Excuse me........
Who's folded cascode???????
Never compared the '63 to the '1704.
'1704 vs. '1862.
The '1862 was the last multibit that AD made, so that only leaves B-B as a supplier of anything higher than 20 bits.
Did compare the '1702 vs the '1862. Yeah, they sounded a bit diferent. Not enough for me to lose sleep over. I had lots of '1862s around (still do), so we made few '1702 versions. Just a few for the hell of it.
Filters:
No way to shove a PMI one in my designs (maybe I shoud have taken that job offer........). Anyway....we were able to compare a CDP with that HDCD crap to some of ours. Once I replaced the stock clock with a better one, they were close. As I refined the modified clock, the one with the '1704 was better. The first clock had a bit of sibilance.That went away with the better one.
The HDCD was more veiled, and on some really nasty sounding CDs, it mucked things up enough as to make some people feel that is was more pleasing to listen to/suffer through.
Long story short:
Get rid of op-amps.
Get a good clock.
The rest contributes less.
Jocko
Who's folded cascode???????
Never compared the '63 to the '1704.
'1704 vs. '1862.
The '1862 was the last multibit that AD made, so that only leaves B-B as a supplier of anything higher than 20 bits.
Did compare the '1702 vs the '1862. Yeah, they sounded a bit diferent. Not enough for me to lose sleep over. I had lots of '1862s around (still do), so we made few '1702 versions. Just a few for the hell of it.
Filters:
No way to shove a PMI one in my designs (maybe I shoud have taken that job offer........). Anyway....we were able to compare a CDP with that HDCD crap to some of ours. Once I replaced the stock clock with a better one, they were close. As I refined the modified clock, the one with the '1704 was better. The first clock had a bit of sibilance.That went away with the better one.
The HDCD was more veiled, and on some really nasty sounding CDs, it mucked things up enough as to make some people feel that is was more pleasing to listen to/suffer through.
Long story short:
Get rid of op-amps.
Get a good clock.
The rest contributes less.
Jocko
Re: Excuse me........
Geeze, I think it must have been ours
When I first saw your GB stage here we had already
implemented and tested about 10 different topology iterations
of this I-V approach
Me neither, however I have a feeling the newer
dacs such as AD1955 may be better anyway.
I have a proto nearing completion with 3 x AD1853
in parallel just to see how these newer generation go
against the old "Chevs" such as 1541A/S1 and 63K
That was our feeling also. Did you use slow rolloff on
DF1704 ?
Yeah, I think that PMD100 just has something about it that
is unmusical. This is playing non HDCD discs.
And then we've got the latest batch of super ASRC's such as
AD1896.... life gets too bloody complicated.
Next life it's definately going to be collecting stamps
Terry
Jocko Homo said:
Geeze, I think it must have been ours
When I first saw your GB stage here we had already
implemented and tested about 10 different topology iterations
of this I-V approach
Me neither, however I have a feeling the newer
dacs such as AD1955 may be better anyway.
I have a proto nearing completion with 3 x AD1853
in parallel just to see how these newer generation go
against the old "Chevs" such as 1541A/S1 and 63K
That was our feeling also. Did you use slow rolloff on
DF1704 ?
Yeah, I think that PMD100 just has something about it that
is unmusical. This is playing non HDCD discs.
And then we've got the latest batch of super ASRC's such as
AD1896.... life gets too bloody complicated.
Next life it's definately going to be collecting stamps
Terry
Re: Re: Excuse me........
I think this schematic is older than the Net itself... wouldn't be surprised to find some in Tektronix schematics from the sixties...
I'm very interested un that ! Can you post your progress ?
Thanks !
Terry Demol said:
Geeze, I think it must have been ours
When I first saw your GB stage here we had already
implemented and tested about 10 different topology iterations
of this I-V approach
I think this schematic is older than the Net itself... wouldn't be surprised to find some in Tektronix schematics from the sixties...
I'm very interested un that ! Can you post your progress ?
Thanks !
Never tried the slow roll-off. Did you???
FWIIW:
Most of the I/V desings that you guys are talking about here are variations of mine......which was done back in '89. The guys that you are refering to have corresponded with me long enough to get most of the hints.
So.....they get the credit for having the initiative and imagination to build on what info that I have supplied them.
I will claim the credit for having one of the first CDPs on the market that used one. At the time, there were about 3-4 other companies that used something similar. No idea who was actually first.
A dealer in Chicago thinks that he gave Mark Brasfield (MSB Designs) the idea for his by telling him about mine. Who knows, or cares.......
Jocko
FWIIW:
Most of the I/V desings that you guys are talking about here are variations of mine......which was done back in '89. The guys that you are refering to have corresponded with me long enough to get most of the hints.
So.....they get the credit for having the initiative and imagination to build on what info that I have supplied them.
I will claim the credit for having one of the first CDPs on the market that used one. At the time, there were about 3-4 other companies that used something similar. No idea who was actually first.
A dealer in Chicago thinks that he gave Mark Brasfield (MSB Designs) the idea for his by telling him about mine. Who knows, or cares.......
Jocko
Ok, so have we settled on the PCM1704?
How about a really simple PCB design for this DAC, one which people could add their own I/V stage and analog filtering to?
I think there would be a lot of interest in a board with a very simple, modern DAC design which they could build into either an existing CDP or as a stand alone unit.
How about a really simple PCB design for this DAC, one which people could add their own I/V stage and analog filtering to?
I think there would be a lot of interest in a board with a very simple, modern DAC design which they could build into either an existing CDP or as a stand alone unit.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.