Come on, something must be wrong with us!
I know that I have the flu with a slight feaver. Maybe I am affected?
Hi, I am sure we'll fight again a next issue
Point-to-point wiring is a very common technic among tubies. Actually performed right it's considered to be better electrically than PCB but suits simple schematics like tubes one obviously http://www.atma-sphere.com/Products/Kit
SMD parts are not always better especially stuff like foil oil caps make other types biting dust. But SMDs are much more convenient in case of industrial automated manufacturing in thousands quantities no doubt.
Agreed that resoldering a new model of DAC IC looks a bit adventuristic as well as resoldering different IC OPAMP is.
However last approach considered to be one of the most efficient and popular DIY’s tweaks and maintains by long threads discussions which OPAMP sounds the best
SMD parts are not always better especially stuff like foil oil caps make other types biting dust. But SMDs are much more convenient in case of industrial automated manufacturing in thousands quantities no doubt.
Agreed that resoldering a new model of DAC IC looks a bit adventuristic as well as resoldering different IC OPAMP is.
However last approach considered to be one of the most efficient and popular DIY’s tweaks and maintains by long threads discussions which OPAMP sounds the best
SMD parts are not always better especially stuff like foil oil caps make other types biting dust. But SMDs are much more convenient in case of industrial automated manufacturing in thousands quantities no doubt.
However last approach considered to be one of the most efficient and popular DIY’s tweaks and maintains by long threads discussions which OPAMP sounds the best
actually no, for the subject at hand, no matter how expensive, no matter how bling, a $2000 silver foil/oil cap will NOT beat out a $0.91 SMD np0 ceramic or even x7r type for high speed decoupling, not even close!! it will actually add its own problems (inductive leads and noise pickup) rather than solving any. it has zero to do with manufacturing economies of scale, as is often cried from the rooftops to sell this approach; but rather using the best part for the job. for this purpose and HF decoupling the power lines of ANY chip, for analogue or digital, SMD np0 ceramic, or pps film bypassed to a ground plane will leave point to point behind. its a matter of scale, you simply cannot get the leads short enough, or the part close enough to do much good with foil/oil caps, they could do the job quite well, if that werent a problem.
for signal/filter caps you can use PPS film SMD if needed, but no cap is best IMO. there are still some situations where film/foil/oil will win out, but these are generally situations where i would prefer not to have one at all.
as for opamp swapping, i'm not sure i see the relevance; it only makes a significant difference is the existing opamp is sh1t. a difference yes, a night and day difference? not IMO
i think you misunderstood some part of my post to make that comment.
i dont disagree that with certain topologies well done point to point can work well, but that is not the subject here
The problem is that SMD was bad when it all started and they came from a (then) even worse family called "ceramic". Things have slowly changed when better dielectrics were developed and now they are the best for decoupling high speed circuits. BG NX can be used as one of the few electrolytic cap types for decoupling if they are placed very very close to the pins.
For analog coupling SMD ceramic caps are best avoided. Film caps are much better for that purpose. No cap at all is the best and when you can avoid them for coupling please do so. Coupling caps win from servo circuits IMO.
Among the tube crowd ceramic caps still are bad news, they generally like big metal drain pipes filled with bees wax that sound warm. Or PIO caps to tweak the sound character of tube amps. Voltages are higher, wires are longer and working with such parts is a pleasure and when you drop one on the floor you will even see it (or feel it when you drop it on the foot). SMD certainly has no place there anyway. SMD also stopped tweakability of gear as you need good eyes, a steady hand and the right tools. That is something different than it was before: normal non technical people were building radios in the sixties as parts were large and shops were at the corner. Ready made devices were very expensive so DIY was born. I like through hole parts more than SMD but in DACs I can not live without SMD caps. I try to avoid SMD resistors when possible as working with SMD can be a pain.
Regarding opamps: there sure are differences but the large differences of years ago are becoming smaller and smaller. Sometimes I do not hear any difference when I try new types. I think the possibility of changing a device is more difficult with current devices. What is left is opamp rolling just like tube rolling. Just look at some of the Ebay DACs, the manufacturers deliberately use through hole DIL opamps in IC sockets in SMD only DACs so customers can change things to make the product even better. Most audio people have an illness that they always want it to sound "better".
PCB's loose their tracks when heated, SMD parts are better left for what they are, building a device yourself is more difficult with through hole parts becoming obsolete, designing a PCB is not easy. So what is left for us to change ? Exactly !
For analog coupling SMD ceramic caps are best avoided. Film caps are much better for that purpose. No cap at all is the best and when you can avoid them for coupling please do so. Coupling caps win from servo circuits IMO.
Among the tube crowd ceramic caps still are bad news, they generally like big metal drain pipes filled with bees wax that sound warm. Or PIO caps to tweak the sound character of tube amps. Voltages are higher, wires are longer and working with such parts is a pleasure and when you drop one on the floor you will even see it (or feel it when you drop it on the foot). SMD certainly has no place there anyway. SMD also stopped tweakability of gear as you need good eyes, a steady hand and the right tools. That is something different than it was before: normal non technical people were building radios in the sixties as parts were large and shops were at the corner. Ready made devices were very expensive so DIY was born. I like through hole parts more than SMD but in DACs I can not live without SMD caps. I try to avoid SMD resistors when possible as working with SMD can be a pain.
Regarding opamps: there sure are differences but the large differences of years ago are becoming smaller and smaller. Sometimes I do not hear any difference when I try new types. I think the possibility of changing a device is more difficult with current devices. What is left is opamp rolling just like tube rolling. Just look at some of the Ebay DACs, the manufacturers deliberately use through hole DIL opamps in IC sockets in SMD only DACs so customers can change things to make the product even better. Most audio people have an illness that they always want it to sound "better".
PCB's loose their tracks when heated, SMD parts are better left for what they are, building a device yourself is more difficult with through hole parts becoming obsolete, designing a PCB is not easy. So what is left for us to change ? Exactly !
Last edited:
what happens if you are a tweaker with good eyes, a steady hand and the right tools? we agree on most things it seems, but i disagree that tweaking is becoming a lost art, it just requires a different skillset and headset. agreed, some SMD is difficult or impossible to remove by hand, but most is dead easy and less likely to damage a half decent quality pcb than pth. i think most barriers that exist are in people's minds tbh
Hi Sonic, how many cd players have you lampized? I have modified 3 JVC cd players, and the result is stunning. I often left the original outputs just to compare it for my friends...who would not believe otherwise. Just like you.
Last edited:
I did hear a few tube-based equipments in my life. I was atracted by them in 80's when lots of people here were not born. I don't need to damage any DAC's to know how it will sound.
Eventually I grew to recognize that the "sweet" sound was just a figment of my brain. You need to go sometimes in a live concert hall (symphonic, opera, jazz, acoustic guitar), close the eyes and hear the true instruments to decide what's real and what just a pleasant distortion.
Eventually I grew to recognize that the "sweet" sound was just a figment of my brain. You need to go sometimes in a live concert hall (symphonic, opera, jazz, acoustic guitar), close the eyes and hear the true instruments to decide what's real and what just a pleasant distortion.
How curious that my experience is the opposite - I used to favour polypropylene film caps (axial and radial types) but these days I find NP0 ceramics are (fairly subtly) more transparent. My particular applications being active crossovers built around opamps.
Agreed there though.
SMD caps (and resistors) can work wonders in P2P tube amps, they are excellent for decoupling HF tubes that have pins that are actually antennas
. Quite a few times I have found SMD components handy with a P2P tube build.I'll be honest I was shocked to find thru-hole ceramics in the signal path of the O2, I knew of the virtues of smd ceramics w.r.t. decoupling but their contruction must have come along ways from the past to be the first cap in the signal path of such a transparent amplifier.
As for as the Lamp,I have never found anything gained by adding an SRPP tube stage to any DAC especially a S_D one, credibility is just lost with his whole claim to fame, even the old R2R- passive I/V- SRPP is unpredictable because the THD corrlated so tightly to load. Yet folks are signing up to buy his multithousand dollar home built dac creation.
With the Wolfson I did not know Cambridge was bypassing the internal oversampling, I need to look at that datasheet again. I still think that the wolfson has become so popular that mastering engineers monitor and master for them (sort of like Sure catridges +JBL speakers in the 70's.) There is something unique about how a wolfson handles a delimited peak.
Wolfson WM8741 Chip
In right design the Wolfson WM8741 chip can sound amazing especially in Professionally designed Tube DAC where no op-amps used - only tubes.
I use a handmade Tube DAC (MB™ DAC -WM1 Made by Malbru-Cables) on Wolfson WM8741 chips in mono configuration and I can say for SURE, the sound bits another Wolfson WM8740 chip in my Arcam CD player and I mean buy a big margin. That tells me the potential the Wolfson WM8741 has - its is a huge one with instruments sounding clear, fast and its bass VERY DEFINED.
I think, if a good quality parts used in the signal chain with a minimum interruption, the sonic result is definitely improved on either DAC chips.
In right design the Wolfson WM8741 chip can sound amazing especially in Professionally designed Tube DAC where no op-amps used - only tubes.
I use a handmade Tube DAC (MB™ DAC -WM1 Made by Malbru-Cables) on Wolfson WM8741 chips in mono configuration and I can say for SURE, the sound bits another Wolfson WM8740 chip in my Arcam CD player and I mean buy a big margin. That tells me the potential the Wolfson WM8741 has - its is a huge one with instruments sounding clear, fast and its bass VERY DEFINED.
I think, if a good quality parts used in the signal chain with a minimum interruption, the sonic result is definitely improved on either DAC chips.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.