hi guys
i got a bit of a scare this evening after i opened my dac up to check the info on the caps. when i plugged it back in i was getting white noise for a few minutes until i switched the dac off and on again a couple of times. as a result i really want to get these caps changed as soon as possible before any further damage is done. i have noted that the caps all have 2200uf 25v written on them but i have noticed that some people on this forum have changed their caps using different values eg 1000uf 25v. i have also noted that the cerafines are not actually available in 2200uf but are in 1000uf. will it be ok to replace them with these? and is the voltage important, i.e. some caps are 16v, will these be appropriate or not? sorry if these are dumb questions but i am not very knowledgable about this stuff and don't want to shell out on getting inappropriate replacements.
thanks in advance for any info
frank
i got a bit of a scare this evening after i opened my dac up to check the info on the caps. when i plugged it back in i was getting white noise for a few minutes until i switched the dac off and on again a couple of times. as a result i really want to get these caps changed as soon as possible before any further damage is done. i have noted that the caps all have 2200uf 25v written on them but i have noticed that some people on this forum have changed their caps using different values eg 1000uf 25v. i have also noted that the cerafines are not actually available in 2200uf but are in 1000uf. will it be ok to replace them with these? and is the voltage important, i.e. some caps are 16v, will these be appropriate or not? sorry if these are dumb questions but i am not very knowledgable about this stuff and don't want to shell out on getting inappropriate replacements.
thanks in advance for any info
frank
Hi Frank,
i recently had caps replaced on my Dacapo. They were supposed to be replaced with Rubycon ZLH but, in the end they were replaced with Panasonic FM. The whole thing was a bit of a sorry tale, but nothing to do with the above suggested caps, just the inability of the engineer to do what he said he could do. Since then i have had dealings with another engineer who has done a fantastic job of upgrading an Ordinal that i also have. Below are his comments on the ZLH and FM caps that he kindly gave me after i questioned why the other engineer opted for FM's over the ZLH in the end.
"All of the capacitors that needed replacing due to the inherent issues with the originals (as opposed to those that may be changed by way of an upgrade) are in the power supply circuits, so none of them are actually in the signal path. It is therefore in power supply applications that we need to put their relative performance and merits into context.
The FM series do have a slightly higher ripple current rating, but the ZLH has a much better high frequency performance which is important for removing RF and digital noise from power supplies.
Because of the way in which the capacitors are configured on the board, there are enough capacitors placed in parallel to give ample ripple current capacity even with considerably lower spec. capacitors than either of these. The type of circuitry involved with CD Players, transports and DAC do not require large amounts of current and these requirements do not fluctuate a great deal.
Therefore ripple current is not really an issue so we come down to the other performance and characteristics of the capacitors.
FM series are described as very low impedance and indeed they are, but their impedance is not as low as the ZLH, and this is emphasised even more at higher frequencies where the ZLH excel. From subjective experience, ZLH tend to sound "nicer" too.
The bottom line is that the ZLH will have the edge in terms overall performance and sound although because of where they are in the circuit and the parallel configuration in which they are used, the difference will not be huge (there are much better ways to upgrade a DaCapo)
More importantly in this case is the fact that Panasonics FM series capacitors are 40% cheaper than the equivalent ZLH."
So, the first guy that i used, just wanted to squeeze even more of a profit from my cap replacement by using FM's but this does not mean that they are not good, quite the contrary as i understand. Both ZLH and FM will be better that the original failing caps, however not the same. I am not an officianado on the merits of cap placement but, finally i have found someone that i trust to do work on my components and i believe him when he says not to agonise over the replacement of these particular caps.
I hope this helps.
Steven.
i recently had caps replaced on my Dacapo. They were supposed to be replaced with Rubycon ZLH but, in the end they were replaced with Panasonic FM. The whole thing was a bit of a sorry tale, but nothing to do with the above suggested caps, just the inability of the engineer to do what he said he could do. Since then i have had dealings with another engineer who has done a fantastic job of upgrading an Ordinal that i also have. Below are his comments on the ZLH and FM caps that he kindly gave me after i questioned why the other engineer opted for FM's over the ZLH in the end.
