I presume you have the ES9022 IC, so you already have the data sheet.
If you study the pictures of post #54 carefully, you should not have too much difficulty figuring out what component values I used.
For SMD, start with data sheet value.
I do not want to encourage you to copy me blindly.
So you should not be afraid to try things out.
> I would ask to further describe the frequency divider (which flip-flop did you use?)
Any high speed single gate will do.
I used one from On-Semi. But NXP or TI is also OK.
> which XO Crystek CX3391
Will do fine.
> did you use a 0.1uF C0G cap at the S/PDIF input (pin 20) of the WM8804?
Yes.
Enough hints ? 😉
Patrick
If you study the pictures of post #54 carefully, you should not have too much difficulty figuring out what component values I used.
For SMD, start with data sheet value.
I do not want to encourage you to copy me blindly.
So you should not be afraid to try things out.
> I would ask to further describe the frequency divider (which flip-flop did you use?)
Any high speed single gate will do.
I used one from On-Semi. But NXP or TI is also OK.
> which XO Crystek CX3391
Will do fine.
> did you use a 0.1uF C0G cap at the S/PDIF input (pin 20) of the WM8804?
Yes.
Enough hints ? 😉
Patrick
Hi All,
well at last I got the chance and headspace to sit down and compare EUVLs 9022 dac to my Pass D1 clone. The 9022 was the one described by EUVL here and here is my implementation. I used my shigaclone player throughout as a comparison (it is my best digital source). This means 16/44 only of course....
So, this was interesting. Firstly, it was noticeable that the EUVL dac plays a bit louder than the Pass, so I needed to change volume when swapping over to level the field a bit. The EUVL dac is so clean, it definitely offered greater resolution and more firmer better defined bass. I regularly use a couple of Henri Mancini tracks as test tracks. They have lots of percussion going on, plus massed strings and are recorded with fantastic dynamics. Comparing the 2 dacs, you could easily hear more going on with the EUVL dac. Things like the echo in the room, or where 2 percussion instruments are being hit at the same time - you get both, even when they are sitting together in the soundstage. Now, the Pass still gives very close to this, but overall the tone from it is warmer. I can imagine that this would appeal to many. However you argue for that though, the bass on the Pass is not as well defined or firm I think. Maybe some fancier caps on the outputs might clean that up a bit (it certainly helped on the Xono).
My next task now is to use a source thats not as good as the shiga - something that doesn't resolve just quite as well. Maybe my squeezebox or something. That should be interesting. My impressions are that the EUVL dac is absolutely revealing and transparent - GIGO would definitely apply I think. But feed it a good line, and it really will shine. This really is quite the piece of kit!
Fran
well at last I got the chance and headspace to sit down and compare EUVLs 9022 dac to my Pass D1 clone. The 9022 was the one described by EUVL here and here is my implementation. I used my shigaclone player throughout as a comparison (it is my best digital source). This means 16/44 only of course....
So, this was interesting. Firstly, it was noticeable that the EUVL dac plays a bit louder than the Pass, so I needed to change volume when swapping over to level the field a bit. The EUVL dac is so clean, it definitely offered greater resolution and more firmer better defined bass. I regularly use a couple of Henri Mancini tracks as test tracks. They have lots of percussion going on, plus massed strings and are recorded with fantastic dynamics. Comparing the 2 dacs, you could easily hear more going on with the EUVL dac. Things like the echo in the room, or where 2 percussion instruments are being hit at the same time - you get both, even when they are sitting together in the soundstage. Now, the Pass still gives very close to this, but overall the tone from it is warmer. I can imagine that this would appeal to many. However you argue for that though, the bass on the Pass is not as well defined or firm I think. Maybe some fancier caps on the outputs might clean that up a bit (it certainly helped on the Xono).
My next task now is to use a source thats not as good as the shiga - something that doesn't resolve just quite as well. Maybe my squeezebox or something. That should be interesting. My impressions are that the EUVL dac is absolutely revealing and transparent - GIGO would definitely apply I think. But feed it a good line, and it really will shine. This really is quite the piece of kit!
Fran
Hi, the es9022 looking real interesting and I am thinking of replacing the tda1543 inside my tweaked deq2496 with the es9022 via I2S of cause. Can anybody point me the way to order a ES9022 board. Thanks.🙂
One very happy customer !! 🙂
Fran,
If you would ever get a chance to listen to Jonners' QA550 (or Koon's Ultimate Source 2) with a 45.1584 MHz ES9022 in synchronous mode, you would agree with me that there is still more to be had from a very simple, very low total cost digital source for 16/44.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-2.html#post2458187
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-2.html#post2484647
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-3.html#post2547645
Patrick
.
Fran,
If you would ever get a chance to listen to Jonners' QA550 (or Koon's Ultimate Source 2) with a 45.1584 MHz ES9022 in synchronous mode, you would agree with me that there is still more to be had from a very simple, very low total cost digital source for 16/44.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-2.html#post2458187
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-2.html#post2484647
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-3.html#post2547645
Patrick
.
Last edited:
Thanks Patrick.
My other choice is to cannibalize a 2nd hand Nuforce uDac, but might be a bit of a waste to just use the es9022.
My other choice is to cannibalize a 2nd hand Nuforce uDac, but might be a bit of a waste to just use the es9022.
Hi Patrick,
The differential version looks cool. Could you hear or measure the LSB error induced on the inverted side?
Thanks,
Dave
The differential version looks cool. Could you hear or measure the LSB error induced on the inverted side?
Thanks,
Dave
> Could you hear or measure the LSB error induced on the inverted side?
No, but if you are really bothered, there are circuits around to correct for that, I think.
Patrick
No, but if you are really bothered, there are circuits around to correct for that, I think.
Patrick
Patrick, a while back Fran & a number of people did briefly hear one of these - an ES9022 connected via I2S from a QA550 board. It had no mods to it & the local QA 11.xxx clock was the MCLK used. This was auditioned through headphones. Unfortunately it died when we tried connecting it to his main rig - never did understand what happened to it - both the ES9022 & QA550 were taken out?
My QA550/EUVL-ES9022 is still playing happily. The DAC is installed in an Al box directly underneath the player. I've tried it in my main system and I recently took it on holiday in conjunction with a small portable system. I could play it in the car too, but I haven't tried that yet. 🙂
My own combo must be playing as long as, if not longer than John's, in my GC system in the study.
Never any problems.
But then also never put the ES9022 directly to a headphone either.
Patrick
Never any problems.
But then also never put the ES9022 directly to a headphone either.
Patrick
No, it wasn't the headphones - it happily ran HD650, not so good on AKG701s
It was when connecting to the main system - maybe static, maybe some DC, I don't know but it killed the ES9022 & the dsPic (it would seem)
It was when connecting to the main system - maybe static, maybe some DC, I don't know but it killed the ES9022 & the dsPic (it would seem)
I don't think it's the headphones because I've done a good bit of listening with a 9022 ( not your one Patrick) without any issues.
Realistically I think we must have shorted something - or static. I couldn't rule out something else like dc, but I don't think so since I haven't had any other problems with the other 9022 dacs. Its possible though......
Seems like I'll need to put a QA550 on the list! I have 2 tonearm projects to finish first though.
Realistically I think we must have shorted something - or static. I couldn't rule out something else like dc, but I don't think so since I haven't had any other problems with the other 9022 dacs. Its possible though......
Seems like I'll need to put a QA550 on the list! I have 2 tonearm projects to finish first though.
Sorry cross post! It actually sounds pretty good into high impedance cans, but not so good on akg 701s. Then there's a fair number of amps that can't handle them either...
Yes, Fran, I've spoken to you privately about this & we are pretty sure that it wasn't your kit causing the problem so I didn't mean to give that impression, hope I didn't?
No, not at all. In fact given that all the stuff is DIY, its entirely possible!!! Especially as given all the plaudits here, a QA550 might well be something worth getting down the line a bit!!
EUVL said:
I saw it - and initially planned for using it on the output of the 9022, using a shunt supply to run it. Then I ended up going with the batteries and didn't follow through. Maybe I should do a rebuild someday and add it in....
Fran
ES9023 sync clock mode with 192K sample rate
The datasheet shows minimum sync clock of 128fs with 192K materal, does it make big different feeding 128fs clock (my correct setup) vs 192fs or 256fs in sync mode? Or maybe feed even higher clock in async mode.
The datasheet shows minimum sync clock of 128fs with 192K materal, does it make big different feeding 128fs clock (my correct setup) vs 192fs or 256fs in sync mode? Or maybe feed even higher clock in async mode.
Yes, Patrick. I have both papers (xx22 & xx23) and chips are on the way. 😉
But you also add 560uF // to 1uF at the Neg pin (11) of the dac.....
Well, no. 🙁
Being a noob I sufered all the proposed manufacturers websites but I got lost. Too many ICs! A part number, or even a partial part number without manufactuer's prefix will be highly appreciated!
Moreover in your pcbs I saw two resistors near the Xo. One (low value I presume) from the clock o/p to the MCLK in and another from the "enable" pin to the VD+.... Isn't enough to connect the enable pin to VD+ directly?
Thank you!
Search single gate flip flop.
You should always have a small resistor (say 33R) in a digital line.
The one for +Vd is just an extra RC filter after the regulator for the XO.
Patrick
You should always have a small resistor (say 33R) in a digital line.
The one for +Vd is just an extra RC filter after the regulator for the XO.
Patrick
- Status
- Not open for further replies.