I use Brent's C1 - http://www.audioupgrades.co.uk/clocks.shtml
It's not far off a Clock4 in performance. At the very least it wants feeding from its own transformer, and preferably using a good voltage regulator.
I don't want to get into trouble for constantly recommending my friends' businesses, but the price/performance ratio is good and you buy from a small, friendly company (which I always think is cool).
http://www.audioupgrades.co.uk/psu.shtml
Those power supply kits are top-notch and convenient, but to save money you could source yourself any old transformer, rectifier bridge, smoothing cap and regulator. It depends if you want to do each step once, or twice when you later want the best
Simon
It's not far off a Clock4 in performance. At the very least it wants feeding from its own transformer, and preferably using a good voltage regulator.
I don't want to get into trouble for constantly recommending my friends' businesses, but the price/performance ratio is good and you buy from a small, friendly company (which I always think is cool).
http://www.audioupgrades.co.uk/psu.shtml
Those power supply kits are top-notch and convenient, but to save money you could source yourself any old transformer, rectifier bridge, smoothing cap and regulator. It depends if you want to do each step once, or twice when you later want the best
Simon
SimontY said:
If you want Cat5, I've got 2 platted cables I made several years ago after reading an article on tnt audio's site. I also have a load of spare shottky's (and some other bits) I ordered that I didn't use because I went for Hexfreds. Let me know if you're interested.
Not alot else to add, its already been said. Def the phono connectors is later on job and yes the tracks can be upset with repeated add/removal but then these players can be had for sub £20 on ebay if you keep your eye out! Its definately a good unit to learn on!
Best of luck
Ian
Attachments
SimontY said:Nice cable job!!
Mine's nicer!
And don't forget the Bitstream 1547 in a CD72mkII!
Plenty of DAC's to compare it to, but the 1541 is the only multibit chip so I think it's going to be quite different from the rest.
Ray
poynton said:
Ah yes, good point - the steel legs of the original RCAs don't take solder vey well.
6h5c said:
What can I say Ray?? Military precision!!
I make do with this:
Attachments
DOS revisited
nice cables!
Yesterday I finally managed to put the DOS inside my CD53. It works, but frankly I am bit dissapointed. I connected both output stages (modded opamp LM4562) and the discrete to the amp (yamaha a1020). I put some music and switched between both and couldnt hear the difference. Of course the sound is bloody good, but I couldn't tell... Maybe you have any ideas what should be better ??
The DOS is on a proto-board based on Ray's design. The differences are:
- LM317 / 337 PSU with protection diodes based on the datasheet. The caps are 100uF/35 pana fc, input is taken after the stock transformer, +-24V DC unregulated
-output caps are WIMA 10uF/16V MKS
-passive LPF is built with WIMAs MKP + 1% metall film resistors
The opamp output stage is LM4562 heavily decoupled with 470uF pana fm + wima bypass (0,1uF) + 220pF between CD24 & CD22 (a kind of bessel mod).
The other mods are caps and the Ray's clock for the DAC (very big gain!).
So please, someone tell me where could be the bottleneck ? (speakers are mission 783, speaker cables UTP as above but CAT7 and less AWG than a common patch cable, interconnects: some cheapos).
Greetings,
Pawel
P.S. Does it matter that both output stages run in parallel ??
nice cables!
Yesterday I finally managed to put the DOS inside my CD53. It works, but frankly I am bit dissapointed. I connected both output stages (modded opamp LM4562) and the discrete to the amp (yamaha a1020). I put some music and switched between both and couldnt hear the difference
. Of course the sound is bloody good, but I couldn't tell... Maybe you have any ideas what should be better ??The DOS is on a proto-board based on Ray's design. The differences are:
- LM317 / 337 PSU with protection diodes based on the datasheet. The caps are 100uF/35 pana fc, input is taken after the stock transformer, +-24V DC unregulated
-output caps are WIMA 10uF/16V MKS
-passive LPF is built with WIMAs MKP + 1% metall film resistors
The opamp output stage is LM4562 heavily decoupled with 470uF pana fm + wima bypass (0,1uF) + 220pF between CD24 & CD22 (a kind of bessel mod).
The other mods are caps and the Ray's clock for the DAC (very big gain!).
So please, someone tell me where could be the bottleneck ? (speakers are mission 783, speaker cables UTP as above but CAT7 and less AWG than a common patch cable, interconnects: some cheapos).
Greetings,
Pawel
P.S. Does it matter that both output stages run in parallel ??
Re: DOS revisited
Hi Pawel,
I think this is a major bottleneck!
