DCS Or LAMPIZATOR- YOUR CONSIDERATIONS.

Argonaut · Mar 1, 2016

I have pretty much deduced my short list for a new digital front end down to - DCS Vivaldi Transport and DAC / DCS Rossini and Clock or an Lampizator Balanced GG.

Purely on RRP alone, the list runs in descending order, however other that bonzo (Whome I consider to have a very good ear ! Altho perhaps somewhat overly pre dis positioned toward the 2nd harmonic ) Personal experience
of the two products, in comparison, would seem to be rather thin on the ground.

I would be most interested therefore in any considerations, views, and in particular any practical experiences of the fore mentioned contenders.

Crashem · Mar 1, 2016

Hard choice. Both are great.

Was looking through your profile on what equipment you currently have and couldn't find anything. Mind me asking what you are looking to pair them with? Also, what kind of music you listen to?

Andrew Stenhouse · Mar 1, 2016

Harlequin said:
I have pretty much deduced my short list for a new digital front end down to - DCS Vivaldi Transport and DAC / DCS Rossini and Clock or an Lampizator Balanced GG.

Purely on RRP alone, the list runs in descending order, however other that bonzo (Whome I consider to have a very good ear ! Altho perhaps somewhat overly pre dis positioned toward the 2nd harmonic ) Personal experience
of the two products, in comparison, would seem to be rather thin on the ground.

I would be most interested therefore in any considerations, views, and in particular any practical experiences of the fore mentioned contenders.

Wow. What a choice to have. I haven't heard any of them, only the Merging + Nadac. There are plenty of enthusiasts for each path, is it possible to audition in your system first?

Peter and Al M. report that the dCS Rossini is very, very impressive, but of course there is something magical in the glow of tubes

and the lushness they impart. It may come down to system matching and personal preference as much as anything. No wrong choice at your level.

Good luck and please keep us informed of your progress. Preferably with pictures !

Bruce B · Mar 2, 2016

Harlequin said:
I have pretty much deduced my short list for a new digital front end down to - DCS Vivaldi Transport and DAC / DCS Rossini and Clock or an Lampizator Balanced GG.

Purely on RRP alone, the list runs in descending order, however other that bonzo (Whome I consider to have a very good ear ! Altho perhaps somewhat overly pre dis positioned toward the 2nd harmonic ) Personal experience
of the two products, in comparison, would seem to be rather thin on the ground.

I would be most interested therefore in any considerations, views, and in particular any practical experiences of the fore mentioned contenders.

I'd definitely go for the GG. I've never really warmed up to the dCS sound. Plus, I've never heard an external clock added to a DAC that made it better, unless it was broken or poorly designed in the first place!

bonzo75 · Mar 2, 2016

No contest for me. Big 7 trumps vivaldi any day, add to that the fact you can add exotic valves (which I have not tried on the lampi and still stay within a fraction of the vivaldi stack cost

Enatai252 · Mar 2, 2016

I think your best bet is to listen to both in your system if possible....or in a system similar to what you have. Also imagine what source material and method of media delivery will matter. GG can be configured as DSD only or PCM/DSD. From those who have discussed the GG here, it appears most people use it with USB input. If DSD material is your main source material through USB connection than GG seems like an option worth investigating based on feedback from owners here. I have not heard it so can't comment from personal experience. You mention the Vivaldi transport so if you have a lot of CDs or SACDs than leveraging the dual AES function of the transport will require the Vivaldi or Rossini DAC. My personal experience differs from Bruce in that my ears hear a significant improvement with the external clock. Not sure how much time Bruce has with the Vivaldi/Rossini but I have not heard anything better so like the saying goes YMMV and there are some really good options out there today. The dCS route with transport will be a higher cost option than the GG unless you go crazy with tube choices....and even then you could still be way under the dCS option. I think there are several fans of both choices so again the best option is to figure out what works best for your situation and try to listen to it in your system....either way I expect you will be happy.

Enatai252 · Mar 2, 2016

bonzo75 said:
No contest for me. Big 7 trumps vivaldi any day, add to that the fact you can add exotic valves (which I have not tried on the lampi and still stay within a fraction of the vivaldi stack cost

IYnotsoH opinion.

bonzo75 · Mar 2, 2016

My comments stand between PCM. DSD is a red herring. Just because it is better does not mean one is better on PCM and one on DSD.

