Shocking! I can recommend my setup to you which is able to reproduce highest resolution and any differences in sound! Nothing special except the Lightspeed attenuator and the 3-way-speakers with AMT!
I can't understand why a potentiometer is an improvement in sound quality? It always degrade sound, regardless of which type (carbon or plastic) or manufacturer (Alps, Noble, TKD, Panasonic...). Lightspeed (optocoupler) is superior!
I think there is much room for improvement in respect of the used DAC. I tinkered a little bit with TDA1543 but respectless of the mods there rests a lack of details. So, now you have a great transport and you'll loose details and transparency with the old fashioned DAC that smoothens the sound. Therefore you could stay with your old setup.
I just got a PCM1793 DAC which is far above the TDA1543 in almost any parameter (not technical but audible) except the warmth in the mids.Are remote control functions now included into the device? Is it possible to display the play time of a song? That would be a nice thing. Perhaps switchable to folder/ song nr.
Are there any plans to sell just the assembled PCB without case?
Hi Lars,
there was no need for a buffer after I changed the I/V resistors to 870 ohm because input impedance of the Lightspeed is around 8k. I further compared the TDA1543 DAC with my active preamp (KR Audio) against AK4396 (emu 0404USB), PCM1607, PCM56 and PCM1793 DAC. For my taste it is a little bit too smooth and less dynamic. For a passive pre the output voltage with only I/V resistors is too little. Perhaps 4 TDA1543 in parallel could heal it.
Shocking! I can recommend my setup to you which is able to reproduce highest resolution and any differences in sound! Nothing special except the Lightspeed attenuator and the 3-way-speakers with AMT!
I can't understand why a potentiometer is an improvement in sound quality? It always degrade sound, regardless of which type (carbon or plastic) or manufacturer (Alps, Noble, TKD, Panasonic...). Lightspeed (optocoupler) is superior!
I think there is much room for improvement in respect of the used DAC. I tinkered a little bit with TDA1543 but respectless of the mods there rests a lack of details. So, now you have a great transport and you'll loose details and transparency with the old fashioned DAC that smoothens the sound. Therefore you could stay with your old setup.
Are remote control functions now included into the device? Is it possible to display the play time of a song? That would be a nice thing. Perhaps switchable to folder/ song nr.
Are there any plans to sell just the assembled PCB without case?
Even the Litespeed adds a resistive element to the path.
From an impedance perspective it is not the perfect solution either.
Don't take me wrong here - I am not saying it is a bad solution.
BTW: Did you follow the Ultimate DAC thread? This way you might get an idea what's possible with these "old fashioned" devices. I also own a Buffalo. I went back to my "old fashioned" 1543 setup for now. From a resolution perspective it is not better - it is much worse to be precise - however - somehow the overtone/harmonic spectrum seem to be much more coherent on the 1543 though, which in turn makes in instrument sounds like an instrument. As usual it is always about compromises.
If there is a DAC out there which can do that - let me know. ( ??PCM1704 in NONOS config??)
Having the right resistor on the output of a 1543 will make a huge difference in terms of slew rate. The same for the right caps in the PS decoupling, low ESR power sources, the "famous "EC-Designs I2S attenuation. etc. But I guess that's nothing new to you.
MINI PCM1793 DAC
It's this little red head. These guys of QLSHIFI are great. I did just get it on Friday so it isn't really acclimated yet. I'll see how sound develops. Has the datasheet output stage with OPA2134. I am considering to marry it with QA550 via I2S. Johns' solution is more
but 
.A transformer would be interesting but will cost more than the little gadget!
Hmmh. Is it that easy? I guess you are just talking about cabling. Don't you?
Did you follow the level attenuation discussion with ec-designs?
I guess you also assume a perfect transmitter feeding the bits onto the I2S link.
I am just talking about cabling - the original poster gave no detail on DACs etc.
EcDesigns is very specific to the TDAXXX range of DACs wher he has used Henk's idea (first muted on DIYA) to bias the signal around 1.2V AFAIR. His idea of jitter attenuation, he dropped (as it was too picky) but I see now it's back - to be honest, he's losing credibility with me - he redesigned a new amplifier & speakers in the weeks that he wasn't posting here - hard to believe that it's optimal
Also, I keep asking him to get the unit tested for jitter (as this is what the whole point of the development is about) but so far no jitter measures!