You should try some decent cables, then you should clearly hear the difference. Unless your ears are low-fi
Never tried both output stages in parallel, but the opamp-stage doesn't load the DAC that much, so it shouldn't be a problem I guess. There will be more HF noise spreading around with more stuff connected to the DAC's PWM outputs. Best results are with short wiring to the DAC.
Ray
Hi Pawel,
I think this is a major bottleneck!
pzogal said:
You should try some decent cables, then you should clearly hear the difference. Unless your ears are low-fi
Never tried both output stages in parallel, but the opamp-stage doesn't load the DAC that much, so it shouldn't be a problem I guess. There will be more HF noise spreading around with more stuff connected to the DAC's PWM outputs. Best results are with short wiring to the DAC.
Ray
Thanks Ray,
about the ICs , it's gonna be DIY of course, I have some coaxial RG58 or RG59 in my mind, but have to order/buy them yet.
And how about a burn-in ? Is there any required with DOS ? And what about psu-caps ? ok, I use the same type in both circuits....
and the output wimas mks ? did anyone have experience with those ?
Greetings,
Pawel
about the ICs , it's gonna be DIY of course, I have some coaxial RG58 or RG59 in my mind, but have to order/buy them yet.
And how about a burn-in ? Is there any required with DOS ? And what about psu-caps ? ok, I use the same type in both circuits....
and the output wimas mks ? did anyone have experience with those ?
Greetings,
Pawel
Re: DOS revisited
The DOS can become superlative but you really need good components. My CD53 took several weeks burning until it reached optimum output sound. Maybe you should consider better regs for the psu and a better output cap (or bypass the existing one).
After burning period, there is no comparison between the DOS and the opamps.
Ricardo
Hi Pawelpzogal said:nice cables!
Yesterday I finally managed to put the DOS inside my CD53. It works, but frankly I am bit dissapointed. I connected both output stages (modded opamp LM4562) and the discrete to the amp (yamaha a1020). I put some music and switched between both and couldnt hear the difference
The DOS is on a proto-board based on Ray's design. The differences are:
- LM317 / 337 PSU with protection diodes based on the datasheet. The caps are 100uF/35 pana fc, input is taken after the stock transformer, +-24V DC unregulated
-output caps are WIMA 10uF/16V MKS
-passive LPF is built with WIMAs MKP + 1% metall film resistors
Greetings,
Pawel
P.S. Does it matter that both output stages run in parallel ??
The DOS can become superlative but you really need good components. My CD53 took several weeks burning until it reached optimum output sound. Maybe you should consider better regs for the psu and a better output cap (or bypass the existing one).
After burning period, there is no comparison between the DOS and the opamps.
Ricardo
I agree, the sound will change overtime, so you have to give it some time. The MKS output cap is not special, it's just a common MKT. You can make it do better with an MKP (Auricap/Mundorf!) or MKP/tinfoil (Audyn KP-SN or Multicap).
The Pana caps are good caps, but when you want to improve things, there's always Black Gates... The regs are a good start, but it's better to have something low-noise there, because the DOS is sensitive to supply-noise (it's single-ended). A simple shunt regulator with opamp will work, and is very easy to make, or use some of the commercially available regs (Tentlabs, Brent's SPower).
I would not recommend the use of RG58 coax for interconnects, unless the ones you have now are really crappy. I think you'll be better off with some solid silver wire or UTP.
Ray
The Pana caps are good caps, but when you want to improve things, there's always Black Gates... The regs are a good start, but it's better to have something low-noise there, because the DOS is sensitive to supply-noise (it's single-ended). A simple shunt regulator with opamp will work, and is very easy to make, or use some of the commercially available regs (Tentlabs, Brent's SPower).
I would not recommend the use of RG58 coax for interconnects, unless the ones you have now are really crappy
. I think you'll be better off with some solid silver wire or UTP.Ray
Hi,
Not every subtle nuance of an improvement will be obvious on a quick A-B listen, but those that ought to be present with your change:
* dynamics
* sound-stage: laid-back or more upfront
* bass weight and depth
As has been pointed out the components may be important. I haven't tried it with "basic" parts so it's hard for me to say. I did change the regulators from standard types to S Powers on mine and heard a totally different presentation - fresher, more clarity, especially noticable in the treble.
Things that could hold back the sound or your perception of it:
* expectations being too high
* not being sensitive to the type of change (could be related to above point)
* background noise in the room
* mains noise
* poor speakers
* poor interconnect
* lack of power supply and/or clock upgrades in the player
* poor amplifier(s)
* poor test music (e.g. not natural/acoustic and/or over-compressed/limited/clipped/EQ'd etc.)
