查看完整版本: 老外的有趣评价: Lavry DA10 对 Benchmark DAC1 两台优秀解码器的生死决

老外的有趣评价: Lavry DA10 对 Benchmark DAC1 两台优秀解码器的生死决

这个图我看的要笑.

[img]http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/8379/dac1da10lg9wx.jpg[/img]

[[i] 本帖最后由 小白 于 2008-8-19 15:33 编辑 [/i]]

原文在这里: [url=http://studioforums.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/694106689/m/6611090261]http://studioforums.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/694106689/m/6611090261[/url]

作者Dan Richards是一个业内知名的专业人士.

[img]http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/3444/niehaus07286qx.jpg[/img]

我大致翻译一下.

这场由专业人士主持的生死决包括以下几个回合: 外观设计,功能,音质,与其他器材的连接功能,制造工艺,时尚感.



第一回合: 外观设计

这里判决DAC1赢. DA10的那个拨杆式的音量开关被判为不如DAC1的大旋钮.

[img]http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/3626/bouncyboxingl13zn.jpg[/img]

第二回合: 功能.

评判是双方各给1分. 此项平手.

DA10的数字式的0-56(最大)的输出电平调节可以使用户方便地记忆住合适的音量. DAC1的连续可调的音量调节也很方便.


[img]http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/1852/350pxshootboxingmatch1kf.jpg[/img]

da10在中国没走好，这跟他之前的代理有很大关系
玩好da10的也没几个;P 这解码不看完他说明书基本玩不好;P
跳线很重要，前面板的相位开关也很重要，毕竟xlr是有相位的，真不知用da10的有几个明白这些:lol

下一个回合是: 时尚感.

这个回合DAC1又胜了. 裁判说DA10的黑匣子般的设计,不够DAC1时尚.  DAC1还有黑色和银色两个颜色呢.

三个回合下来,DAC1暂时领先了. 3分,对DA10的1分.

在下一回里,DAC1又把DA10给打败了. 这个第四回合是 ... 质量控制.

因为Dan接触到的那台DA10左右声道(输出口)竟然是反标的. :Q


DA10现在倒在地上,要用手抓住边绳喘气了.

[img]http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/2514/kk17ib.jpg[/img]

下一个是第5回合啦. 这个比的是"连接功能",即与其他器材进行连接的性能.  

DA10在这个回合又挨了一拳 ... :L

原因是显而易见的. DAC1具有DA10所缺的非平衡RCA输出口,而且前面板有两个耳机口,而DA10只能插一副耳机.

下一个第六回合里,DA10绝地反击了. 这个回合是"可操控性".

这个回合里DA10把DAC1直接打在地上找牙了. 裁判给DA10加了2分.

原因是,DA10具有DAC1所没有的操控功能,包括:

1.单声道/立体声输出的切换.

2.相位开关(正相/反相之间的切换).

3.锁相环(PPL)三个模式的选择: Crystal, Narrow, Wide.  发烧友正常聆听时应选择Crystal,多台DA10一起工作时应选Narrow,而当取样频率非标准时,应选取Wide.

4.DA10是有电源开关的,可以关机,而DAC1只能靠拔电源线来关机.

[img]http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/5872/down4ci.jpg[/img]

这个文章太老了
那时候比的是DAC-1老版
现在的新版音质早已不是老版可以相提并论的了

下一回合很关键: 音质. 毕竟买回一台解码器最关心的还是它的音质.

(我旁注一下: DA10的声音风格和DAC1是很不同的,所以各人的主观结论会很不同. 我们在此只看看国外一个专业音频人士的看法.)

在音质这个回合上,作者也花了最多的笔墨. 我完整地帖出来大家自己看. 结论是Dan Richards认为DA10的音质把DAC1[b](注意是06年版)[/b]彻底打趴. 注意我加黑的那段,显示的是为了做好这个回合的比赛,使用的诸多专业级别的监听喇叭,耳机,重播系统,和接线.

After covering a lot of aspects of the DA10 and DAC1 standing still, we take them into the area of sound and everyday use. This is not a "honeymoon" review. We've reviewed too many products over the last several years to worry about being the first review out, or trying something out of the box for a day or two - and then declaring to high heaven about the next product you can't live without.

We received the Lavry DA10 in February of 2006. I'd had a Benchmark DAC1 in my studio as my main DAC since it was introduced in 2002. We have had the DA10 and DAC1 in use and comparison listening tests for around five months. The listening tests have been conducted in several rooms and on several systems and sources. Source files and formats used to conduct the tests consisted of Audio CD's, 24-bit AIFF master stereo files, Nuendo 2 multi-track soundfiles recorded at 24-bit 44.1, MP3's of various bitrates, and internet streaming audio.

[b]Monitors included Dynaudio AIR 15's, Dynaudio BM6A's, Klein and Hummel 0300D, Yamaha NS-10M's/Bryston.
Headphones: Ultrasone Proline 650, Extreme Isolation Headphones, AKG K141, AKG K240
Playback systems included Mac G4 S-Drive, Tascam DV-RA1000, Nuendo 2, iTunes.
Various interconnect cables were used by Gotham, Requisite Audio, Monster, Mogami.[/b]
Source music over several months included a wide variety of genres. You name it: we played it.

A bias: If there's any bias here - it's towards the DAC1. I've owned one since they first came out in 2002. And ever since then had commented regularly that the DAC1 was the one single piece of gear I would not swap out of my studio in exchange for something else. Also, just the fact that I owned the DAC1 would somehow make things easier if I just liked it better and shipped back the review unit of the DA10. Liking the DA10 is more of a pain in the butt, 'cause then I've got to go to the trouble of selling the DAC1 and then ponying up for the DA10. Ah, decisions, decisions...

On the first evening of listening to the DA10, it was apparent that the soundfield is wider than the DAC1. It also seemed that there was a hole in the the middle of the soundfield on the DA10. But I later found out - as my ears adjusted - that there was, in fact, program material there in the middle, but due to my ears being used to the DAC1 it wasn't apparent at first. If your ears/brain have been exposed to one stimulus, it can take some time before traces of the old stimulus aren't engrained along with the new stimulus. That's why I feel it's important when doing comparisons - to do them over a longer period of time and in various situations.

I've read enough "honeymoon" reviews - where someone gets a new piece of gear and runs excitedly to the forums to post something on the order of, "Hey, I just got the BingBong 2000, and we've tried it tonight on female vocals and acoustic guitar, and it KICKS ASS!" I don't get much out of people's reviews until they've lived with the gear and have passed the initial excitement stage, and can at least attempt to give a sober opinion of the gear in various applications, on different kinds of music, and on different sessions.

So, after living with the DAC1 and DA10 for over five months - what's the conclusion? The DAC1 was sold about a month ago, and the DA10 is sitting snug in my rack as my main DA. And while the DAC1 was a formidable opponent to the DA10, in the end, sonically I found the DA10 to be superior on every level. I was happy enough with the DAC1 - until I was shown a better way. It's as if I'd gotten used to a pair of prescription eyeglasses, and then a visit to an optometrist and a new prescription yields clearer, more accurate vision with more depth of field.

After listening through the DA10 and then back to the DAC1, the DAC1 began to reveal what could be described as a "grainy" sound. And I found this to be most evident in the high-end. Compared with the DA10, the DAC1 could also be described as "colored" by some - even if small amount of - distortion. After using the DAC1 and then switching to the DA10 - everything just clears up. With the DAC1 instruments and sounds seemed less separated, whereas with the DA10 - instruments and sounds are presented in their own respective space.

The overall soundfield widens when the DA10 is employed, and shrinks when the DAC1 is put back on duty. And what I found most striking with the DA10 is that the three-dimensional depth of the soundfield is just - well - [i]deeper[/i]. Everything is more alive with the DA10. In fact, after about a month of testing, unless I was specifically testing the DAC1 and the DA10, I was using the DA10 as my DA. On a few occasions I even tried to leave the DAC1 patched into my system after testing, but found I couldn't. The DA10 just sounds that much better. Once you go Lavry Black - you never go back.

I don't claim to know the precise inner workings of convertor chips. And even someone who does, and can read all the specs, still can't apply that to the way something's actually going to sound. You've gotta listen. I do know that there are only a handful of converter chip companies, and that as the technology of their chips increases - so, too, does the sonics of every company's gear that uses the more advanced chips. And many of us have heard the increase in better sonics over the last several years in converters. In that light - the DA10 is simply newer technology - by some fours years. And in computative years - that's a lifetime. And perhaps that's at least partially responsible for what gives it this sonic edge.

I have a part of me that's still old school, and I'm still coming off the shock of the loss of ubiquitous analog technology, and everything moving digital. In the bigger picture - I still think PCM digital sounds like ass compared to a good analog system. But year by year digital's getting there. And the DA10 puts across a much more relaxed and effortless soundfield - that makes both listening for enjoyment, as well as tracking and mixing, a much more pleasurable experience.

