Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

Before announcing Lavry complete failure against Bidat when Lavry was driven by a CD transport I have to make a very important comment: in my case the transport was not a regular transport but the CEC-TL0, a know son of a digital bitch.

I know quite a few installations when CEC-TL0 entered a well performing setup and literally destroyed it. The typical compliances by the system owners were that the CEC-TL0 was “too much”. This is very much true: the CEC-TL0 output so much in everything: details, rhythm, bass, articulation that most of playbacks juts could not handle them and the listing awareness get overwhelmed and stop processing Sound. Using without spacial precautions the TL0 produce just a collection of super high quality sounds that would be not organized into music. This is how the TL0 pretty much sounds in moist of the places… In order to make the TL0 do not sound like a cold, high precision anal-retentive machine it needs a proper DAC, that DAC that would embrace what TL0 dose incredibly well: both frequency extremes, details, phenomenal rhythm and stunning, not comparing with a anything else articulation, but in the same time compile the sounds into music, unite everything together and fix up the TL0’s limitations in upper bass.

So, in my world the Bidat was exactly the DAC that was doing exactly that. The combination of TL0-Synopsis-Bidat turned out to be very-very successful and probably if not Bidat I would not go for the TL0. OK, what happen when I drive the TL0 into Lavry? The problem is that nothing happen and the Lavry outputs the very same TL0’s high quality individual sounds that many other DACs did. The TL0- Lavry presentation was very nice, large, bassy, fast but it is hardly musical. Not to mention that in the case of CD course (contrary to my FM case) the Lavry’s tendency for being slightly brighter serves a negates purpose. I would say that Lavry extreme HF were objectively better then Bidat. They were cleaner, more “expressed” (in very positive ways) and I would say even more sophisticated. However, the Bidat juts did not have any HF at all! Sound after Bidat flows very naturally and I do not acknowledge or bothered by any existing or none-existing HF.

You know Bidat HF is like reading Pushkin. Pushkin in Russian literature is not the same as Shakespeare in the literature of English speaking world. Shakespeare smart, inelegant, fancy, witty, stylish and sophisticated. Shakespeare requires the reader brain to switch into a mode of wit and style and sophistication.  You have to be already somebody to “get” Shakespeare… With Pushkin it is totally different story. Before Pushkin Russian language did not exist and arguably it hardly exist after him. Pushkin’s language is insultingly simple (3 year old kinds “get” it with no problems) but at the same time it has within itself the wit, style and sophistication no less, or in some cases even more, then Shakespeare. This amassing simplicity create own absolute unique fluency of Pushkin’s language and it is no surprised that someone had noticed in the past that reading Pushkin ventilates the reader’s lungs… The Bidat’s sound has something from that Pushkin’s fluency and smoothness. Lavry, in contrary, is juts presents the good sounds.

I wonder how much the Lavry’s disability to work with TL0 comes from that minute HF “eagerness” that Lavry has.  I did tried to kill my tweeter when I dealt with Lavry; it helped but only to a degree.  It would be fun trying to lowpass Lavry additionally to what it does at 15-16kz and to see how it would behave….

Rgs,
Romy the Cat

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site