I was a bit rough I agree. Sorry for that KP11520weissi said:
I blame the beer 
As you say weissi, it's a good thing to paralell capacitors and also use elyths together with film. But when it comes to 5V You can't have to fat elyth after the bridge. If you think something else, OK, then we have different opinions.
I am not a guru but I have at least worked at a repair shop for some years in the -80's. I would say that changing the decoupling caps around every IC and in the PSU, and also raise their values is a good modification for any CD player.
A different way to go
KP11520, weissi, Radiomann62,
There is a lot of contradictory with the information here. It is not a simple matter, so how about taking the following measures:
1.
Record a musician playing a natural/acoustic instrument, in the same room where your HiFi is mounted. Record his/her playing on a DAT, or even on a minidisk (directly, with no Mixer and no any sound processors!!). It should be a good & natural sounding wind instrument, like Oboe or Clarinet. A Violin & Violinist would be excellent as well. Use a good device & a Stereo microphone (should be good enough for now).
While recording, monitor it on Headphones, compare it to the "live" and be sure that you got a good and reliable “source”. Experiment with it until you are SURE that you got the true colours, dynamic, room-acoustic etc. It is possible to do all this with some amount of time & effort. It is actually essential.
2.
Listen carefully that the sound-quality which comes from the DAT/minidisk through the Headphones is not being changed/altered when you connect the device to your Audio-Line (preamp) thought the devices line-out/PreAmp line-in section! The sound comparison should show 1:1 results. If not, don’t go yet to the Digital domain. Instead, look for the right decoupling caps in the PSU and then check all those which are connected to (or around) you OpAmps (or discrete, whatsoever). The process of balancing your PreAmp might take hundred of hours until you’ll get it right. I am afraid that this process is unavoidable.
3.
Now copy the above recorded music digitally into a recordable CD (use a good cable and don’t convert it D/A and A/D if only possible). Play now the recorded CD (your new source) through your CD player/DAC. Still sounds the same?? Very probably – not!.
So now is the time to experiment with caps & decoupling in the Digital domain. Start always with the PSU and then play around the ICs. Be warned: It is a lot of consequent work!
There was no other way to go: Commercial CDs are not meant to be the sources for balancing our Hi-Fi systems. They can’t do this, and anyone who thinks that I am wrong here is very welcome to continue doing exactly this.
My own conclusion after years of trying: Larger decoupling caps in the PreAmp and DAC PSUs did not degrade the audio frequency. They did however challenged the further development-necessity of the entire DAC, the I/V, the amplification system... The “inner balance” of what was before “good” has been changed. It is a natural part of a growing up process.
Other conclusion: Using too big decoupling caps in the Audio-Line can indeed destroy the highs! The sound becomes out of phase and sometimes terrible. In my case, there was no any transparency any more, but rather just a very “bold” sound. I would be careful with assumption that “raise their values is a good modification for any CD player”.
One example here: some 14 years old 470uf, 16v, Philips decupling caps sounded too crispy, still they have been much better then the 680uf new Panassonic FC or even the 1100uF Panasonic EC which was a true disaster for the sound!!!
By then, I started using OsCons 100uf around the Digital ICs, with a combination of only few 470uf & OsCons 100uf in the PreAmp. I am keeping experimenting exactly ere, still surprised myself with the fantastic results of the above mentioned process.
When one is looking for the natural sound, it becomes a hard “fight”. My experience tells that many of the most respected Hi-End developers & Engineers which we all “worship” follows their wonderful imagination, but rarely the natural sound.
Many people do not hear natural sounds anyhow; but even if one hears it in a live-concert, he will need it 1:1 at home if he wishes to balance his system appropriately. Our “sound memory” (as wonderful as it is) might long 20 seconds when it come to details, and then - that’s it.
Ironicaly, Oone can obtain a natural sound by using a DAT recorder or a minidisk, while our great Hi-Fi systems might well supply us with something completely different.
Balance your System accordingly and you will be surprised how good many of your CDs will be sounding suddenly.
KP11520, weissi, Radiomann62,
There is a lot of contradictory with the information here. It is not a simple matter, so how about taking the following measures:
1.
Record a musician playing a natural/acoustic instrument, in the same room where your HiFi is mounted. Record his/her playing on a DAT, or even on a minidisk (directly, with no Mixer and no any sound processors!!). It should be a good & natural sounding wind instrument, like Oboe or Clarinet. A Violin & Violinist would be excellent as well. Use a good device & a Stereo microphone (should be good enough for now).
While recording, monitor it on Headphones, compare it to the "live" and be sure that you got a good and reliable “source”. Experiment with it until you are SURE that you got the true colours, dynamic, room-acoustic etc. It is possible to do all this with some amount of time & effort. It is actually essential.
2.
