occam;186810 Wrote:
And what makes you think that 'smearing' (lack of resolution?)
originates with the cathode follower tube stage? Those who've swaped
the extant OPA2604 opamp for an OPA2107 in their Paradisea report a
substantial increase in percieved resolution and extention, along with
gobikey;186742 Wrote:
I have a Paradisea with the SB3, Krell amp, Vienna Acoustics Speakers.
I'm not going to exaggerate. With A-B testing between the SB3 DAC and
the Paradisea, the average listener would not notice the difference.
To me, the biggest difference is with the lower
dlite;186583 Wrote:
Personally I think just about any tube adds distortion to the signal not
musicality. Good music should not need to be smeared by a tube to sound
good. Just my opinion.
And what makes you think that 'smearing' (lack of resolution?)
originates with the cathode follower
Anyone that has experience of the DAC´s from MhdtLab?
Especially Paradisea, but all of them are interesting.
Quality, sound, overall opinion?
--
mangew
mangew's Profile:
I have the MHDT Lab Constantine, which if I understand correctly, is
basically a Paradisea dac without the tube. I've had it for about 4
weeks and I've had my SB3 for about a week now. It's a great
combination and probably the best digital playback I've ever had in my
system. I've never had
I am using a Paradisea dac with stock tube. SB with upgraded
transformer. The Paradisea brings a musicality that the SB dac does
not have, which could be attributed to the tube. On the other hand it
does lack some detail, which is more an error of omission, and not
missed due to it's
I also have the Constantine DAC, for the price excellent value, but to
me is very laid back sound and not very dynamic.
--
dlite
dlite's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4885
View this thread:
DrRasta;186563 Wrote:
I am using a Paradisea dac with stock tube. SB with upgraded
transformer. The Paradisea brings a musicality that the SB dac does
not have, which could be attributed to the tube. On the other hand it
does lack some detail, which is more an error of omission, and not