Enatai252 · Mar 2, 2016

bonzo75 said:
My comments stand between PCM. DSD is a red herring. Just because it is better does not mean one is better on PCM and one on DSD.

It is clear which one you prefer....which one is better will vary based on use, system and person. I understand your point on DSD and PCM not necessarily being mutually exclusive and I agree. since the OP referenced the GG, I was indicating it comes in two forms...PCM&DSD or DSD only. Several people here seem to have gone for the DSD only version and really like it. The GG also supports 256DSD while the dCS supports 128 If OP was going to listen primarily to DSD, it seems like a good option and best bang for the buck. If the OP wanted to listen to CDs and SACD, the Vivaldi transport upsampling the 16/44k data to DXD or sending the direct DSD stream from SACDs on dual AES will yield a better result IMO, albeit with a much higher investment. My suggestion was to try to listen to both options based on the method that will get the most playing time. I did not give an opinion on which would actually be better for the OP. Cheers

Al M. · Mar 2, 2016

Enatai252 said:
It is clear which one you prefer....which one is better will vary based on use, system and person.

Precisely. We know that Bonzo is strongly biased towards DSD. So strongly in fact, that he once claimed that there is not much qualitative difference between an Oppo and a dCS Vivaldi. A disqualifier right there if there ever was one.

So yeah, his positive opinions about a Lampi may count, perhaps to a high degree, his negative opinions about any PCM playback no matter what...not so much.

bonzo75 · Mar 2, 2016

Al M. said:
Precisely. We know that Bonzo is strongly biased towards DSD. So strongly in fact, that he once claimed that there is not much qualitative difference between an Oppo and a dCS Vivaldi. A disqualifier right there if there ever was one.

So yeah, his positive opinions about a Lampi may count, perhaps to a high degree, his negative opinions about any PCM playback no matter what...not so much.

Sorry, you are confusing from my previous posts. I am not biased to DSD though it sounds better, I keep saying my comparisons between Lampi and the rest were also based on PCM (I can understand the DSD perception based on my liking of Lampi, which further adds credence to why I say the DSD is a red herring)

Also the statements seem incorrect out of context. Regarding Vivaldi and Oppo, I replaced Vivaldi with an oppo and heard a difference, more quietness and detail, all hifi stuff, but couldn't be bothered. In the broader context, it was that I will get massive upgrade if I replace Oppo with a basic well set up turntable instead. I can't be bothered with expensive digital as it makes ZERO significant difference to me compared to vinyl, and Lampi is the only digital I like. To me, the Oppo, vivaldi, trinity, AR Dac 8, a sony SACD player, relative to vinyl all sound the same. I will stay with Lampi as it sounds better than digital (not as good as vinyl) and is less expensive and more convenient than vinyl. Eventually I expect to be pulled into buy vinyl. Sorry to be OT but thought I would clarify the context

Andrew Stenhouse · Mar 2, 2016

Well, whatever any individual views, and what other members understanding is of those views, it is always going to be the OP's ears and gears that determine the choice made.

Personally if someone is considering spending dCS money, I would suggest you would be insane not to audition in your own system, if at all possible.

bonzo75 · Mar 2, 2016

Andrew Stenhouse said:
Well, whatever any individual views, and what other members understanding is of those views, it is always going to be the OP's ears and gears that determine the choice made.

Personally if someone is considering spending dCS money, I would suggest you would be insane not to audition in your own system, if at all possible.

In any event, lets not have conflict guys. Room for all here

Not a conflict - just a clarification. Because saying I am all DSD, and the oppo-vivaldi comment did not accurately represent what I wanted to convey

Andrew Stenhouse · Mar 2, 2016

Thanks Kedar !

I guess after the last few weeks, the last thing anyone wants to see is a blue. Anyway I didn't read your response the way it was interpreted. I just read it s saying your preference was for a Lampi, regardless of format.

Cheers mate.

bonzo75 · Mar 2, 2016

Andrew Stenhouse said:
Thanks Kedar !

I guess after the last few weeks, the last thing anyone wants to see is a blue. Anyway I didn't read your response the way it was interpreted. I just read it s saying your preference was for a Lampi, regardless of format.

Cheers mate.

true - I think the DHT is what makes much more difference than DSD or PCM. Maybe when I go TT I am going to look at Thoress, which Mike L and others say is one of the best, if not the best phono they have heard. Also DHT.

