CS8416 PLL Values

[Bengali]

Hi,

I bought the current version of the ebay DAC kit LM-DAC3.

Per previous posts, the CS8416 datasheets shows the following as
recommended values.

RFLT 3K
CFLT 22nF
CRIP 1nF

The values on my board have 1K, 220nF and 10nF.

How does it sound with incorrect PLL values? Per the seller,
the values have been adjusted per their design. I'm trying
to confirm if I should replace them with the values from
the datasheet or leave as is.

The sound quality of the stock DAC using coax sounds very similiar
to the outputs of my analog player.

 

[bbp]

Hi bengali, maybe you can refer to the AN159 from CS ^_^

 

[Bengali]

Hi bbp,

that app note is not for the same chip though. I'll stick with the values on the datasheet. have yet to try it and see what happens.

thanks for the suggestion.

 

[bbp]

I check the dataeet for CS8416‘s

Extensive use of power and ground planes, ground
plane fill in unused areas and surface mount decoupling
capacitors are recommended. Decoupling capacitors
should be mounted on the same side of the
board as the CS8416 to minimize inductance effects,
and all decoupling capacitors should be as
close to the CS8416 as possible. Refer to AN159
for examples of proper techniques.

 

[Bengali]

thanks for looking.

It's a stock board from ebay so I'm not concerned about layout. it's just that they used certain values that are not the same as the cs8416 datasheet so I will try changing to values on the datasheet.

 

[HominisNocturna]

This could be useful...

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.

To lower the jitter you could directly attach the pll filter to the 7 and 8 leg of CS8416, it should look like this :

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.

 

[johnm]

The above table is now considered incorrect - please see attachment.

FWIW I updated the PLL components on my 24/192 chinese DAC and could detect no audible difference at all.

Cheers,

- John

 

[bbp]

Again, if you use the recovery MCLK of this chip, that maybe not precision enough for your system. 200 ps is not a acceptable value today.

In my opinion, a crystal which includes low phase jitter should be added, either in the DF stage or the DAC stage.

 

[ChuckT]

Just wondering if anyone has found a optimal value for the PLL.
I have a ES9023 dac using the CS8416 that uses the standard 3k/22nf/1nf.
I changed the smd resistor to 100R accidentally (i thought it was 1k) with 220nf and 4.7nf. The sound became very smooth, too smooth in fact, lacking the highs.
The original standard value (3k/22nf/1nf) was a bit on the harsh side.

I changed the 100R to 1K and keeping the 220nf/4.7nf, it was a more balance sound than the standard values.
Since I don't have anymore smd or very small resistor to test on, I was wondering if anyone has found an optimal value on the PLL for cs8416?

 

[jean-paul]

The best PLL would be to omit the CS8416 and use a WM8805 instead

 

[ChuckT]

Ok, that wasn't helpful. For one, it would be almost impossible for me to change the receiver chip to another one. Even if I can, it would better for me to just get another dac.

If anyone else can share the experience, I will be grateful.
Not much I can find one the web, it seems the values for the CS8412/4 is a bit different to the cs8416.

 

[jean-paul]

It was not helpful ? What difficult is it to design a small PCB for WM8805 ? It is good sound quality we're after isn't it ? I would not even bother with PLL part values with a mediocre receiver.

The LM DAC 3 can also be equipped with DIR9001 isn't it ? Also a good choice.