I still miss some of the added interconnectivity of the DAC1, and would like to see an additional headphone jack as well as another pair of outputs on the DA10... And, I can't say that I don't miss that nice, juicy knob on the DAC1. But sonically, I just can't go back. The DA10 offers too big of a step forward in DA technology. Whatever Dan Lavry and Lavry Engineering are doing - they're doing it right. Consider me converted.

[img]http://img55.imageshack.us/img55/9376/nikolayvaluevetienne3fw0.jpg[/img]

[b]Final Score: In a technical KO based on superior overall sound and performance
the Lavry DA10 is declared the winner.[/b]

白兄的图看的我笑死   支持

[quote]原帖由 [i]nadesicozhao[/i] 于 2008-8-19 13:35 发表 [url=http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191280&ptid=111686][img]http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
这个文章太老了
那时候比的是DAC-1老版
现在的新版音质早已不是老版可以相提并论的了 [/quote]


DA10也不见得近2年来没有任何改动.

我真正觉得非常好奇的是,国外的一班专业音频人士,不是业余发烧友而是搞专业的人士,为什么喜欢DA10的声音,而不是声音明显更为监听风格的DAC1. 这是费思量的一点.

[[i] 本帖最后由 小白 于 2008-8-19 13:42 编辑 [/i]]

这么多回合比下来,宣布胜者了 ... 仔细读一下原文,如果你英语还可以的话.

照片上的这班专业人士在经过一段时间的仔细对比后,都认同DA10是胜者.  注意这是06年的结论,即06版的DA10胜出06版的DAC1.



[b]Rematch Conclusion: 2006 Benchmark DAC1 vs 2006 Lavry DA10[/b].

I took the occasion of a recent TLS Intensive Recording Workshop to bring the crew to my new private workspace that's been under construction for the last several months. I'm still finishing it up, but I wanted to give everyone a tour of another listening environment. [ I'll post more room pics at some point in my Studio Journals topic.]

We'd been up at the studio in Myrtle Beach all week, and had been doing a lot of listening - including A/B comparisons to 20+ preamps and a good 30+ mics. So everyone's ears were nice and tuned up for listening to sonic nuances and differences. One of the things I wanted to spend a little time on when I brought everyone over to my new space was to give them a listen to the 2006 model DAC1 and the DA10 I have here for comparison.

With everyone in the room - at different positions, and changing positions through out the audition process - we played various music selections through the DA10, then the DAC1 - and back and forth several times. To cut to the chase: the DA10 was overwhelmingly preferred. It wasn't even close.

[img]http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/2859/tlsnewroom1ay1.jpg[/img]

I'd also been conducting my own listening tests, and had been using both the DAC1 and DA10 in my work as a real-world tools. I found no difference in the sonic qualities of the 2006 DAC1 and the 2002 DAC1 used in my original DAC1/DA10 comparison. These recent tests, as well as the tests conducted earlier in this review, have taken place over the timespan of more than a year with various listening environments, sound systems, and listeners and engineers present.


[img]http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/6238/pwnedfacekickka7.jpg[/img]

The results of the rematch of a 2006-model Benchmark DAC1 and a 2006-model Lavry DA10: [b]The Lavry DA10 is declared the winner and remains victorious.[/b]

[quote]原帖由 [i]小白[/i] 于 2008-8-19 13:41 发表 [url=http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191283&ptid=111686][img]http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]



DA10也不见得近2年来没有任何改动.

我真正觉得非常好奇的是,国外的一班专业音频人士,不是业余发烧友而是搞专业的人士,为什么喜欢DA10的声音,而不是声音明显更为监听风格的DAC1. 这是费思量的一点. [/quote]

专业并不代表可以排除个人的好恶
sony做出来的东西就是一股子sony味 无论是小到一根8字电源线（刚买了一对听了下）还是高档产品 尽管很多还是找人代工的 这是不得不佩服的一件事情

关于DA10和DAC-1好比复刻版PK头版
谁好谁坏会听懂听的人能很明显区别，但是未必结论一致

CHORD DAC 64不知道会比DAC1好多少，这点我比较关心

[quote]原帖由 [i]guyongsoft[/i] 于 2008-8-19 13:56 发表 [url=http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191298&ptid=111686][img]http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
CHORD DAC 64不知道会比DAC1好多少，这点我比较关心 [/quote]

