diyAudio

diyAudio (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/)
-   Digital Line Level (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/)
-   -   AD5543 dac (http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/223224-ad5543-dac.html)

ash_dac 9th November 2012 06:14 PM

AD5543 dac
 
Do you think it would be possible to build an audio dac using the AD5543 ? (though it is rather pricey there are even selected versions ;))

The data looks to come in MSB first on a three wire SPI. I have yet to compare it to the I2S standard. I was thinking of the evaluation board as there seems to be software included to send waveform data to the dac (though I think another evaluation board is required for that).

AD5543 datasheet and product info | 16-Bit DAC in µSOIC-8 Package | Precision & General Purpose D/A Converters | Analog Devices

http://www.analog.com/static/importe...D5543_5553.pdf

twest820 10th November 2012 03:23 PM

Nice NOS find. I2S is for stereo DACs but the 5543 (and 5553) are mono so you'll need to implement something more like I1S. There are many, many ways to do that but probably the easiest is to use a microcontroller with I2S or USB in and some kind of parallel to serial translation peripheral that can drive the two mono DACs. That limits the possibilities to oh, I dunno, probably a few thousand different parts. A couple good starting points on microcontroller selection are NXP's Cortex M4s and Atmel's AVRs. I'm sure you'll get lots of other selections.

abraxalito 12th November 2012 01:10 AM

I think what would scupper this for audio duty is the zero crossing glitch at 7nV-s. Compare this figure with the considerably cheaper DAC8581 which sports 0.5nV-s and I can't see anything to favour this ADI part. R2R architecture DACs such as this are generally regarded as not sounding so good, this is probably down to glitching.

hochopeper 12th November 2012 01:21 AM

Off topic and not directed at you twest820, but why is it that there is some unspoken convention about the number in i2s standing for the number of channels?

I thought I2S stood for Inter-Ic-Sound. IIS then becomes I2S. This acronym in my mind has no bearing on the number of channels of audio between the two chips .... Or have I missed something somewhere and it is a standard?

qusp 12th November 2012 04:29 AM

I think its just a made up standard, i've seen it for I8S as well

ash_dac 14th November 2012 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by abraxalito (Post 3238023)
I think what would scupper this for audio duty is the zero crossing glitch at 7nV-s. Compare this figure with the considerably cheaper DAC8581 which sports 0.5nV-s and I can't see anything to favour this ADI part. R2R architecture DACs such as this are generally regarded as not sounding so good, this is probably down to glitching.

Interesting chip DAC8581. I have never seen an off-system linearity adjustment like the one in the datasheet

abraxalito 15th November 2012 02:18 AM

Yes its interesting I agree, I also hadn't seen it before. A bit weird though to put it in the datasheet rather than in an appnote coz it makes the chip look better than it really is, until you realize that you need external hardware and software to achieve it.

Rather a no-no for audio though I suspect where DNL probably matters more than INL.


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:02 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright İ1999-2014 diyAudio


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2