Quote : jkeny;1919427] - to be honest, he's losing credibility with me - he redesigned a new amplifier & speakers in the weeks that he wasn't posting here - hard to believe that it's optimal
Unquote
John''s father had a couple op weeks a ago a stroke-cva and has been taken to hospital. That is for John very time consuming and not optimal.
Onno
Unquote
John''s father had a couple op weeks a ago a stroke-cva and has been taken to hospital. That is for John very time consuming and not optimal.
Onno
Last edited:
Quote : jkeny;1919427] - to be honest, he's losing credibility with me - he redesigned a new amplifier & speakers in the weeks that he wasn't posting here - hard to believe that it's optimal
Unquote
John''s father had a couple op weeks a ago a stroke-cva and has been taken to hospital. That is for John very time consuming and not optimal.
Onno
I wasn't aware of that - I wish his father & all his family my kindest regards & a speedy recovery.
I wasn't talking about any delay (I'm not really in the market for this product) but just the development of new amp, speakers & SD player in such a short time seems superhuman
Come on jkeny. John was talking about tweaking.
If you would know John you would know how he works. He is building his prototypes in "free-air-style wiring" - what I'd call artwork. That'll take him half an hour.
Regarding measurements: Would you issue measurements on a "work-in-progress" product? ( If you read the Ultimate-DAC story you'll realize that he will post his stuff sooner or later. If it makes sense
it's another issue. Would you compare the measurements/specs of a Sabre and a 1543? No. It doesn't make sense.)
(Sidenote: I guess you've got all your measurements supplied by Musiland before you purchased your DAC recently - don't you? )
I think John is one of the very very few commercial people around who is spreading his knowledge around to feed the dogs. So please -- stay on the fair side.
If you would know John you would know how he works. He is building his prototypes in "free-air-style wiring" - what I'd call artwork.
That'll take him half an hour.Regarding measurements: Would you issue measurements on a "work-in-progress" product? ( If you read the Ultimate-DAC story you'll realize that he will post his stuff sooner or later. If it makes sense
it's another issue. Would you compare the measurements/specs of a Sabre and a 1543? No. It doesn't make sense.)
(Sidenote: I guess you've got all your measurements supplied by Musiland before you purchased your DAC recently - don't you?
)I think John is one of the very very few commercial people around who is spreading his knowledge around to feed the dogs. So please -- stay on the fair side.
Last edited:
Did you follow the level attenuation discussion with ec-designs?
Can you direct me to the post no?
What I like to do is to interface a source media with I2S and DAC with input I2S.
Come on jkeny. John was talking about tweaking.
If you would know John you would know how he works. He is building his prototypes in "free-air-style wiring" - what I'd call artwork.
Regarding measurements: Would you issue measurements on a "work-in-progress" product? ( If you read the Ultimate-DAC story you'll realize that he will post his stuff sooner or later. If it makes sense
it's another issue. Would you compare the measurements/specs of a Sabre and a 1543? No. It doesn't make sense.)
(Sidenote: I guess you've got all your measurements supplied by Musiland before you purchased your DAC recently - don't you?
I think John is one of the very very few commercial people around who is spreading his knowledge around to feed the dogs. So please -- stay on the fair side.
Ok, soundcheck, I hear what you're saying & I know you have visited him & heard his system so you have far better knowledge than I of the inner workings & have heard the product.
All I'm saying is that reduced jitter is the reason for this design and so far no measurements at all to show the ball park that the jitter is in? Just a statement that testing with music & critical listening shows the low jitter. I'm not disputing this or casting any doubt at John's integrity here but in order to invest XXX hundreds of dollars, something more than those jitter evaluations are needed, I'm sure you can understand. Also from a technical persepective it would be interesting to know what had the greatest effect on reducing the jitter as this design is for TDAXXX family of DACs only - some techniques may be applicable to other DACs.
I didn't demand a jitter figure from Musiland (although their marketing said 1ppm hehe!) because it was only $80 & it wasn't developed with low jitter as it's selling point - different criteria, I'm sure you'll agree
As it turns out I believe the design is low jitter but this is from listeningI'm trying to be fair & don't wish to stir anything up - I can accept his statement that he has achieved low jitter but less subjective evaluation criteria are needed, I feel. Maybe I've been overly sensitised by snake oil salesmen?
It is somewhere in here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79452&page=302
Don't ask me to look it up.
Maxlorenz implemented it, perhaps he'll support later on.- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.