I was about to say the WaveIO site is easy to find, but the Luckit.biz page has been suspended.
Deode's site : DDDAC 1794 NOS DAC - Non Oversampling DAC with PCM1794 - no digital filter - modular design DIY DAC for high resolution audio 192/24 192kHz 24bit
Here is the DIYAudio discussion of the board : http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/188902-xmos-based-asynchronous-usb-i2s-interface.html
Perhaps one of these will help you out.
I am NOT an expert on this board, but have seen this board for awhile, and there used to be website for it.
Deode's site : DDDAC 1794 NOS DAC - Non Oversampling DAC with PCM1794 - no digital filter - modular design DIY DAC for high resolution audio 192/24 192kHz 24bit
Here is the DIYAudio discussion of the board : http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/188902-xmos-based-asynchronous-usb-i2s-interface.html
Perhaps one of these will help you out.
I am NOT an expert on this board, but have seen this board for awhile, and there used to be website for it.
As soon as the SPDIF main board is available I will be going for a 12 stack.
I can weld 2 off 3.3K/W heat sinks together for the rectifiers and transistor.
Is there an uprated transformer available, and will the R47 5w resistors have to be uprated as well ?
My 4 stack with Sowters has been running for a few months now and I can confirm that it does improve with settling time, stunning sound quality
I can weld 2 off 3.3K/W heat sinks together for the rectifiers and transistor.
Is there an uprated transformer available, and will the R47 5w resistors have to be uprated as well ?
My 4 stack with Sowters has been running for a few months now and I can confirm that it does improve with settling time, stunning sound quality
Thanks Doede, that is the reason why I prefixed my inquiry with "Sorry for the silly question"...for a single board you need 133 Ohm (135 will be fine also.. =270//270)
so using the Ra and Rb position to parallel values is correct. That is the reason there are Ra and Rb psoitions in the first place
Attachments
To avoid interferences, it has been said in a post before that the DACs boards should be stacked alltogether. But you can turn them horizontaly instead of vertically to avoid a too high stack : when they are stacked (alltogether vertically) just turn the group 90° to place them horizontally in the chassis.
Doede seems to approve this suggestion a few pages before....
That's possible but then I will end up with longer wiring from the dacs to the motherboard. I am just wondering if it makes any difference.
Another option would be to just stack another dac chip on top of the other ones, just like the 1543 dac, and keep the 4 boards.
You need to take the extra current into consideration for the shunt regulators and maybe some other components need to be adjusted.
Another option would be to just stack another dac chip on top of the other ones, just like the 1543 dac, and keep the 4 boards.
You need to take the extra current into consideration for the shunt regulators and maybe some other components need to be adjusted.
8deck-stack
Hi Alex,
Is your curiosity itched by the using of the Salas-Shunt pre regulator to finding out what is more left in Doede's 1794 Dac, quality wise?
I learned you where very happy with the 4stack, like you had it untill now.
I hope you keep us updated about your findings.
About the placing of the two 4 stacks, you could place them side by side and parallel the 'towers' halfway, between the second and the third deck, keeping the bridges of the same length. But this will give a big chance of having RF rubbish induced, because of the antenna your building.
Maybe adequate sheilding could solve that?
Wish you succes!
Ed
Hi Alex,
Is your curiosity itched by the using of the Salas-Shunt pre regulator to finding out what is more left in Doede's 1794 Dac, quality wise?
I learned you where very happy with the 4stack, like you had it untill now.
I hope you keep us updated about your findings.
About the placing of the two 4 stacks, you could place them side by side and parallel the 'towers' halfway, between the second and the third deck, keeping the bridges of the same length. But this will give a big chance of having RF rubbish induced, because of the antenna your building.
Maybe adequate sheilding could solve that?
Wish you succes!
Ed
I'm currently building the dddac with tent labs shunt regs, I only have the one board at the moment and I'm just about to go for a second board with tent labs shunts . My question is; rather than bending the shunt regs over so they lie sideways, can I keep the shunt regs standing up straight and therefore have the second board on top of that, ie the height between the two boards would be about 60mm. Is this ok?