"All of the capacitors that needed replacing due to the inherent issues with the originals (as opposed to those that may be changed by way of an upgrade) are in the power supply circuits, so none of them are actually in the signal path. It is therefore in power supply applications that we need to put their relative performance and merits into context.
The FM series do have a slightly higher ripple current rating, but the ZLH has a much better high frequency performance which is important for removing RF and digital noise from power supplies.
Because of the way in which the capacitors are configured on the board, there are enough capacitors placed in parallel to give ample ripple current capacity even with considerably lower spec. capacitors than either of these. The type of circuitry involved with CD Players, transports and DAC do not require large amounts of current and these requirements do not fluctuate a great deal.
Therefore ripple current is not really an issue so we come down to the other performance and characteristics of the capacitors.
FM series are described as very low impedance and indeed they are, but their impedance is not as low as the ZLH, and this is emphasised even more at higher frequencies where the ZLH excel. From subjective experience, ZLH tend to sound "nicer" too.
The bottom line is that the ZLH will have the edge in terms overall performance and sound although because of where they are in the circuit and the parallel configuration in which they are used, the difference will not be huge (there are much better ways to upgrade a DaCapo)
More importantly in this case is the fact that Panasonics FM series capacitors are 40% cheaper than the equivalent ZLH."
So, the first guy that i used, just wanted to squeeze even more of a profit from my cap replacement by using FM's but this does not mean that they are not good, quite the contrary as i understand. Both ZLH and FM will be better that the original failing caps, however not the same. I am not an officianado on the merits of cap placement but, finally i have found someone that i trust to do work on my components and i believe him when he says not to agonise over the replacement of these particular caps.
I hope this helps.
Steven.
Well, I would as not bother to much about the absoute size...there are 317 and 337 regs all over the place. A 317 typically is fine with 1000uF.
By the way: This white noise thing I have had as well after the mod one time. Sithched the unit off and on and everthing was fine...these are still mini-computers which sometimes need a reset...
The inital metallic sound is far better by now, the cerafines seem to settle. I am still not in perfect heaven, let'S wait what comes addionally, but overall it seem that the da capo has more light, brings more holographic power into the scene and a really mighty bass. I am not saying it has a build in loudness-function, but it does more on bothsides of the end than any other DAC I know. It is astonishing though how much you can hear the PSU-Quality even with all of the regs and SMD-caps around.
By the way: This white noise thing I have had as well after the mod one time. Sithched the unit off and on and everthing was fine...these are still mini-computers which sometimes need a reset...
The inital metallic sound is far better by now, the cerafines seem to settle. I am still not in perfect heaven, let'S wait what comes addionally, but overall it seem that the da capo has more light, brings more holographic power into the scene and a really mighty bass. I am not saying it has a build in loudness-function, but it does more on bothsides of the end than any other DAC I know. It is astonishing though how much you can hear the PSU-Quality even with all of the regs and SMD-caps around.
As far as 16V goes, it was said above that the DC voltage is 19V but it was not stated at what mains voltage that was, so 16V caps is taking a chance that they may fail, maybe not straight away, but it may shorten their life.
I've heard that Caps can sound better when run near their working voltage, ie, a 16V cap run with 16V. IIRC there were some 20V Oscons. But you have to check the voltage after the bridge rectifier when the mains is at the legal maximum and when the unit is at it's full current requirement (as the voltage could sag in use) to know what overhead the caps need to have, ie, mains at 253V, voltage on caps maybe at 21v. Caps would have a rating of maybe 10% over, so a 20V could safely work at 22u. Or something like that. Check the data sheet for the caps you intend to buy.
As far as whether 1000u will do, as I don't own a dacapo I can only assume that the DAC will work fine. Just that the sound may be more harsh as more transformer ripple or other mains / PSU / DAC noise remains on the pre regulator power rails (eg ± 19V) and even when the oscilloscope shows no ripple after the regulators, changes before them still somehow have an effect on the musical sound quality.
Personally I've found that a DAC just keeps sounding better and better as you increase the reservoir. Transformers have a limit to what they stand before they can't supply enough current and saturate their core. But I've never found that a pair of 2000u is anywhere near enough which is why I have a 30,000u supply for mine and a 20,000u for the transport, both cases having black gates after the regulators and more black gates near the chips. I supplemented the OE transformer, which no longer feeds the DAC digital/filter/decoder, DAC Analogue or Analogue stage, with two for larger ones I had made that feed the two banks of caps.