Listen carefully that the sound-quality which comes from the DAT/minidisk through the Headphones is not being changed/altered when you connect the device to your Audio-Line (preamp) thought the devices line-out/PreAmp line-in section! The sound comparison should show 1:1 results. If not, don’t go yet to the Digital domain. Instead, look for the right decoupling caps in the PSU and then check all those which are connected to (or around) you OpAmps (or discrete, whatsoever). The process of balancing your PreAmp might take hundred of hours until you’ll get it right. I am afraid that this process is unavoidable.
3.
Now copy the above recorded music digitally into a recordable CD (use a good cable and don’t convert it D/A and A/D if only possible). Play now the recorded CD (your new source) through your CD player/DAC. Still sounds the same?? Very probably – not!.
So now is the time to experiment with caps & decoupling in the Digital domain. Start always with the PSU and then play around the ICs. Be warned: It is a lot of consequent work!
There was no other way to go: Commercial CDs are not meant to be the sources for balancing our Hi-Fi systems. They can’t do this, and anyone who thinks that I am wrong here is very welcome to continue doing exactly this.
My own conclusion after years of trying: Larger decoupling caps in the PreAmp and DAC PSUs did not degrade the audio frequency. They did however challenged the further development-necessity of the entire DAC, the I/V, the amplification system... The “inner balance” of what was before “good” has been changed. It is a natural part of a growing up process.
Other conclusion: Using too big decoupling caps in the Audio-Line can indeed destroy the highs! The sound becomes out of phase and sometimes terrible. In my case, there was no any transparency any more, but rather just a very “bold” sound. I would be careful with assumption that “raise their values is a good modification for any CD player”.
One example here: some 14 years old 470uf, 16v, Philips decupling caps sounded too crispy, still they have been much better then the 680uf new Panassonic FC or even the 1100uF Panasonic EC which was a true disaster for the sound!!!
By then, I started using OsCons 100uf around the Digital ICs, with a combination of only few 470uf & OsCons 100uf in the PreAmp. I am keeping experimenting exactly ere, still surprised myself with the fantastic results of the above mentioned process.
When one is looking for the natural sound, it becomes a hard “fight”. My experience tells that many of the most respected Hi-End developers & Engineers which we all “worship” follows their wonderful imagination, but rarely the natural sound.
Many people do not hear natural sounds anyhow; but even if one hears it in a live-concert, he will need it 1:1 at home if he wishes to balance his system appropriately. Our “sound memory” (as wonderful as it is) might long 20 seconds when it come to details, and then - that’s it.
Ironicaly, Oone can obtain a natural sound by using a DAT recorder or a minidisk, while our great Hi-Fi systems might well supply us with something completely different.
Balance your System accordingly and you will be surprised how good many of your CDs will be sounding suddenly.
This kind of gets to the core of it. If the baseline is the sound of a tube preamp then virtually every opamp and most discrete SS based preamps are going to sound different and probably "worse". If tube sound is your preference then you should stick with it. I believe that if you search the web enough you will find tube based DACs and CD players in both off-the-shelf and kit form.
stoolpigeon said:
This is true of course! I should have indeed mention, that in order to overcome this, we where doing the work in two different "locations" in a quite long room (but not too long):
The player performs on the opposite side of the HiFi, which means - he was facing the (closed) HiFi System, so that the microphone is located near the Hifi / between the Loudspeakers.
In this way, later by the playback, I got the feeling that the Mic. and the Loudspeakers are "corresponding" and that at the end, they produces the sound as it is coming from the same direction - so that one don't have this effect of double acoustic, or at least have it minimally.
I personally chose the Clarinet, which can play very soft but also very loud. One has to compare it several times of course; it is quite a long approach but all in all - it works
irgendjemand , I think you bring up some good points. If there's a commercial CD that's really suitable for evaluating a system, I haven't found it yet. Where we diverge is on what constitutes an adequate bypass. IMO, bypass caps are extremely important, especially with the higher BW opamps people use today. If the bypassing isn't done right, all sorts of odd conclusions can be reached about the supposed sound of particular parts. I'm a big fan of OSCONs- they have very low ESR and are effective to quite high frequencies. *But*, I've also found they aren't sufficient all by themselves as a bypass for modern opamps, even positioned very close. One still needs small ceramic or film caps right next to the opamp. FWIW, I'm usually happy with 0.47uF stacked film caps, but YMMV. Lead or trace length quickly defeats the purpose of a bypass, plus OSCONs alone aren't effective at frequencies where many opamps still have significant gain. IMO, as long as one is hearing differences by changing bypass caps, the bypass job, the layout, or some aspect of the surrounding design, is inadequate.
SP (a second remark)
All I can tell you is that since once tuning the DAC after the Clarinet like this, whenever I take it with me (to different locations) it always performs there reliable. The Live feeling has never disappeared since.
I trust that our sensuality "knows" to distinguish between the room-acoustic and the sound being produced "per-se". But, this is really a very difficult topic.
As for me, even though it is controversial, I did not find a better way to "study" and "memorise" the sound which I want to hear in the system's-room then in this way. One should of course record the instrument and have the playback being done in two different rooms. May be, it is my "long" room which allow this as well.
Nevertheless, the approach itself (of comparing a live instrument with the HiFi) should never be put aside.
All I can tell you is that since once tuning the DAC after the Clarinet like this, whenever I take it with me (to different locations) it always performs there reliable. The Live feeling has never disappeared since.
I trust that our sensuality "knows" to distinguish between the room-acoustic and the sound being produced "per-se". But, this is really a very difficult topic.
As for me, even though it is controversial, I did not find a better way to "study" and "memorise" the sound which I want to hear in the system's-room then in this way. One should of course record the instrument and have the playback being done in two different rooms. May be, it is my "long" room which allow this as well.
Nevertheless, the approach itself (of comparing a live instrument with the HiFi) should never be put aside.
Hi Conrad and irgendjemand,
The op amp decoupling, I would think, could be tried sucessfuly from the data sheet info and hopefully that is ok for me to continue thinking that too big or small could be a problem.. Bypassing here, is an art or a lot of experience. What I do think about bypassing is: what ever small bypass value (this varies op amp to op amp) you use on the op amps, soldering directly to the pin is a best policy (or closer, LOL).
Now about those PSUs and DACs, bigger caps is always better? Bypassing doesn't do anything positive or isn't required when using an appropriate sized cap or larger?
"IMO, as long as one is hearing differences by changing bypass caps, the bypass job, the layout, or some aspect of the surrounding design, is inadequate."
Conrad, I would like to understand this statement a little beter, would you mind just a little more on this? The way you always do so well when asked!
Thanks guys!
Regards//Keith
The op amp decoupling, I would think, could be tried sucessfuly from the data sheet info and hopefully that is ok for me to continue thinking that too big or small could be a problem.. Bypassing here, is an art or a lot of experience. What I do think about bypassing is: what ever small bypass value (this varies op amp to op amp) you use on the op amps, soldering directly to the pin is a best policy (or closer, LOL).
Now about those PSUs and DACs, bigger caps is always better? Bypassing doesn't do anything positive or isn't required when using an appropriate sized cap or larger?
"IMO, as long as one is hearing differences by changing bypass caps, the bypass job, the layout, or some aspect of the surrounding design, is inadequate."
Conrad, I would like to understand this statement a little beter, would you mind just a little more on this? The way you always do so well when asked!
Thanks guys!
Regards//Keith
The purpose of bypass caps is to provide a low impedance source of current right at the op-amp, or any amp for that matter. That low impedance condition should be satisfied to (and a bit beyond) whatever frequency the op-amp can respond to. The faster the op-amp, the better bypassing you need for stability, and the better bypassing you need to meet other data sheet specs like slew rate. That condition can be met with a variety of different parts, but once it's been met, there shouldn't be sonic differences between whatever methods are used. I'm not saying it's easy. The pcb layout needs to be well thought out, and the design needs to play to the strengths of the parts chosen. They make hundreds of different op-amps for a reason, so blindly swapping op-amps without considering the whole rest of the circuit, particularly whether it's designed to handle a higher BW part, is madness. A few hours looking at different bypass caps on a vector impedance meter is revealing beyond belief, as is changing the lead length by a half inch or so. Always remember that good audio op-amps will usually have a GBP of 4-20 MHz, so you have to think way beyond normal audio practices. IMHO, if you're getting different results with various bypass caps, chances are that none of them are really adequate to the task- or the layout is preventing them from doing their job.
John,
It seems from your remarks that you prefer tube sound to silicone, like I do. If you have some courage and experience in working with tube stuff (dangerous HV, special layout) I recommend you to try this transformer/tube I/V circuit:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=100297
The pair of Lundahl transformers you get for a little more than 100 EUR, but the rest costs nearly nothing (Tesla and Tungsram tubes are anywhere for peanuts in our country ), and you'll get a REALLY fantastic sound that is in a different league than any opamp. (Interestingly I purchased the Lundahls from Belgium for less than it would have been from the factory).
Laszlo
It seems from your remarks that you prefer tube sound to silicone, like I do. If you have some courage and experience in working with tube stuff (dangerous HV, special layout) I recommend you to try this transformer/tube I/V circuit:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=100297
The pair of Lundahl transformers you get for a little more than 100 EUR, but the rest costs nearly nothing (Tesla and Tungsram tubes are anywhere for peanuts in our country
), and you'll get a REALLY fantastic sound that is in a different league than any opamp. (Interestingly I purchased the Lundahls from Belgium for less than it would have been from the factory).Laszlo
Well when you stop being happy with Op-amps you can always try Erno Borbely discrete J-fet op-amp stages . With my TDA 1541 S2 Dac I'm using 5 Ohm i/V passive resistor and 1uF cap in parallel to filter HF nastines and 419 phono preamp boards (without Riaa EQ ) as a 40dB line stage - absolutely ****...enn fabulous .
Regards, L
Regards, L
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.