不搭配原配转盘听下来不如DAC-1;P

专业的机器么 值得加分的 呵呵 我觉得Lavry这个品牌本身就是一种保障 其实da10最大的问题是使用不方便 毕竟是专业器材 用起来还是不对音乐欣赏的口子 其他方面见人见智 不过不管怎么说 从lavry的精神以及开壳后的视觉效果来看 是很让我喜欢的 声音方面由于限于平衡器材 具体无法衡量了 希望能有da15之类的器材能稍微兼顾一下民用~

[quote]原帖由 [i]nadesicozhao[/i] 于 2008-8-19 13:50 发表 [url=http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191294&ptid=111686][img]http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
关于DA10和DAC-1好比复刻版PK头版
谁好谁坏会听懂听的人能很明显区别，但是未必结论一致 [/quote]
第99遍

[quote]原帖由 [i]小白[/i] 于 2008-8-19 13:41 发表 [url=http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191283&ptid=111686][img]http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]



DA10也不见得近2年来没有任何改动.

我真正觉得非常好奇的是,国外的一班专业音频人士,不是业余发烧友而是搞专业的人士,为什么喜欢DA10的声音,而不是声音明显更为监听风格的DAC1. 这是费思量的一点. [/quote]

无论是在网上，还是现实中，的确接触到有相当数量的人喜欢有些偏暖的、有包围感的声音，这样的声音可能舒适感好些，更容易使听者放松一点，是一种有吸引力的声音取向。

[quote]原帖由 [i]pipeorgan[/i] 于 2008-8-19 14:21 发表 [url=http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191311&ptid=111686][img]http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


无论是在网上，还是现实中，的确接触到有相当数量的人喜欢有些偏暖的、有包围感的声音，这样的声音可能舒适感好些，更容易使听者放松一点，是一种有吸引力的声音取向。 [/quote]
恩 我觉得暖的 平缓的 柔软的声音并不是错的 硬朗的 透明的 秀丽的声音也不一定是对的 本来就是对原始信号的艺术化诠释 自己喜欢最重要 不过值得一提的是 “自己喜欢”是会随着很多因素的改变而变的

[quote]原帖由 [i]mvw[/i] 于 2008-8-19 14:30 发表 [url=http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191313&ptid=111686][img]http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]

恩 我觉得暖的 平缓的 柔软的声音并不是错的 硬朗的 透明的 秀丽的声音也不一定是对的 本来就是对原始信号的艺术化诠释 自己喜欢最重要 不过值得一提的是 “自己喜欢”是会随着很多因素的改变而变的 [/quote]

是的 从幅频上来讲这些都是无论错对的
但是对我个人来讲 声音相位的正确性才是最不可妥协的

我不觉得da10声底属于暖和润

也许老外是对的, 可惜没听过DA10.

[quote]原帖由 [i]zyzs[/i] 于 2008-8-19 14:55 发表 [url=http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191329&ptid=111686][img]http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
我不觉得da10声底属于暖和润 [/quote]

我玩过的经历来说
属于中频突出 整体比较厚的

[quote]原帖由 [i]nadesicozhao[/i] 于 2008-8-19 14:35 发表 [url=http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191316&ptid=111686][img]http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


是的 从幅频上来讲这些都是无论错对的
但是对我个人来讲 声音相位的正确性才是最不可妥协的 [/quote]


请问赵版，幅频和相位如何体现在声音上?

[quote]原帖由 [i]dxx[/i] 于 2008-8-19 15:37 发表 [url=http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191351&ptid=111686][img]http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]



请问赵版，幅频和相位如何体现在声音上? [/quote]

[quote]原帖由 [i]dxx[/i] 于 2008-8-19 15:37 发表 [url=http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191351&ptid=111686][img]http://www.headphoneclub.com/bbs/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]



请问赵版，幅频和相位如何体现在声音上? [/quote]

幅频特性比较容易听出来 关于这个你自己电脑上弄个EQ调调就能听明白
相位就很难用文字清除表述了(其实我以前帖子说过不少 但是感觉依然没几个能看明白)
有些发烧了10多年的人都没搞明白 想要快速领悟 需要有经验的人在特定的一些组合上演示区别 并提示如何学会听

[quote]原帖由 [i]nadesicozhao[/i] 于 2008-8-19 15:44 发表 [url=http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=1191354&ptid=111686][img]http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]


幅频特性比较容易听出来 关于这个你自己电脑上弄个EQ调调就能听明白
相位就很难用文字清除表述了(其实我以前帖子说过不少 但是感觉依然没几个能看明白)
有些发烧了10多年的人都没搞明白 想要快速领悟 需要有经 ... [/quote]
可不可以理解为不正确的相位就象整个音场结像重叠在一起的感觉?
而正确的相位就整个音场梳理的比较开扬!!