I've been looking at build a decent DAC, but I am still a newbie to DIY electronics. I found this on eBay (based on an AD1955):
Finished DIR9001 AD1955 (MK3A) DAC &Transformer in Case | eBay
This is in my price range, and given my capability, a decent start to DIY. Anyone have any opinions on the setup?
Finished DIR9001 AD1955 (MK3A) DAC &Transformer in Case | eBay
This is in my price range, and given my capability, a decent start to DIY. Anyone have any opinions on the setup?
Judging only from the photos and description (a schematic is necessary to really assess) , this appears to be decent design, and a decent value given the price for what is an assembled product with case and power supply.
The AD1955 is Analog Devices' current top-of-line DAC chip - although many of their own high-end customers seem to disagree about that. I'm not a fan of the DIR9001 digital input reciever. I do see liberal use of what appear to be film type capacitors, which is a good thing. While the analog stage op-amps aren't listed, it appears the vendor had the foresight to mount them in sockets so to facilitate op-amp "rolling". If you choose to purchase this DAC, I would suspect that you will be able to improve the sound simply by experimenting with different op-amps.
Having said all of that, the only things which truly matter, IMO, regarding the purchase of HiFi equipment are how it sounds, what it costs, how reliable it will be, and how much of your purchase price it will retain when it inevitably comes time to sell it for something better. You might not be able to expect much from those last two points with this product, but without hearing it first, you are gambling on that first and most important point. Although, admittedly, it would only be a $140 gamble.
The AD1955 is Analog Devices' current top-of-line DAC chip - although many of their own high-end customers seem to disagree about that. I'm not a fan of the DIR9001 digital input reciever. I do see liberal use of what appear to be film type capacitors, which is a good thing. While the analog stage op-amps aren't listed, it appears the vendor had the foresight to mount them in sockets so to facilitate op-amp "rolling". If you choose to purchase this DAC, I would suspect that you will be able to improve the sound simply by experimenting with different op-amps.
Having said all of that, the only things which truly matter, IMO, regarding the purchase of HiFi equipment are how it sounds, what it costs, how reliable it will be, and how much of your purchase price it will retain when it inevitably comes time to sell it for something better. You might not be able to expect much from those last two points with this product, but without hearing it first, you are gambling on that first and most important point. Although, admittedly, it would only be a $140 gamble.
Last edited:
Here's a little better view of the board:
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/$%28KGrHqYOKjwE2JTPG%28pHBNyrboHESw%7E%7E_3.JPG
http://i.ebayimg.com/00/$%28KGrHqYOKjwE2JTPG%28pHBNyrboHESw%7E%7E_3.JPG
Last edited:
I have had some very similar (perhaps identical) boards from Taobao (take a look at my blog). The layout sucks so its a great way to learn about how to get decent sound by re-jigging the power supplies and grounding. In the end though the AD1955 doesn't cut it for me any longer sound quality-wise.
Hi,
after my experience the DAC-Chip itself is not the most important source of a certain ´sonic fingerprint´. The digital filters, Jitter-performance and analogue stages are more discriminating against the sonic performance.
With the surrounding circuitry being equal or very similar the differences between the AD1955 and the PCM179x series are negligible and it´d need a helluva good system to evaluate any differences at all. Simple digital filters and OPamps in the analogue output stages surely degrade the sound quality of most DACs to a lower average.
jauu
Calvin
after my experience the DAC-Chip itself is not the most important source of a certain ´sonic fingerprint´. The digital filters, Jitter-performance and analogue stages are more discriminating against the sonic performance.
With the surrounding circuitry being equal or very similar the differences between the AD1955 and the PCM179x series are negligible and it´d need a helluva good system to evaluate any differences at all. Simple digital filters and OPamps in the analogue output stages surely degrade the sound quality of most DACs to a lower average.
jauu
Calvin
DAC is important. But between the flagship models it is hard to say that one is clearly "better" than others.
Jitter levels and OS filters make a bigger impact at this level of performance. And of course, with just 16 bit/44kHz signals, you will not be able to tell a difference anyway, you need something better.
Jitter levels and OS filters make a bigger impact at this level of performance. And of course, with just 16 bit/44kHz signals, you will not be able to tell a difference anyway, you need something better.
I'm a bit sceptical about this statement. There was at least one research indicating that 16/44 format at least covers (or exceeds) the abilities of human's hearing. I think all cases when hi-res records sound better than 16/44 can be explained by different (better) mastering/production.
What "humans" were used in that study? The "iGeneration" students that blown their ears with loud mp3 players and in-the-channel cheap headphones? And have their brain used to that kind of music and not to pay attention to musical details?
Example:
Try to measure the difference between two transistors on cip (like one 180um and other 28um) with a construction measuring tape. Will you get any differences? No. Does it help if you repeat the measurement 1000 times? No.
Does that mean that NOBODY can find those differences?
Example:
Try to measure the difference between two transistors on cip (like one 180um and other 28um) with a construction measuring tape. Will you get any differences? No. Does it help if you repeat the measurement 1000 times? No.
Does that mean that NOBODY can find those differences?
Upon superficious investigation I'm starting to think the sound quality might actually benefit from higher sampling rate due to higher noise frequency and great margin for low-pass filtering. Still sceptical as to 24 bit vs 16 bit, though
Perhaps, this old research paper by Bob Stuart of Meridian may give you something more to consider on that front.
http://www.meridian-audio.com/w_paper/Coding2.PDF
Thanks!
It's not only about data storage - hihgher bandwidth transmission lines, faster chips are required for hi-res audio. Anyway, currently there's too little 24/96 reords to be concerned of this format, I think.
Last edited:
Hi and sorry to take-up again this old thread.
I would like to mention that some of the current best reviewed dacs, the Bricasti M1 and the Berkeley Audio, actually use this AD1955.
I wonder if anyone has tried any of the boards available in the web sporting this chip.
I feel that rightly implemented it could be "the revenge of delta-sigmas" on multibits.
Thanks and regards, gino
I would like to mention that some of the current best reviewed dacs, the Bricasti M1 and the Berkeley Audio, actually use this AD1955.
I wonder if anyone has tried any of the boards available in the web sporting this chip.
I feel that rightly implemented it could be "the revenge of delta-sigmas" on multibits.
Thanks and regards, gino
Hi and thanks for the reply.
In a word ... i do not have the least idea
I would like something that sounds above all other things 3dimensional.
I have come to the conclusion that is the most difficult aspect for digital, while analog is quite good at this.
Precision without dimensionality is not satisfactory.
Second requirement ... a very good bass response. Rock solid, as someone say.
So i am looking to some boards tested with positive results by Members of the Forum.
I like the idea of the boards because then i can use the transformers i like.
Thanks again, gino
Last edited: