Bernhard,
I scan my 3 chips on hand KY / Japan K / Taiwan K and they all looks the same! Sound wise the Taiwan K is definitely not as good as the other two.
I use a Digital Signal Generator, not a CD player + test disc. The model is Leader 1507A. It has 1khz at 0db, -20, -40, -60, -80 dbfs.
I scan from 2.5k to 3.5khz frequency and the harmonics of all 3 chips look very similar. Here is one picture.
I scan my 3 chips on hand KY / Japan K / Taiwan K and they all looks the same! Sound wise the Taiwan K is definitely not as good as the other two.
I use a Digital Signal Generator, not a CD player + test disc. The model is Leader 1507A. It has 1khz at 0db, -20, -40, -60, -80 dbfs.
I scan from 2.5k to 3.5khz frequency and the harmonics of all 3 chips look very similar. Here is one picture.
It seems quite possible that the KY was used in Yamaha's 02R digital mixing consoles. These have 20bit x8 oversampling DAC's on the main stereo outputs and studio monitor outputs. The quoted dynamic range on the main stereo outs is 110dB (typ) which would be another 2dB step up from the datasheet specs for the "K" grade (108dB typ). This is just a hunch as I don't have hard evidence that these consoles do use KY's but I'll see what I can dig up.
So folks..
The first thing solved to this thread and according to "my" interest are... this PCM63P-Y are not FAKE
to spzzzzkt, can you describe a little bit more about D1V3 with that balance PCM63P-Y compare to "ordinary" design, i'm not finished yet mine
But as IY describe in another thread, i already try to my DAC with this. PCM63P-Y is have a "diferent" sound compare to the rest of other version of PCM63
all the best,
a'af
The first thing solved to this thread and according to "my" interest are... this PCM63P-Y are not FAKE
to spzzzzkt, can you describe a little bit more about D1V3 with that balance PCM63P-Y compare to "ordinary" design, i'm not finished yet mine
But as IY describe in another thread, i already try to my DAC with this. PCM63P-Y is have a "diferent" sound compare to the rest of other version of PCM63
all the best,
a'af
A'af,
I know you have an interest in selling these chips, but I think you are overstating the case to say that this thread has solved anything regarding authenticity. All that has been determined is that there is documentation that BB produced chips with Y, KY and K2 marking, and TI has indicated that chip forgery is a substantial problem. Your chips may well be authentic but I don't think this thread can be used to make any decision on that.
beauty_divine was going to post some results from his tests on both K grade and the Y grade chips he purchased. I have seen mention of findings relating to the K's but nothing on the Y's. Perhaps if b_d posts some test results we'll be closer to understanding how these chips compare?
cheers
Paul
I know you have an interest in selling these chips, but I think you are overstating the case to say that this thread has solved anything regarding authenticity. All that has been determined is that there is documentation that BB produced chips with Y, KY and K2 marking, and TI has indicated that chip forgery is a substantial problem. Your chips may well be authentic but I don't think this thread can be used to make any decision on that.
beauty_divine was going to post some results from his tests on both K grade and the Y grade chips he purchased. I have seen mention of findings relating to the K's but nothing on the Y's. Perhaps if b_d posts some test results we'll be closer to understanding how these chips compare?
cheers
Paul
Hi...
I just to make a little progress with this thread "Real or Fake PCM63?" and no more like that. Yes i have interest, but not most, especially here
Frankly i can not have the technic result and also can not afford it instead test it in working DAC and evaluation the sound, even i dont say nothing about this chips. I just say what i got and what i heard.
Thanks for beauty_divine, Bernhard, spencer and others who have aparatus and skill to test and evaluation this, even to put they result here!! great jobs friends!!
Say overstating mine is too overstate!! and especially not my style
all the best,
a'af
I just to make a little progress with this thread "Real or Fake PCM63?" and no more like that. Yes i have interest, but not most, especially here
Frankly i can not have the technic result and also can not afford it instead test it in working DAC and evaluation the sound, even i dont say nothing about this chips. I just say what i got and what i heard.
Thanks for beauty_divine, Bernhard, spencer and others who have aparatus and skill to test and evaluation this, even to put they result here!! great jobs friends!!
Say overstating mine is too overstate!! and especially not my style
all the best,
a'af
A'af's chips are brand new, and most likely sourced from a company similar to hkinventory:
http://www.hkinventory.com/public/OfferInventResult.asp?Order=1&pnums=pcm63p-y
note the '04 and '05 date codes on the chips which are available.
A search for K chips shows that there is a reasonable number of chips available with old date codes, but note the 04, 05 and 06 date code chips originating from China and available in large quantities.
http://www.hkinventory.com/public/OfferInventResult.asp?Order=1&pnums=pcm63p-k
Given the documentary evidence we have seen that production was to cease by the end of 2002, the date range on your chips (02/03) would seem to have an ok chance of being the genuine article. As the DC's move into 04, 05, and 06 there is diminishing likelihood these chips are what is claimed.
I'll make the observation that the stamping on each of the chips I have is different in terms of print definition and alignment on the chip despite the information being identical. The robots had been on the booze that afternoon I guess.
