tubed power supply which is at least 400% oversized to provide the unheard of purity, authority and grunt. Every supply has built in both - 230 V and 115 V windings. All GND is on copper rails. Everything, except the tubes is stone cold. There are at least two 20 Henry chokes per anode supply and enough capacitance to jump start a car engine.

The use of approx. 10 times oversized capacitor bank effectively means that the DAC board as well as tube anodes are supplied by caps for 3 minutes of operation without need to recharge. This is a quasi-battery operation but without the hassle of real batteries charging. The Lampizator DAC does not SEE at all the AC influence, its quality, fluctuations etc. The custom made massive chokes separate the electronics from any AC residual history and the Fikus Power Supply is as pure as it gets. You can hear that, let me tell you."

HI bro

The I/V stage is the stage where the current output of the TDA 1541A DAC is converted to voltage output which is what the tube sees to amplify. You can't amplify current. 2 ways of doing this, either using resistors as Dr Lamp does it but its the ' economical ' and ' common solution, I and many beg to differ in which I have used transformers to do the job.

This method is patented and used by Audio Note UK and they use it exclusively in all their DAC's using also the AD1865 current output DAC's.

The tube analogue output stage remains, transformers used only at the DAC chip current conversion stage.

Lamp's power filtering stage is so immense that if you look at what was used exactly inside ( I shall not disclose ) it would throw you off your mind that such a circuit topology be used to power a DAC. The thinking is beyond what any modern DAC designers would even want to undertake. Beyond common sense sometimes but its a proven formula. A stage like that would take up enough space to fill up a whole cd player, leaving no space for its lens mechanism and circuit boards. Tell me then, which of the current giants would want to even build and sell something like that especially in today's modern digital transistor era.

The best thing is that, the background is deeply immensely black and ultra quiet. You can virtually place your ears next to the speakers and we're talking about 99db/w high sensitivity speakers here and you here nothing. Dead quiet! I gotta give credit to this guy here..

If you read up on Lampizator's site, one can also go full passive by using full output transformers suitable for DAC output stage which would bring up to 90 percent of sound with tubes but depending on the quality of the trans available and also possible bandwidth issues one get with trans, tubes are a lot more fun and also gives limitless possibilities in various sonic results. Bit tuneability in PSU, and signal circuit itself ala resistor types, values, capacitors, etc

The possiblities are endless..

For those who have listened to a lampizator DAC and still find it ' lacking ' in some areas, I like to reiterate that his DAC was built using common and cheaply available components such as NOS military surplas capacitors, Russian tubes, and standard type resistors. None of which are ' boutique ' components. With anything, I think he needs to maintain a margin of profit for his years of development and thus will not give you expensive components and still expect to make money out of.

When I still owned his equipment, I modified it further to ' refine ' it better... when I told him about it, he wasn't too happy though...