* lack of familiarity with test music
* other "veiling" items, e.g. switch-box(?)
* poor room acoustics (inappropriate quantity of diffusion, uneven bass, too strong first-reflections etc.)
There's so much that could stop you hearing changes, so I hope this gets you thinking.
Most DIY wires won't help you all that much, you need to look beyond what is commonplace - most people have wiring that is sub-optimal.
For a good value interconnect you may wish to try enamelled copper wire in a twisted pair, with Eichmann Bullet plugs or CMC plugs. Coax is not suitable for interconnects, as it seems to cloud detail. Plated wire is also a no-no. Twisted or braided wire, or foil all seem to sound consistently good to my ears.
Simon
Not every subtle nuance of an improvement will be obvious on a quick A-B listen, but those that ought to be present with your change:
* dynamics
* sound-stage: laid-back or more upfront
* bass weight and depth
As has been pointed out the components may be important. I haven't tried it with "basic" parts so it's hard for me to say. I did change the regulators from standard types to S Powers on mine and heard a totally different presentation - fresher, more clarity, especially noticable in the treble.
Things that could hold back the sound or your perception of it:
* expectations being too high
* not being sensitive to the type of change (could be related to above point)
* background noise in the room
* mains noise
* poor speakers
* poor interconnect
* lack of power supply and/or clock upgrades in the player
* poor amplifier(s)
* poor test music (e.g. not natural/acoustic and/or over-compressed/limited/clipped/EQ'd etc.)
* lack of familiarity with test music
* other "veiling" items, e.g. switch-box(?)
* poor room acoustics (inappropriate quantity of diffusion, uneven bass, too strong first-reflections etc.)
There's so much that could stop you hearing changes, so I hope this gets you thinking.
Most DIY wires won't help you all that much, you need to look beyond what is commonplace - most people have wiring that is sub-optimal.
For a good value interconnect you may wish to try enamelled copper wire in a twisted pair, with Eichmann Bullet plugs or CMC plugs. Coax is not suitable for interconnects, as it seems to cloud detail. Plated wire is also a no-no. Twisted or braided wire, or foil all seem to sound consistently good to my ears.
Simon
Hi Ray & Carlos
ok, Ive just bypassed the mks with a mkp cap (available in the drawer), playing dire straits (making movies) right now
I dont deny, the sound is great... but with BGs, similar improvement would be having them at the opamps, wouldnt it ?
Ray:
and why should be RG58 or rather RG59 (lower capacitance) be worse than UTP ? the ICs are not the cheapest ones but nothing special, they are some no name "premium" ones from a local electronic shop - sporting some pseudo high-endish looks for 4€/m
about shunt regs, could you recommend some diy page on that?
Pawel
I may have lo-fi ears but not my wife, she has high-end ones
ok, Ive just bypassed the mks with a mkp cap (available in the drawer), playing dire straits (making movies) right now
I dont deny, the sound is great... but with BGs, similar improvement would be having them at the opamps, wouldnt it ?
Ray:
and why should be RG58 or rather RG59 (lower capacitance) be worse than UTP ? the ICs are not the cheapest ones but nothing special, they are some no name "premium" ones from a local electronic shop - sporting some pseudo high-endish looks for 4€/m
about shunt regs, could you recommend some diy page on that?
Pawel
I may have lo-fi ears but not my wife, she has high-end ones
Re: DOS revisited
I'm sure the fact that both stages are run i parallel will definately not be helping!
As previously stated, the DOS should have very good decoupling caps (i have blackgates) and the output dc blocking cap should also be of high quality.
The quality of the PSU is also of paramount importance in the DOS. Any noise on the supply WILL be transfered into the stage.
The DOS is crying out for quality components and good interconnects IMHO.
There are lots of other tweeks that are required to fully realise the potential of the DOS.
Even if the improvements are being clouded, I would expect you to pick up a tonal change with the new output stage.
Ian
pzogal said:
I'm sure the fact that both stages are run i parallel will definately not be helping!
As previously stated, the DOS should have very good decoupling caps (i have blackgates) and the output dc blocking cap should also be of high quality.
The quality of the PSU is also of paramount importance in the DOS. Any noise on the supply WILL be transfered into the stage.
The DOS is crying out for quality components and good interconnects IMHO.
There are lots of other tweeks that are required to fully realise the potential of the DOS.
Even if the improvements are being clouded, I would expect you to pick up a tonal change with the new output stage.
Ian