BTW take a look a the availability of PCM63K chips:
http://www.hkinventory.com/public/OfferInventResult.asp?Order=1&pnums=pcm63k
I came across this somewhat old (2003) but interesting pdf discussing Chinese protection of chip designs.
www.sia-online.org/downloads/china_chip_protection_law.pdf
I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.
http://www.hkinventory.com/public/OfferInventResult.asp?Order=1&pnums=pcm63p-y
note the '04 and '05 date codes on the chips which are available.
A search for K chips shows that there is a reasonable number of chips available with old date codes, but note the 04, 05 and 06 date code chips originating from China and available in large quantities.
http://www.hkinventory.com/public/OfferInventResult.asp?Order=1&pnums=pcm63p-k
Given the documentary evidence we have seen that production was to cease by the end of 2002, the date range on your chips (02/03) would seem to have an ok chance of being the genuine article. As the DC's move into 04, 05, and 06 there is diminishing likelihood these chips are what is claimed.
I'll make the observation that the stamping on each of the chips I have is different in terms of print definition and alignment on the chip despite the information being identical. The robots had been on the booze that afternoon I guess.
BTW take a look a the availability of PCM63K chips:
http://www.hkinventory.com/public/OfferInventResult.asp?Order=1&pnums=pcm63k
I came across this somewhat old (2003) but interesting pdf discussing Chinese protection of chip designs.
www.sia-online.org/downloads/china_chip_protection_law.pdf
I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.
Paul,
I think that You are getting closer and closer to the truth. Which, in my opinion, is that a new a production line had been started after that BB ceased production. Is it fake, this new series? I don't know, but it definitely does not look like the BB originals from the mid-90ies.
And the Y stamp is not a selection grade, for sure. On these chips.
On the originals, with date code like '93, probably.
But I would say that we are in a much better situation than the generic audiophile confusion - the selection grade level is supposedly based on testing, no happy subjectivism here!
So, I tried to repeat the tests of Bernhard.
Sidenote: I don't know how Bernhard tested his chips, my results are quite different..
I have here a pair of original PCM63P- K-s in my Tent Dac, bought many years ago, for sure before the craze started.
And a Rotel RCD990 cd player, with Standard! PCM63P-s inside. Though as You will see, I'm quite sure that those were non-K but factory selected pairs - they measure better than my K-s! Would not be a miracle, as that player was Rotel's flagship model at the time.
Finally, a pair of PCM58P -s, for comparison, from an Onkyo DX5700 (another flagship model).
So, I'm looking forward to the Y grade test of B_D! I'm quite sure that the difference should show up.
Soundwise: the Tentdac is best, the Onkyo is second (just a little bit) and the Rotel, which measures best, is the far away third place..
So much about the importance of low level linearity..
Ciao, George
Here is the test of the Tent dac, -60dB NoiseShaped 1kHz signal, straight into the soundcard.
I think that You are getting closer and closer to the truth. Which, in my opinion, is that a new a production line had been started after that BB ceased production. Is it fake, this new series? I don't know, but it definitely does not look like the BB originals from the mid-90ies.
And the Y stamp is not a selection grade, for sure. On these chips.
On the originals, with date code like '93, probably.
But I would say that we are in a much better situation than the generic audiophile confusion - the selection grade level is supposedly based on testing, no happy subjectivism here!
So, I tried to repeat the tests of Bernhard.
Sidenote: I don't know how Bernhard tested his chips, my results are quite different..
I have here a pair of original PCM63P- K-s in my Tent Dac, bought many years ago, for sure before the craze started.
And a Rotel RCD990 cd player, with Standard! PCM63P-s inside. Though as You will see, I'm quite sure that those were non-K but factory selected pairs - they measure better than my K-s! Would not be a miracle, as that player was Rotel's flagship model at the time.
Finally, a pair of PCM58P -s, for comparison, from an Onkyo DX5700 (another flagship model).
So, I'm looking forward to the Y grade test of B_D! I'm quite sure that the difference should show up.
Soundwise: the Tentdac is best, the Onkyo is second (just a little bit) and the Rotel, which measures best, is the far away third place..
So much about the importance of low level linearity..
Ciao, George
Here is the test of the Tent dac, -60dB NoiseShaped 1kHz signal, straight into the soundcard.
Attachments
Going back to the original question posted by "beauty divine", I am afraid that his "PCM63K Y" is a fake. The "0403" date code is the old Burr-Brown style indicating that the unit was assembled/marked in week 3 of 2004. Unfortunately for you, after TI bought B-B, the marking scheme was changed to the TI method (in 2001) which is a 5 character alphanumeric code. I don't know of any exceptions to this change so I can only conclude that the device is somehow a fake.
I have run into several similar counterfeits of other B-B parts in the last few months, all coincidentally being marked with a B-B style 2004 date code.
The "Y" portion of the p/n being separated is not necessarily a cause fo r concern as 'gradeout' markings are often added after testing whereas the rest of the marking is done at assembly (before test). Perhaps this is shown on the datasheet.
I have run into several similar counterfeits of other B-B parts in the last few months, all coincidentally being marked with a B-B style 2004 date code.