Argonaut · Mar 2, 2016

Thank you for your considerations folks, much appreciated.
If I may expand a little upon my OP I may provide a few answers to points raised, together with my reasoning thus far.

My system at present is constructed around an ARC Reference 10 pre and Reference 250se mono blocks driving ML CLX Anniversary transducers, so no particular shortage of valve harmonics (nor radiated heat) as is, which in part is one aspect of the DCS way of things that appeals to me whilst still leaving plenty of scope for valve rolling the system should I wish.

I have yet to experience in person the Rossini Player/DAC or Clock, however I have spent quite some time with a good friends Full On Vivaldi stack fronting a very similar system, even down to the same transducers, and am therefore pretty well acquainted with how an Vivaldi Player/DAC combination should work within my own set up.

I would in part concur with Bruce with regard to previous iterations of DCS equipment, however, as has been universally commented upon in recent reviews of the latest generation of DCS gear, I found that they have evolved from that somewhat cold, clinical, almost overly analytical presentation of yore, into an entirely more organic animal, quite palpably believable in the tonality and timbre of instrument and vocal, whilst retaining, if not even improving upon the elements that DCS has always majored on.

It is my understanding that whilst the DCS line currently supports up to 2xDSD that 4xDSD capability is but a firmware update away.

I am still quite undecided as to whether a transport figures large in my future?!?!?? the price difference, not withstanding SACD capability and build quality, in incorporating this functionality, between Rossini and Vivaldi being quite considerable! And a mute point with GG. Somewhat annoyingly, and for the most part, it would seem reviewers and customers comment upon the transport playback on R and V to remain slightly ahead of a rip of the same media.

My goal in the short term will be to audition all three contenders for my ill gotten within my own room/system, in the main to assess how close the additional clock brings the Rossini Player to the Vivaldi Player and DAC at half the cost, but also to ascertain whether the valve presentation of the GG brings its expected organic nature to the system without over egging the thermionic pudding!

bonzo75 · Mar 2, 2016

Harlequin said:
I am still quite undecided as to whether a transport figures large in my future?!?!?? the price difference, not withstanding SACD capability and build quality, in incorporating this functionality, between Rossini and Vivaldi being quite considerable! And a mute point with GG. Somewhat annoyingly, and for the most part, it would seem reviewers and customers comment upon the transport playback on R and V to remain slightly ahead of a rip of the same media.

... but also to ascertain whether the valve presentation of the GG brings its expected organic nature to the system without over egging the thermionic pudding!

Hi I have compared Aurender to Vivaldi CD transport, and latter is better, to answer your point. My preference would be to put dcs type transport into GG if I wanted to spin, but then I would lose benefit of SACD, though I could still stream DSD. But then I would prefer to stream via aurender or such into GG vs using a good transport as standalone or into a non-lampi dac.

Another comment on the valve aspect - GG is not like audio research or Jadis that valve brings softness (sometimes too soft). It can have more slam and speed then some SS. Sure if you put certain 300bs in, you might get it soft.

Harlequin said:
My system at present is constructed around an ARC Reference 10 pre and Reference 250se mono blocks driving ML CLX Anniversary transducers, so no particular shortage of valve harmonics (nor radiated heat) as is, which in part is one aspect of the DCS way of things that appeals to me whilst still leaving plenty of scope for valve rolling the system should I wish.

Also, the valves in the lampi are on a completely different level from valves in AR, Lamm, and such amps - you can go original WE 101ds, 300bs, Elrogs and KRs, not to mention you can use much cheaper valves if you choose to as well, so that valve rolling is on a different plane.

jfrech · Mar 2, 2016

Harlequin said:
Thank you for your considerations folks, much appreciated.
If I may expand a little upon my OP I may provide a few answers to points raised, together with my reasoning thus far.

My system at present is constructed around an ARC Reference 10 pre and Reference 250se mono blocks driving ML CLX Anniversary transducers, so no particular shortage of valve harmonics (nor radiated heat) as is, which in part is one aspect of the DCS way of things that appeals to me whilst still leaving plenty of scope for valve rolling the system should I wish.

I have yet to experience in person the Rossini Player/DAC or Clock, however I have spent quite some time with a good friends Full On Vivaldi stack fronting a very similar system, even down to the same transducers, and am therefore pretty well acquainted with how an Vivaldi Player/DAC combination should work within my own set up.

