Lavry Black DA-10 X Benchmark DAC-1

[jdg]

i had a da96 for along while.. i liked it better then the benchmark. thats just me tho

[tengu]

Originally Posted by jdg

i had a da96 for along while.. i liked it better then the benchmark. thats just me tho

I see you are now using a Sonic Studio 304 for your conversion.

What were you using before?

Why did you change?

How does it compare to the Mytek?

[peeder]

Just FYI...the DA10 is on all day for me...it may be about the least "fatiguing" converter there is...it is something I'd use for pleasure listening no questions asked.

The "fatiguing" comment is completely from left field... I'd like to see a pic of the studio including monitoring that found the DA10 "fatiguing"...

Oh I see, there is one...though they try to hide it...Genelec 1030As with Auralex 1" foam? Aha. There's the fatiguing part.

[tengu]

Just FYI .... I am not one of those people who find the DA10 "fatiguing".

LoL

I was merely quoting what another poster referred to the DA10 as being.

Personally it is my favourite stand standalone DA converter out of the 3 usual suspects.

If there was still someone distributing it in Australia I would get one without a doubt. I found out only last week that the company that was bringing them over are no longer selling them.

That is the only reason I am going to outlay on a Mytek DA96.

Having said that it was only a little behind the Lavry, but I really would have preferred the lavry.

[Luna Sound]

I have both the DAC1 and DA10. I think they're both great and that the OP would find either unit to be a useful upgrade.

I know other people like the toggle switch for volume on the DA10. Personally I don't if using it to control monitor volume. However if using it to feed an analogue loop then it's great to have the precise and repeatable control. In either role I like the precise volume readout.

As others have noted there are differences in the sound. To me the the DAC1 seems to have slightly more upper mid. Depending on the source material this can actually be slightly flattering. On other source material it could seem slightly fatiguing. To be clear I'm not saying that you will get tired listening to the DAC1, however if either converter has a (very slight) tendency in that direction then for me it's not the DA10.

I've tried using both converters to feed a DA>AD loop. In this context the loop with the DA10 seemed closer to the non looped source than the loop with the DAC1. Obviously for this test the differences between the two Dacs has to be heard through the monitor Dac. The AD used in the test will also have a contribution to the sound of the loop however I think the test is still legitimate for hearing relative differences.
FWIW the AD and monitor DAC I used for this test were both from the Prism Orpheus. When Orpheus DA converters were used in the DA>AD loop then this combination yielded the result closest to the non looped source. But the DA10 was close!

[Ashermusic]

I love my DA-10. It is very transparent and IMHO that is what a D/A converter is supposed to be, not a mojo adder.

[Goldfish]

I'd go with Mytek over Benchmark. Haven't heard the Lavry black, but was underwhelmed by the DAC-1. I'm using Mytek for mix monitoring and 2192 for tracking.

[Bob Olhsson]

I've never heard anything that sounded great on a Benchmark DAC-1 sound less than great elsewhere while I've heard plenty of stuff sound OK elsewhere but not very good on the DAC-1. The DAC-1 has less flattering bloat in the lower mid-range than many converters which is why people often characterize it as having more upper-mids.

It's also somewhat picky about loading compared to others. Their new USB version uses a different and they say less picky line driver. Mine has won shootouts against the most expensive converters in ultra high resolution systems and come off as mediocre when plugged into lots of console tape returns. There's no substitute for trying it and others in your own system.

[Trakworx]

Originally Posted by peeder

Just FYI...the DA10 is on all day for me...it may be about the least "fatiguing" converter there is...it is something I'd use for pleasure listening no questions asked.

The "fatiguing" comment is completely from left field... I'd like to see a pic of the studio including monitoring that found the DA10 "fatiguing"...

Oh I see, there is one...though they try to hide it...Genelec 1030As with Auralex 1" foam? Aha. There's the fatiguing part.

I wonder if Peeder is practicing for a career making campaign ads for the RNC. His oft-proved ability to attack the source of opinions different from his would take him far.

Republican • National • Committee - maybe they're taking applications...

To each his own, friend.

[DONNX]

Originally Posted by Torg

The price is exactly the same for both.

Are they in the same league ? Anyone had the chance to compare?

For monitoring purposes.

Which one would you choose? (not only soundwise, any other feature/reason comments also appreciated)

thank you

I have owned both and sold them off after trying them out for a month. DAC1 warm, musical and analogish sounding to me. Loved it.
DA10 Sterile, detailed, clean, neutral as you can be. Liked it more than the Benchmark for hearing the details only.

What do I use and kept? Tascam DVRA-1000 or 1000HD. They both have superior D/A sections. Far more detailed and defined than the previous I mentioned. And you get a standalone DSD/PCM recorder on with the package. The reason is the Tascams use a far more superior D/A design and chip due to the DSD ability. 123DB of headroom. Very nice.

And I must mention. And I have one used on sale.

All three would be better than most. And I would use any of the three for monitoring. Good luck!

[finetuner]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

I've never heard anything that sounded great on a Benchmark DAC-1 sound less than great elsewhere while I've heard plenty of stuff sound OK elsewhere but not very good on the DAC-1. The DAC-1 has less flattering bloat in the lower mid-range than many converters which is why people often characterize it as having more upper-mids...

Interesting point of view, especially in the case of monitoring DAC (as indicated by O.P.).

Indeed (a) monitoring (DAC) shouldn't be pleasing or flattering.
On the contrary, it should clearly ;-) unveil any mix problems. So when something sounds good on merciless accurate monitoring, it IS good.

I consider any studio monitoring chain, DAC included, as a looking glass through which you can easily see (hear) all details and possible problems. Not rose colored glasses through which the whole world seems 'nice'.

[arf]

Originally Posted by finetuner

I consider any studio monitoring chain, DAC included, as a looking glass through which you can easily see (hear) all details and possible problems. Not rose colored glasses through which the whole world seems 'nice'.

All audio devices have a characteristic voice that comes to light when presented with dynamically changing music vs. a steady state sine wave. The relationships between lows, low mids, upper mids, and top vary from device to device for converters, amps, speakers, eqs, compressors, etc. So, aside from good resolution and low distortion, any device has to be judged in the system where it will live. It's another reason why opinions are all over the map on a given piece of gear. The context is everything.