The "Y" portion of the p/n being separated is not necessarily a cause fo r concern as 'gradeout' markings are often added after testing whereas the rest of the marking is done at assembly (before test). Perhaps this is shown on the datasheet.
Doh, pardon me, Bernhard, after having had a better look, I think we are saying the same - Your only Kgrade chip shown seems to be the same like mines - harmonics below the -120dB level. Though the K2-s measured by You were worse - maybe fakes also?
And if the measurement of Spencer is right, then his Y grade looks much more ugly..
I have a pair of "real" no-grade PCM63P-s, too. will measure them as well.
Ciao, George
And if the measurement of Spencer is right, then his Y grade looks much more ugly..
I have a pair of "real" no-grade PCM63P-s, too. will measure them as well.
Ciao, George
OK this is my effort at capturing the Y's
RMAA is showing levels 4dB lower than what the audio editor on the Mac was indicating, so add 4dB to the scale reading for more sane results.
991hz test tone, MBIT+ dithering on CDR -> TEAC T1 -> 4 x "Y" D1V3 -> HDP2 88Khz/24bit -> RMAA "analyze file"
RMAA is showing levels 4dB lower than what the audio editor on the Mac was indicating, so add 4dB to the scale reading for more sane results.
991hz test tone, MBIT+ dithering on CDR -> TEAC T1 -> 4 x "Y" D1V3 -> HDP2 88Khz/24bit -> RMAA "analyze file"
Attachments
counterfeits
As aggravated as the subject is, it also seemed to me that many of the counterfeits are well done.
Paul, if your “Y”s (as well as my own ones) are counterfeits (very probably), then it is quite a outstanding plagiarism achievement... By the way, your Left Channel measurements 991Hz to 20KHz doesn’t look worth then the excellent Tent DAC scoped picture, includes the 3K and 6-7K areas. Moreover, if I am not wrong, the measurements here are much depended & corresponding to the implementation in the D1V3, CD transport, etc (or do I understand this wrong?).
Counterfeits or not, I personaly will start looking now for some old genuine BB “Y” chips, just to be on the appropriate & “no doubt” side. Evaluating all the new information, there should be no wonder that one can hardly put his hands on a genuine PCM63P-Y; the Chips has been part of the most expensive professional gears and one hardly terminate such a device.
As aggravated as the subject is, it also seemed to me that many of the counterfeits are well done.
Paul, if your “Y”s (as well as my own ones) are counterfeits (very probably), then it is quite a outstanding plagiarism achievement... By the way, your Left Channel measurements 991Hz to 20KHz doesn’t look worth then the excellent Tent DAC scoped picture, includes the 3K and 6-7K areas. Moreover, if I am not wrong, the measurements here are much depended & corresponding to the implementation in the D1V3, CD transport, etc (or do I understand this wrong?).
Counterfeits or not, I personaly will start looking now for some old genuine BB “Y” chips, just to be on the appropriate & “no doubt” side. Evaluating all the new information, there should be no wonder that one can hardly put his hands on a genuine PCM63P-Y; the Chips has been part of the most expensive professional gears and one hardly terminate such a device.
IY,
I agree the left channel looks very good. But then the right channel looks to be 10dB worse on the third harmonic with lots of junk in the higher ranges. I really need to swap the chips channel for channel to confirm this isn't a fault with the D1V3. Ideally I need to test each chip individually in a single channel. I'm going on holidays for two weeks on Friday and doubt I'll have time to do this before I leave.
It's clearly possibly to make an almost identical optical copy of the wafer, so in theory the chips could perform to a similar level as a BB production run. But if the difference between channels I'm seeing hold true then that tends to confirm that these chips are completely unselected and you could get anything from a chip that fails to meet basic P grade specs to something that out performs a K grade chip. Problem is unless they are tested to separate the junk from the gold you'll be paying a premium price for a lucky dip.
It could be a nice opportunity - selling diyers hand matched DAC chips
The testing is dependent on supporting components and method to a certain extent, so I'm not sure if you can directly compare between tests carried out by different individuals. There do seem to be general trends however.
cheers
Paul
I agree the left channel looks very good. But then the right channel looks to be 10dB worse on the third harmonic with lots of junk in the higher ranges. I really need to swap the chips channel for channel to confirm this isn't a fault with the D1V3. Ideally I need to test each chip individually in a single channel. I'm going on holidays for two weeks on Friday and doubt I'll have time to do this before I leave.
It's clearly possibly to make an almost identical optical copy of the wafer, so in theory the chips could perform to a similar level as a BB production run. But if the difference between channels I'm seeing hold true then that tends to confirm that these chips are completely unselected and you could get anything from a chip that fails to meet basic P grade specs to something that out performs a K grade chip. Problem is unless they are tested to separate the junk from the gold you'll be paying a premium price for a lucky dip.
It could be a nice opportunity - selling diyers hand matched DAC chips
The testing is dependent on supporting components and method to a certain extent, so I'm not sure if you can directly compare between tests carried out by different individuals. There do seem to be general trends however.
cheers
Paul
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.