I would in part concur with Bruce with regard to previous iterations of DCS equipment, however, as has been universally commented upon in recent reviews of the latest generation of DCS gear, I found that they have evolved from that somewhat cold, clinical, almost overly analytical presentation of yore, into an entirely more organic animal, quite palpably believable in the tonality and timbre of instrument and vocal, whilst retaining, if not even improving upon the elements that DCS has always majored on.

It is my understanding that whilst the DCS line currently supports up to 2xDSD that 4xDSD capability is but a firmware update away.

I am still quite undecided as to whether a transport figures large in my future?!?!?? the price difference, not withstanding SACD capability and build quality, in incorporating this functionality, between Rossini and Vivaldi being quite considerable! And a mute point with GG. Somewhat annoyingly, and for the most part, it would seem reviewers and customers comment upon the transport playback on R and V to remain slightly ahead of a rip of the same media.

My goal in the short term will be to audition all three contenders for my ill gotten within my own room/system, in the main to assess how close the additional clock brings the Rossini Player to the Vivaldi Player and DAC at half the cost, but also to ascertain whether the valve presentation of the GG brings its expected organic nature to the system without over egging the thermionic pudding!

So I have heard the Rossini & Clock and own a Vivaldi. The Rossini get's closer than you might expect given the price differential. I agree with you that the current dCS line up is quite organic, deep textures and basically and arguably the best out there. Enough to make quite a few vinyl bigots (like me) just sit back and enjoy. In a dCS system, I think a clock is necessary which ever route you go. But you can also go with a Vivaldi DAC and a Rossini Clock...just a thought.

Given your system, you'll hear the extra the Vivaldi brings to the table...but you'll also just sit back and enjoy a Rossini also. They are both fantastic...

Argonaut · Mar 2, 2016

bonzo75 said:
Hi I have compared Aurender to Vivaldi CD transport, and latter is better, to answer your point. My preference would be to put dcs type transport into GG if I wanted to spin, but then I would lose benefit of SACD, though I could still stream DSD. But then I would prefer to stream via aurender or such into GG vs using a good transport as standalone or into a non-lampi dac.

Another comment on the valve aspect - GG is not like audio research or Jadis that valve brings softness (sometimes too soft). It can have more slam and speed then some SS. Sure if you put certain 300bs in, you might get it soft.

Also, the valves in the lampi are on a completely different level from valves in AR, Lamm, and such amps - you can go original WE 101ds, 300bs, Elrogs and KRs, not to mention much cheaper, so that valve rolling is on a different plane.

I appreciate your thoughts bonzo and quite understand where you are coming from, For my part, I am no stranger to DHT valve stages, within digital playback and pre/amplification including exotica such as WE 300b and KR T1610, hence my own considerations in thus far preferring either SS Digital/Non Valve Analogue source with Valve or sometimes Hybrid Pre/Power, Or the opposite configuration.

That said I have yet to experience an Balanced GG with an all Valve Pre/Power.

bonzo75 · Mar 2, 2016

Harlequin said:
I appreciate your thoughts bonzo and quite understand where you are coming from, For my part, I am no stranger to DHT valve stages, within digital playback and pre/amplification including exotica such as WE 300b and KR T1610, hence my own considerations in thus far preferring either SS Digital/Non Valve Analogue source with Valve or sometimes Hybrid Pre/Power, Or the opposite configuration.

That said I have yet to experience an Balanced GG with an all Valve Pre/Power.

I am ruling out hybrids slowly, ruled out Ypsilon Aelius monos after comparing it to Luxman m800 bridged amps, and preferred KR on tone to Lamm M1.1. Will give Lamm M2.2 another shot, but otherwise it is Luxman bridged, Spectral, or Ayon Orthos XS 300 watt triode (400w pentode) for me to run planars. Unless by hybrid you mean valve pre and SS power.

Was your We 300b reissue, or 70s or before issue?

DCS Or LAMPIZATOR- YOUR CONSIDERATIONS.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

WBF Founding Member, Pro Audio Production Member

Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

VIP/Donor

Member Sponsor

New Member

Member Sponsor

New Member

Member Sponsor

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor

VIP/Donor

Well-Known Member

Member Sponsor