Here's a project I've been following which has some cool features. It's non-oversampling DAC based on Kusunoki's work, but uses rechargable batteries for PS and only cost around $100 USD in parts!
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache...fi/hifi_diy.html+csown+ack!dac&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
(This is a cached link.)
Any thoughts on this? When used with a simple DVD player he says that the combo. is close to his Naim CD5 + Hicap. That's some serious equipment!
http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache...fi/hifi_diy.html+csown+ack!dac&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
(This is a cached link.)
Any thoughts on this? When used with a simple DVD player he says that the combo. is close to his Naim CD5 + Hicap. That's some serious equipment!
I took my DAC to the store yesterday and compared to Bel Canto DAC 1.1, which is regarded as follows (taken from Audiogon ad):
This is the upsampling DAC 1.1 from Bel Canto. It upsamples to 24 bit/96 kHz. The sound is smooth, detailed yet non-fatigueing and relatively neutral. Lots of rave reviews on this unit all over the web.
We were using Teac Esoteric transport and after switching from Kusunoki based DAC to Bel Canto, the latter didn't sound smooth at all, we actually didn't find it interesting at all and quickly switched it off. There was also one musician in the store and immediately after listening to non oversampling DAC, he said it sounds fine indeed.
I tried Lundahl transformers at the output and although initially it seemed like improvement, later we found that it flattens the soundstage, so resistors alone are probably better.
This is the upsampling DAC 1.1 from Bel Canto. It upsamples to 24 bit/96 kHz. The sound is smooth, detailed yet non-fatigueing and relatively neutral. Lots of rave reviews on this unit all over the web.
We were using Teac Esoteric transport and after switching from Kusunoki based DAC to Bel Canto, the latter didn't sound smooth at all, we actually didn't find it interesting at all and quickly switched it off. There was also one musician in the store and immediately after listening to non oversampling DAC, he said it sounds fine indeed.
I tried Lundahl transformers at the output and although initially it seemed like improvement, later we found that it flattens the soundstage, so resistors alone are probably better.
I don't really have schematic as such. Most of the info can be found in that thread: http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13666
I based passive filtering and receiver setup/PS from the first Kusunoki Dac. The DAC itself is very similar to what Fedde shows in his site, except for 5V supply and 1K I/V resistors. PS for DAC is from here: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/convertus1_e.html
It's still work in progress and I'll be trying reclocking soon.
I based passive filtering and receiver setup/PS from the first Kusunoki Dac. The DAC itself is very similar to what Fedde shows in his site, except for 5V supply and 1K I/V resistors. PS for DAC is from here: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/convertus1_e.html
It's still work in progress and I'll be trying reclocking soon.
your dac
Hi Peter,
Well, which sound do you prefer between this and your top-end broadhurst dac?
What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of both?
For my dac I'll us 2 parallel chips, but using the 12s output.
I'll sandwich the pcb between the chips, and connect the relevant legs of both chips thru the pcb holes, allowing me to heatsink each chip if required, rather than piggybacking.
The legs of 12s input will be joind on both chips as well as the audio outputs, but power supply legs will not. I'll use sepertae supplies for each chip. Mounting in this way minimise extra wiring etc.
Thanks
Raj
Hi Peter,
Well, which sound do you prefer between this and your top-end broadhurst dac?
What do you think are the advantages and disadvantages of both?
For my dac I'll us 2 parallel chips, but using the 12s output.
I'll sandwich the pcb between the chips, and connect the relevant legs of both chips thru the pcb holes, allowing me to heatsink each chip if required, rather than piggybacking.
The legs of 12s input will be joind on both chips as well as the audio outputs, but power supply legs will not. I'll use sepertae supplies for each chip. Mounting in this way minimise extra wiring etc.
Thanks
Raj
I didn't compared those DACs yet, but I would say that both provide satisfying musical experience and comparing time, work and parts involvement, TDA1543 is a clear winner.
Your idea about putting both DACs in parallel in that setup is very nice, but before you settle on a certain config, I recommend to install a socket firs and try both single and parallel, as well as different voltage settings. I started building 4 DACs in parallel, but completed this one first and in comparing to parallel config. it seems like a single one provides less restrsined sound, with more air and ambience.
When you consider that the only addition to CD-Pro to get great sound is one chip, 5 resistors and two caps, plus DACs PS, it is truly amazing
I also didn't find the need for a heat sink on a DAC.
Your idea about putting both DACs in parallel in that setup is very nice, but before you settle on a certain config, I recommend to install a socket firs and try both single and parallel, as well as different voltage settings. I started building 4 DACs in parallel, but completed this one first and in comparing to parallel config. it seems like a single one provides less restrsined sound, with more air and ambience.
When you consider that the only addition to CD-Pro to get great sound is one chip, 5 resistors and two caps, plus DACs PS, it is truly amazing
I also didn't find the need for a heat sink on a DAC.
Here's another DAC. This one is almost exact copy of a first Kusunoki DAC. It has much more gain than a single chip. PS is 8V and it employs 4 x TDA1543. Too early for any conclusions, but first impression is like that: more robust sound, and although I used again Vishays S102, there is no softening in midrange. Highs are not laid back, the sound is more aggressive, maybe the highest resolution is missing, but overall not bad, definitely better than 2 chips in parallel with 7V or so. I wonder how many people built the original Kusunoki DAC to the exact detail?
Attachments
Hi Peter,
Your Dac is looking really good, your biography says "Full time DIY", well looking at your production rate this must be the case. I was intending to build the Dac based on the 2xTDA 1541A but I switched to the TDA 1543. This set-up is much cheaper to start with when I compair the needed components to those that are needed to build the dubbel 1541A with tube output.
Some questions:
- What kind of output capacitors are you using?
- I can find the vishays resitor the easy way, do you have an idea what I "soundwise" can expect from a standard metalfilm resistor. Will it be better to use a (low induction) wire resistor?
- Did you, or will you, check audio quallity based on the plane I2S output on your CDPRO?
I would appreciate your information.
Peter
Your Dac is looking really good, your biography says "Full time DIY", well looking at your production rate this must be the case. I was intending to build the Dac based on the 2xTDA 1541A but I switched to the TDA 1543. This set-up is much cheaper to start with when I compair the needed components to those that are needed to build the dubbel 1541A with tube output.
Some questions:
- What kind of output capacitors are you using?
- I can find the vishays resitor the easy way, do you have an idea what I "soundwise" can expect from a standard metalfilm resistor. Will it be better to use a (low induction) wire resistor?
- Did you, or will you, check audio quallity based on the plane I2S output on your CDPRO?
I would appreciate your information.
Peter
Very nice again Peter !!!
You really have too much time it seems...
How many TDA1543 DACs do you plan too build ???
Maybe I will try to lower the voltage of my TDA1543 DAC again soon. Back then I preferred 8 V for more dynamics. But after some mods my gainclone is more direct and dynamic. Now I think the DAC could be a little on the harsh side. I have to try if lowering the supply improves the sound now. I've heard that the 47 Labs Shigaraki DAC uses a 5V supply!!!
Fedde
You really have too much time it seems...
How many TDA1543 DACs do you plan too build ???
Maybe I will try to lower the voltage of my TDA1543 DAC again soon. Back then I preferred 8 V for more dynamics. But after some mods my gainclone is more direct and dynamic. Now I think the DAC could be a little on the harsh side. I have to try if lowering the supply improves the sound now. I've heard that the 47 Labs Shigaraki DAC uses a 5V supply!!!
Fedde
No pun intended but...
It is funny to see that people return to 5V because it sounds better while a few months ago the opposite was the case
I received quite a few mails recently of people that returned to 5V after disappointing results with higher voltages.
Another thing is the use of Super E caps at the output. Heard one of my DAC's yesterday with Super E and it sounded real good. But since the speakers were unknown ( 108 dB Lowther horns) to me and the fact that it was connected via I2S to a CD Pro it is a bit premature to draw definitive conclusions. I did change the layout of my PCB however to accomodate Super E at all spots and I'll do some more experiments. For power supply I keep using 78xx because I don't see real advantages using other regs. Still thinking of a discrete regulator which should be the way to go.
It is funny to see that people return to 5V because it sounds better while a few months ago the opposite was the case
I received quite a few mails recently of people that returned to 5V after disappointing results with higher voltages.
Another thing is the use of Super E caps at the output. Heard one of my DAC's yesterday with Super E and it sounded real good. But since the speakers were unknown ( 108 dB Lowther horns) to me and the fact that it was connected via I2S to a CD Pro it is a bit premature to draw definitive conclusions. I did change the layout of my PCB however to accomodate Super E at all spots and I'll do some more experiments. For power supply I keep using 78xx because I don't see real advantages using other regs. Still thinking of a discrete regulator which should be the way to go.
Not too quickly Jean-Paul !!!
I said that I was going to try it again. I was not suggesting it would be better. And I see the higher output as an advantage too !
I think that the dynamics at 5V are somewhat limited. But the sound gets somewhat sweeter that way!
BTW: I tried to phone you, but you were working. On 5 may, poor fellow...
Fedde
I said that I was going to try it again. I was not suggesting it would be better. And I see the higher output as an advantage too !
I think that the dynamics at 5V are somewhat limited. But the sound gets somewhat sweeter that way!
BTW: I tried to phone you, but you were working. On 5 may, poor fellow...
Fedde
I think nobody will see the higher output as a disadvantage
BTW the setup I heard was with 6V and 1k2 for I/V and 1k5 for Vref, no CS8412 and super E. A bit too much variables for any comparison with other DAC's from my hand but it sure sounded good which is the most important parameter after all
The owner of the gear who knows his stuff well said he still doubts whether 6V is really better than 5V...
BTW the setup I heard was with 6V and 1k2 for I/V and 1k5 for Vref, no CS8412 and super E. A bit too much variables for any comparison with other DAC's from my hand but it sure sounded good which is the most important parameter after all
The owner of the gear who knows his stuff well said he still doubts whether 6V is really better than 5V...
A DAC with a CS8412 ( which is a Digital Interface Receiver; DIR ) can be connected to any cdplayer with SPDIF-RCA or SPDIF-Optical( if you use that on both the cdplayer and on the DAC ). RCA is the best of both of course.
Yes, there is nasty circuitry between transport and digital output. The nastyness varies from cdplayer to cdplayer.
There are ways to make that aspect better but the best solution will be building the DAC in the cdplayer without DIR and SPDIF. Less jitter, less costs and no need for a case etc. It is the most attractive way of building one if you're the lucky owner of an ( older) Philips/Marantz cdplayer, they have the I2S protocol for connecting the TDA1543 as a standard.
Yes, there is nasty circuitry between transport and digital output. The nastyness varies from cdplayer to cdplayer.
There are ways to make that aspect better but the best solution will be building the DAC in the cdplayer without DIR and SPDIF. Less jitter, less costs and no need for a case etc. It is the most attractive way of building one if you're the lucky owner of an ( older) Philips/Marantz cdplayer, they have the I2S protocol for connecting the TDA1543 as a standard.
I was in Cirrus webpage and they do not have the CS8412. The nearest (by number) is the CS8414. Would this work?
I do have a marantz cd48 which I would like to upgrade but I don´t know if this is what you mean. I looked at the inside this weekend and I really don´t know where to start on it, that is why I first though of using the digital out.
Miguel
miguel2 said:
The CS8414 is comparable to the CS8412, but is only available in SMD. The CS8412 is still available (in DIP) ! Have a look at the datasheet on my Nonoz page: www.fedde.tk
Does it have a TDA1541 chip ? Then it'll work...
Fedde
Peter K said:
I'm using 4.7 BG N for output. That's what I had on hand and those caps are not bad at all for coupling, considering size and price.
I also had Vishays around, so that's why I used them here. In this, 4 in parallel DACs, they sound good, but in the previous one, using only one DAC, they were too mellow and I replaced them with Rikens. The resistors are very important, as they tailor the tonal balance of the DAC.
5V supply sounds indeed more sweet, more airy, and more seductive.
As soon as I decide on cofiguration, I will try the DAC with CD PRO using I2S.
QUOTE] I can find the vishays resitor the easy way, do you have an idea what I "soundwise" can expect from a standard metalfilm resistor. Will it be better to use a (low induction) wire resistor?[/QUOTE]
This does not make sense! I ment to write that I can NOT find the vishays resistors.
What might I "soundwise" expect from a standard metalfilm resistor. Will it be better to use a (low induction) wire resistor?
This does not make sense! I ment to write that I can NOT find the vishays resistors.
What might I "soundwise" expect from a standard metalfilm resistor. Will it be better to use a (low induction) wire resistor?
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.