As said above you can bank up 1000u's to make a much larger reservoir.
Frank I sent you an e-mail, did you receive it?
I've heard that Caps can sound better when run near their working voltage, ie, a 16V cap run with 16V. IIRC there were some 20V Oscons. But you have to check the voltage after the bridge rectifier when the mains is at the legal maximum and when the unit is at it's full current requirement (as the voltage could sag in use) to know what overhead the caps need to have, ie, mains at 253V, voltage on caps maybe at 21v. Caps would have a rating of maybe 10% over, so a 20V could safely work at 22u. Or something like that. Check the data sheet for the caps you intend to buy.
As far as whether 1000u will do, as I don't own a dacapo I can only assume that the DAC will work fine. Just that the sound may be more harsh as more transformer ripple or other mains / PSU / DAC noise remains on the pre regulator power rails (eg ± 19V) and even when the oscilloscope shows no ripple after the regulators, changes before them still somehow have an effect on the musical sound quality.
Personally I've found that a DAC just keeps sounding better and better as you increase the reservoir. Transformers have a limit to what they stand before they can't supply enough current and saturate their core. But I've never found that a pair of 2000u is anywhere near enough which is why I have a 30,000u supply for mine and a 20,000u for the transport, both cases having black gates after the regulators and more black gates near the chips. I supplemented the OE transformer, which no longer feeds the DAC digital/filter/decoder, DAC Analogue or Analogue stage, with two for larger ones I had made that feed the two banks of caps.
As said above you can bank up 1000u's to make a much larger reservoir.
Frank I sent you an e-mail, did you receive it?
ian
i think i understand. when you say 'bank' do you mean use twice the number of 1000uf 25v caps and place them where there is space in the dac or like that other guy did and get 4 or so 4700uf caps instaead of 8 2200uf ones?
sorry i didn't get your e-mail and i just checked and the reason is that the address i used when i signed up to this site is no longer in use. i have changed it to my current address now though!
thanks
frank
i think i understand. when you say 'bank' do you mean use twice the number of 1000uf 25v caps and place them where there is space in the dac or like that other guy did and get 4 or so 4700uf caps instaead of 8 2200uf ones?
sorry i didn't get your e-mail and i just checked and the reason is that the address i used when i signed up to this site is no longer in use. i have changed it to my current address now though!
thanks
frank
Hi all.
I was too anxious about experimenting further on the Da Capo, so I have started to mod the isomagic s700 which can be had for lot less money.
I started by upgrading the on board electrolytic caps.Most are used as storage reservoirs for the analogue stage. Again the usual suspects black gates and cerafines were used. I have not altered the original dc power supply to the dac. (as yet). Surprisingly, i heard minimal or almost no improvement in the sound despite burn in time!. So i turned my attention to the digital domain which almost certainly would be more sensitive to electrical interference. However, a lot of the components here ere surface mount and i did not want to start messing with these. Instead, as suggested to Ian in an earlier post, within a matter of minutes I had set up the dc/dc converter to 'purify' the electric feed to the digital board. See photo small rectangular block behind the dac. The power input wires were cut and the unit placed in its path.
Well this did work. Immediate improvement. Clarity, refinement, rock solid image stability were the most obvious findings. There was no alteration to the musicality and after burn in the bright edge i initially heard had gone. The degree of improvement was similar to the Da capo capacity conversion but this time the effect seemed to hit the entire picture in many different parameters.
This is such a simple mod, it involves nothing more than cutting a pair of wires and joining them up to the converter. The converters i use are from the USA- make Acopian. This one was a unity gain version. I have as previously mentioned obtained similar if less dramatic results from placing these in the electrical path of valve heaters and solid state preamps.
In comparison to the limited battery conversions that i have made, these dc/dc converters seem to capture a lot of the refinement found from battery supply but with perhaps an increase in snap and dynamics. I think the battery supply conversions may have also had a slightly more smoother and more relaxed presentation. Nonetheless both lower the noise floor and allow a better view of the picture.
I will replace the digital power input of the isomagic with a battery supply next just to see if mains power/dc dc converter is superior to lead acid battery power supply.
I was too anxious about experimenting further on the Da Capo, so I have started to mod the isomagic s700 which can be had for lot less money.
I started by upgrading the on board electrolytic caps.Most are used as storage reservoirs for the analogue stage. Again the usual suspects black gates and cerafines were used. I have not altered the original dc power supply to the dac. (as yet). Surprisingly, i heard minimal or almost no improvement in the sound despite burn in time!. So i turned my attention to the digital domain which almost certainly would be more sensitive to electrical interference. However, a lot of the components here ere surface mount and i did not want to start messing with these. Instead, as suggested to Ian in an earlier post, within a matter of minutes I had set up the dc/dc converter to 'purify' the electric feed to the digital board. See photo small rectangular block behind the dac. The power input wires were cut and the unit placed in its path.
Well this did work. Immediate improvement. Clarity, refinement, rock solid image stability were the most obvious findings. There was no alteration to the musicality and after burn in the bright edge i initially heard had gone. The degree of improvement was similar to the Da capo capacity conversion but this time the effect seemed to hit the entire picture in many different parameters.
This is such a simple mod, it involves nothing more than cutting a pair of wires and joining them up to the converter. The converters i use are from the USA- make Acopian. This one was a unity gain version. I have as previously mentioned obtained similar if less dramatic results from placing these in the electrical path of valve heaters and solid state preamps.
In comparison to the limited battery conversions that i have made, these dc/dc converters seem to capture a lot of the refinement found from battery supply but with perhaps an increase in snap and dynamics. I think the battery supply conversions may have also had a slightly more smoother and more relaxed presentation. Nonetheless both lower the noise floor and allow a better view of the picture.
I will replace the digital power input of the isomagic with a battery supply next just to see if mains power/dc dc converter is superior to lead acid battery power supply.
Attachments
Not tried the battery yet, but i do not think that is going to be necessary. This tweak now makes a difference in sound quality that I believe you would not even have imagined was possible with the DAcmagic s700.
I bypassed I believe 2 out of the three op amps in the analogue stage. Not sure why I could not by pass the first op amp except that the sa7350 must be used with a current output therefore needing an i/v converter. John no doubt will correct me on that. Nonetheless even removing two of the op amps makes a huge difference to the sound. Voltage was a little on the low side so being lazy and not wanting to build a valve output stage i just used one of my cheap diy valve preamplifiers (6SN7 with valve rectification). I had to use the entire voltage output of the preamp to get sufficient gain then fed this into the integrated amplifier.
What you notice immediately is excellent transparency like a multitude of veils had been lifted off the sound. Dynamics grow , and bass notes take on real meaning with tremendous power depth and detail to them. Bill Evans Piano now had excellent presence to it, it was palpable how much weight each note was struck with. Air and sound stage seemed to spring into life. I could go on. But then this is not new news as this has been done before to numerous DACs with similar results on various DIY sites, the details of which I have mentioned before. More importantly, the simple valve amplifier stage does not appear to add its own signature to the sound. The sound remains very neutral true to the original but with a lot lot more of the same thing.
I have the DA capo in my main system, but i have a strong feeling the S700 may well be better than it at this stage of development!!
What next?? battery supply, discrete i/v converter
I bypassed I believe 2 out of the three op amps in the analogue stage. Not sure why I could not by pass the first op amp except that the sa7350 must be used with a current output therefore needing an i/v converter. John no doubt will correct me on that. Nonetheless even removing two of the op amps makes a huge difference to the sound. Voltage was a little on the low side so being lazy and not wanting to build a valve output stage i just used one of my cheap diy valve preamplifiers (6SN7 with valve rectification). I had to use the entire voltage output of the preamp to get sufficient gain then fed this into the integrated amplifier.
What you notice immediately is excellent transparency like a multitude of veils had been lifted off the sound. Dynamics grow , and bass notes take on real meaning with tremendous power depth and detail to them. Bill Evans Piano now had excellent presence to it, it was palpable how much weight each note was struck with. Air and sound stage seemed to spring into life. I could go on. But then this is not new news as this has been done before to numerous DACs with similar results on various DIY sites, the details of which I have mentioned before. More importantly, the simple valve amplifier stage does not appear to add its own signature to the sound. The sound remains very neutral true to the original but with a lot lot more of the same thing.
I have the DA capo in my main system, but i have a strong feeling the S700 may well be better than it at this stage of development!!
What next?? battery supply, discrete i/v converter
The SAA7350 gives a voltage output.
The bit stream is converted through two internal op-amps per channel that give a dual differential output.
These two, I guess out of phase, feeds are then joined by another op-amp, which is IIRC according to the Philips data sheet, called a subtracter which also causes the signal voltage to be doubled.
On my 7350 DAC the subtracter is the first op-amp.
But it rather looks like the S700 keeps the dual differential all the way through the AD712 dual op-amp to the 2nd op-amp, the AD711, a single.
I guess they do their digital noise filtering in balanced mode.
Luke where did you extract a signal from? Pin 6 of the AD712? If so, that's un-filtered signal straight out of the 7350 with high frequency digital noise on it. Either way around you look at the dual, that's the inverting input pin. So you will have missed out the first op-amp in this case.
I gave up with my 7350 as it always had a receded midrange. "Sucked out" as some people call it. It makes me kind of depressed to listen to it. It rather lacks the musical part of the music. The S700 has exactly the same flaw. I got it to see if I could learn anything to improve mine, but when I listened to it I decided to not bother.
The bit stream is converted through two internal op-amps per channel that give a dual differential output.
These two, I guess out of phase, feeds are then joined by another op-amp, which is IIRC according to the Philips data sheet, called a subtracter which also causes the signal voltage to be doubled.
On my 7350 DAC the subtracter is the first op-amp.
But it rather looks like the S700 keeps the dual differential all the way through the AD712 dual op-amp to the 2nd op-amp, the AD711, a single.
I guess they do their digital noise filtering in balanced mode.
Luke where did you extract a signal from? Pin 6 of the AD712? If so, that's un-filtered signal straight out of the 7350 with high frequency digital noise on it. Either way around you look at the dual, that's the inverting input pin. So you will have missed out the first op-amp in this case.
I gave up with my 7350 as it always had a receded midrange. "Sucked out" as some people call it. It makes me kind of depressed to listen to it. It rather lacks the musical part of the music. The S700 has exactly the same flaw. I got it to see if I could learn anything to improve mine, but when I listened to it I decided to not bother.
Ian thanks for that i will reopen the unit tomorrow and check out the pin used. Did John not say on one of the forums that he felt the internal op amps of the SAA7350 were not very good. Did he not extract a current output from the DAC then i/v converted this externally in the Da Capo??
Good point about the midrange. I love jazz and classical and have not concentrated on vocals as much as i should have, however in previous outings with the Da Capo the midrange did match my reference, I will re audition concentrating on vocals.
Luke
ps whereabouts in London are you based??
Good point about the midrange. I love jazz and classical and have not concentrated on vocals as much as i should have, however in previous outings with the Da Capo the midrange did match my reference, I will re audition concentrating on vocals.
Luke
ps whereabouts in London are you based??
Kind of on-topic: Litaural display
Hi,
Since this is one of the longest running threads (and only thread about PT digital gear...), kind of on-topic.
I have owned a Cardinal/Ordinal (later DaCapo) combo in the past, enjoyed it very much. Upgraded to a CEC TL-1X and DAC, then "downgraded" my system and have been playing with a Litaural for the last 2 years...
My Litaural started to have one problem last week: the right digit (only that one) of the two digits indicating the track no. on the display has been permanently displaying an "8" (all segments on).
Whether I load a disc or not...
I've been told this is a VFD which fades over time, but that doesn't explain the sudden faulty single digit... Also, I can't imagine a bad solder joint after 10 years of flawless functionality.
Anyone got an idea? The player never experienced transport or shock for the last 2 years...
Hi,
Since this is one of the longest running threads (and only thread about PT digital gear...), kind of on-topic.
I have owned a Cardinal/Ordinal (later DaCapo) combo in the past, enjoyed it very much. Upgraded to a CEC TL-1X and DAC, then "downgraded" my system and have been playing with a Litaural for the last 2 years...
My Litaural started to have one problem last week: the right digit (only that one) of the two digits indicating the track no. on the display has been permanently displaying an "8" (all segments on).
Whether I load a disc or not...
I've been told this is a VFD which fades over time, but that doesn't explain the sudden faulty single digit... Also, I can't imagine a bad solder joint after 10 years of flawless functionality.
Anyone got an idea? The player never experienced transport or shock for the last 2 years...
Hi, this isn't a pink Triangle thread. It's a Dacapo thread. Primarily asking John Westlake about the Dacapo as he designed it and repairs them sometimes.
Re the Dacapo Cap change:
Panasonic FC
2200u 25V
ripple at 100KHz 2510mA
impedance at 100KHz 0.022
case size 35mm x 12.5mm
lead pitch 5mm, dia 0.8mm
£0.79 + VAT from CPC for 1 to 10 or £0.69 (£0.81 inc) for 10 to 50 pieces
Rubycon ZLH
2200u 25V
ripple at 100KHz 3450mA
impedance at 100KHz 0.013 Ohms
case size 30mm x 12.5mm
lead pitch 5mm, dia 0.6mm
£1.70 + VAT (£2.00 inc) from Farnell for 1 to 49 pieces.
So the Rubycon has a lot more current and a lot lower impedance.
CPC don't do the Rubycon ZLH, nor do RS or Rapid.
Nichicon KZ
1000u 25V
case size 35.5mm x 16mm
Lead pitch 7.5mm, dia 0.8mm
About £2.00 inc or less.
Low noise and low impedance / high current.
Luke,
Does the Dacapo have discrete DACS. I can't guess what that entails. Is it bitstream or multibit?
I don't want to say my location on a public board. If you enable your email I can say via that.
Re the Dacapo Cap change:
Panasonic FC
2200u 25V
ripple at 100KHz 2510mA
impedance at 100KHz 0.022
case size 35mm x 12.5mm
lead pitch 5mm, dia 0.8mm
£0.79 + VAT from CPC for 1 to 10 or £0.69 (£0.81 inc) for 10 to 50 pieces
Rubycon ZLH
2200u 25V
ripple at 100KHz 3450mA
impedance at 100KHz 0.013 Ohms
case size 30mm x 12.5mm
lead pitch 5mm, dia 0.6mm
£1.70 + VAT (£2.00 inc) from Farnell for 1 to 49 pieces.
So the Rubycon has a lot more current and a lot lower impedance.
CPC don't do the Rubycon ZLH, nor do RS or Rapid.
Nichicon KZ
1000u 25V
case size 35.5mm x 16mm
Lead pitch 7.5mm, dia 0.8mm
About £2.00 inc or less.
Low noise and low impedance / high current.
Luke,
I expect so, it seems to be a widely held belief.
I'm fairly sure it's not possible to take anything other than the analogue voltage out and from the internal op-amps of the 7350. (Apart from the 7350's digital output of course allowing it to be used as a noise shaper or digital filter to drive, eg, TDA1547 DAC.) The TDA1547, and I think also the 1305, is/are the same in having two internal op-amps converting the bitstream direct to an output. It's the way they work. I think they never have a I to make into a V. They have a tiny internal capacitor that is discharged via a switch at high frequency into the inverting or non inverting input of both op-amps. The op-amps being 'cross wired' so to make the differential outputs.
Does the Dacapo have discrete DACS. I can't guess what that entails. Is it bitstream or multibit?
I don't want to say my location on a public board. If you enable your email I can say via that.
Hi,
I'm sorry if my previous post was not suitable for this thread...
However, the Litaural uses the exact same drive and electronics as the Cardinal drive, and I'm pretty sure the discrete DAC is largely the same as a DaCapo. Furthermore, it was designed in 1997, which would place it in the same era.
I will post this in a separate thread and hope that someone can tell me something about the VFD used in the Litaural which is, oh what a coincidence, EXACTLY the same VFD as used in the Cardinal....
Cheers,
Ivar
I'm sorry if my previous post was not suitable for this thread...
However, the Litaural uses the exact same drive and electronics as the Cardinal drive, and I'm pretty sure the discrete DAC is largely the same as a DaCapo. Furthermore, it was designed in 1997, which would place it in the same era.
I will post this in a separate thread and hope that someone can tell me something about the VFD used in the Litaural which is, oh what a coincidence, EXACTLY the same VFD as used in the Cardinal....
Cheers,
Ivar