Hi

Have you tried Legato? Bloody marvellous! For me, it's Russ's finest hour- though that's largely because I know enough analogue electronics to appreciate its design. (My near total ignorance of the digital side of the equation means I have to take that on trust, but it certainly seems to be in good hands). And, more importantly, my ears appreciate it even more!

I use a modified Legato 1- essentially now a Legato 3 without the output buffer and dc nulling, but with the paralleled FETs. I use a Pass B1 style fet buffer (installed on the pcb) between the I/V stage and the op amp Bal to SE stage, a metal canned version of the amp, a FET CCS on the current mirror that sets the output dc voltage at one half VACC (this feature wasn’t retained in Legato 3; dc output nulling was introduced instead), different I/V resistors, and different filter caps (the 2n2 types). I also use different voltage regulators to power the circuit (various Paul Hynes types).

I think my mods help, but that's not the point I'm trying to make. The basic circuit is excellent, and excellent sounding. It's also tweakable, if that floats your boat. And I say this as a man not adverse to valves and transformers. Or turntables, though I rarely play an lp these days- even CDs sound so good I can't be bothered with the hassle. Give Legato a go!

Paul N

Perhaps you could explain the perceived "compromises" in the layout and manufacturing quality?

Edited by user Friday, March 09, 2012 9:28:47 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I respect your thoughts, but I do not agree with you. I am always striving to improve my work, but your statements don't really lead to a better place as far as I can see.

The signal path for IVY-III and Legato is not large in any way, especially not "unnecessarily" :). Much shorter than many comparable solutions, especially modular ones.

We don't use any inferior quality resistors, we are actually very careful there. Personal tastes aside, you might be able to spend more for a resistor, but that does not make it better for the task.

IVY (I, II, and III) was developed over a long period of time with careful attention to detail and extreme care put into the final result - what you hear. It was not designed in a vacuum. It was not designed as an afterthought. It has been tuned and paid very careful attention to detail. It also has been measured and enjoys significant success and has a reputation that stands on it's own. :)

I design these things because I like to listen to them. So you better believe I don't take it lightly. I want the best for myself.

I would just say that I can't agree with the opinions you voiced about the IVY, what I can agree on is that if you want a tightest layout you can't make the output stage selection flexible. We took the inflexible but awesome route with Buffalo 32S but many people wanted a more flexible design.

That said - you should take a close look at the ESS reference design, which has a far longer signal path. Perhaps you will find their parts selection inferior? :)

Now what you may personally be interested in is something like Buffalo 32S which had the I/V tightly integrated with the DAC. We are actually open to bringing that back (a new version) as it does allow for the best possible routing from DAC to output stage.

Buffalo 3 is designed for more hands-on DIY folks, some of whom want to use their own output stages.

IVY-III has enjoyed extreme success for very good reason, some prefer it over Legato, some Legato over IVY. That is just a matter of taste. Perhaps Legato is a better fit for you.

Cheers!
Russ

Edited by user Friday, March 09, 2012 11:34:44 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Ok I appreciate you clarifying your intent.

I can assure you I do very much pay attention to the analog part. I can also assure I never stop thinking about different ways to do things. :) I am sure there will be new things to get excited about.

I really appreciate your kind words, and I truly hope you enjoy the DAC!

Cheers!
Russ

I don't have any reason to believe it would be better. You can try for yourself. :)

Try a discret solution . It could be Burson or a Dexa . Opamps is not really Hifi in any case in my opinion

Than what is Hi-end solution in this case? I've read in the net, Erno Borbely is more preferable i/v stage over any others. Did you hear how it sounds?

Edited by user Friday, March 30, 2012 10:01:15 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Russ, I guess you have a way to step up) What about to design a jfet based i/v stage and of course multichannel?
But please do not get as I'a looking for a work for you, this is just a question, curiosity)

Edited by user Saturday, March 31, 2012 1:32:26 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I've shown you an example regarding EB jfet i/v converters, you do not agree?
As I know, jfet are far better in audio than any other transistor types.

Edited by user Saturday, March 31, 2012 9:03:10 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified