CDE FCA cap
Another candidate over MLCC.
http://www.cde.com/catalogs/FCA.pdf
338-2778-1-ND from digikey, maximum 1uf.
Another candidate over MLCC.
http://www.cde.com/catalogs/FCA.pdf
338-2778-1-ND from digikey, maximum 1uf.
2A3SET,
I have some of these and tried them. Films will not be as effective as the MLCCs in these positions IF you strictly look at the residual feed through noise on the AVCC pin. Either way you need some specialized equipment to measure signals at this level. ~200uV or less.
Try it with and without them to make sure you are happy with the change after you add them. Adding them (MLCCs) to my layout directly on the 9023 reduced the ripple on the AVCC pin but also noticeably hurt the sound. I took them back out, leaving the 1uF films in place from the original layout.
Happy tuning,
Dave
P.S. I compared the 1uF CDE cap to the Panasonic ECPU 1uF film cap for general bypass on my board. I use the 1uF caps in parallel with a 0.01uF 0805 films for bypass everywhere instead of ceramics as a trial on this layout. Both films sounded great. Both also sounded virtually indistinguishable so I left the CDEs in place.
I have some of these and tried them. Films will not be as effective as the MLCCs in these positions IF you strictly look at the residual feed through noise on the AVCC pin. Either way you need some specialized equipment to measure signals at this level. ~200uV or less.
Try it with and without them to make sure you are happy with the change after you add them. Adding them (MLCCs) to my layout directly on the 9023 reduced the ripple on the AVCC pin but also noticeably hurt the sound. I took them back out, leaving the 1uF films in place from the original layout.
Happy tuning,
Dave
P.S. I compared the 1uF CDE cap to the Panasonic ECPU 1uF film cap for general bypass on my board. I use the 1uF caps in parallel with a 0.01uF 0805 films for bypass everywhere instead of ceramics as a trial on this layout. Both films sounded great. Both also sounded virtually indistinguishable so I left the CDEs in place.
Last edited:
Hi Patrick,
Loaded answer -
I have films as bypass in the layout a short distance from the 9023 connected by a short length of trace. These were left in for the comparison.
I added the MLCCs and did some listening, then swapped them for the films directly over the chip for an apples to apples comparison. I swapped back to the MLCCs to do some more listening but in the end I took the added caps back out all together.
Dave
Loaded answer -
I have films as bypass in the layout a short distance from the 9023 connected by a short length of trace. These were left in for the comparison.
I added the MLCCs and did some listening, then swapped them for the films directly over the chip for an apples to apples comparison. I swapped back to the MLCCs to do some more listening but in the end I took the added caps back out all together.
Dave
Dave, your current pcb looks beautiful, but may I suggest to try to reverse the WM chip in order to keep the I2S tracks shorter?
ESS Tech is in North America ?
http://www.esstech.com/index.php?p=company_sales
Why not just give them a call ?
You can get any datasheets from ESS after you have sign a Non Disclosure Agreement.
Their engineering department would also answer any technical questions related to your applications.
Patrick
.
http://www.esstech.com/index.php?p=company_sales
Why not just give them a call ?
You can get any datasheets from ESS after you have sign a Non Disclosure Agreement.
Their engineering department would also answer any technical questions related to your applications.
Patrick
.
Last edited:
Thank you for the compliment!
I really don’t want to change the 9022/3 orientation. Rotating the 8804 is already under consideration and would shorten the trace lengths. We’ll see what makes sense in the overall scheme of things...
Thanks,
Dave
Hello
I've received yesterday the data sheet for the ES9023
Looking at it and at the application diagram, page 7, they don't say a lot about implementation.
I presume that the xtal oscillator goes at the MCLK pin of the ES9023 ?
Which sound better between synchrone and asynchrone mode and how do we set it on the ES9023 chip ?
Thank
Bye
Gaetan
I've received yesterday the data sheet for the ES9023
Looking at it and at the application diagram, page 7, they don't say a lot about implementation.
I presume that the xtal oscillator goes at the MCLK pin of the ES9023 ?
Which sound better between synchrone and asynchrone mode and how do we set it on the ES9023 chip ?
Thank
Bye
Gaetan
Patrick
do you measure any difference In thd and noise between standard modules of receiver pcb with 12 MHz and DAC pcb with local 50 MHz XO shown http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-6.html#post2458184 and the same modules but receiver pcb fed with 12 MHz from 48 MHz XO at DAC pcb divided by 4
do you measure any difference In thd and noise between standard modules of receiver pcb with 12 MHz and DAC pcb with local 50 MHz XO shown http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digi...ng-new-ess-vout-dac-es9022-6.html#post2458184 and the same modules but receiver pcb fed with 12 MHz from 48 MHz XO at DAC pcb divided by 4
How much do they cost (ES9022, 9023)? I can't find a single online shop selling them.
There is a general consensus that Iout DACs (with proper output stage) outperform Vout ones (ceteris paribus). I don't know why that should be so, but still. Are these ES DACs competitive in comparison with equally priced Iout DACs?
There is a general consensus that Iout DACs (with proper output stage) outperform Vout ones (ceteris paribus). I don't know why that should be so, but still. Are these ES DACs competitive in comparison with equally priced Iout DACs?
The price I heard was around $2. But there might be an even better sounding option available now from TI - the PCM51XX. Worth a listen anyway, especially with its 'low latency' filter engaged. Those parts are around the $2 mark too, potentially both are quite a bargain vis a vis sound quality per dollar spent.
The reason that Iout DACs might sound better is because the analog stages can be optimised rather than constrained by the process technology used for the rest of the IC.
Iout DACs of the latest generation are in general more expensive than Vout ones - probably for marketing reasons. Their volumes are lower but the perceived value is higher amongst audiophiles. You'll need to go back a few generations to find bargains in Iout DACs - I'm currently playing with TDA1387 and find that very much to my taste. Cheap too.
The reason that Iout DACs might sound better is because the analog stages can be optimised rather than constrained by the process technology used for the rest of the IC.
Iout DACs of the latest generation are in general more expensive than Vout ones - probably for marketing reasons. Their volumes are lower but the perceived value is higher amongst audiophiles. You'll need to go back a few generations to find bargains in Iout DACs - I'm currently playing with TDA1387 and find that very much to my taste. Cheap too.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.