About tube DACs? - Page 18 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 28th January 2013, 04:37 PM   #171
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
People have disagreed with what you said. It seems that in some cases what you said is not what you meant. If you regard disagreement as a form of insult then debating is not for you.
Hey hey hey! If wanted a debate on this thread, I would have asked for it at the beginning. I asked for experiences and recommendations, and since those are always subjective matters, there shouldn't be anything to debate for. If someone really wants to debate on something, I would kindly ask for he/she to start an own thread for it.

And; Stephensank was one of the few that actually answered my original question, and he did it really well. So if some one gives up with this discussion, I surely hope that it is not Stephensank. :=)

It's quite surprising how often basic manners seem to get lost in the internet world. One of the most basic rules is to respect the OP's wishes, and stick in to the subject. If you feel that you just can't, it's always better to be silent or start an own discussion on your own topic. Or otherwise, the original discussion gets lost in the middle of the secondary issues, like it has pretty much happened in this thread.

But hey, we are just humans, and surely no hard feelings for anyone; I have learned a lot from this thread. About the original topic, and few other things just well.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2013, 06:59 PM   #172
DF96 is offline DF96  England
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2007
The debate was started by people offering false technical explanations. DIYaudio does not impose a separation of technical discussion and exchange of anecdotes. The discussion has stayed on the topic of DAC amplifiers/buffers, and related issues.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th January 2013, 08:13 PM   #173
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
I went down to the demonstration
To get my fair share of abuse
Singing, "We're gonna vent our frustration"
If we don't, we're gonna blow a 50-amp fuse

You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometime, you just might find
You get what you need.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th January 2013, 01:51 PM   #174
Juhazi is offline Juhazi  Finland
diyAudio Member
Juhazi's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland
Some heavy discussion here! Almost like a automotive diesel-guy arguing with a petrol-guy.
AINOgradient speaker project
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th January 2013, 03:59 PM   #175
DF96 is offline DF96  England
diyAudio Member
Join Date: May 2007
Not really. Diesel and petrol are both vehicle fuels, and both work when used in the appropriate engine. People may have a preference, for all sorts of reasons. What they can't do is claim things like "petrol degrades steering and so causes accidents"; it isn't true.

Similarly, people may have preferences for valve or SS buffers after a DAC. What they can't say is things like "SS feedback can't correct all errors because of time delay"; it isn't true.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31st January 2013, 11:38 PM   #176
diyAudio Member
stokessd's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Grantham, NH
Originally Posted by Gyuri View Post
For me, this is the Tube Dac still now:

Thanks for the kind words. I am still impressed with that unit even after all these years.

I do also like this DAC a lot as well. No tubes in the analog stage, but no transistors either:

Sheldon’s World Blog Archive Another Audio Digital-to-Analog (DAC) is Born

  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2013, 06:04 AM   #177
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cologne, Germany
I habe build a couple of dacs, with tube output and without. Modified as well a couple of commercial products. My current preference in my system and my room:

- buffalo iii in dual mono with broskie unbalancer and Ian's fifo and usb-input. jj803s and 12bh7. No electrolytics anywhere and many selected parts like z foil, v-caps, wirewounds prec. resistor, silber wiring etc.

- very musical as well: ee max plus, but only if you tune it heavily, the eletrolytic in the output is not needed, discrete opamps needed etc. here the solid state output is clearly netter than the tube one.

- i ran many dacs like pcm63 with 6922 output in srpp, rakk dac with tube and solid and transformer output, borbely with all-jfet, tda1543, buffalo ii and bufallo iii. I compared them with commercial products like accuphase dc701 etc.

The top currently for me is the one mentioned in the beginning. I will change the stage to fully balanced though to get rid of the phase splitter in my power amp though.

tentlabs used the tubes to do i/v conversion as well (not the resistor to ground method). I have the stage here, but still busy with other stuff. hope this helps. I would always go with the sabre and tubes. But i am build the sen, the d1 and othe solid stages as well, maybe they change my mind.

Last edited by Blitz; 2nd February 2013 at 06:07 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2013, 11:54 AM   #178
diyAudio Member
danny_66's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lierde
Hello Blitz,
Have you been able to compare the following two tube output stages ?
1) The Differential Parafeed Line Stage with the LL1674 like used in the RAKK dac and the DAC END
2) the Broskie unbalancer

Both seem nice for getting single ended out of current out balanced DACs.

  Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2013, 04:10 PM   #179
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Cologne, Germany

The Rakk-DAC II was my previous DAC, which I really like a lot. I tried it with: the LL1674-passive output stage, with RAKK-TUbeoutput and Borbely-Allfet-Out. I liked the tube-output not too much, not transparent in my view. I did not compared it directly withe the unbalancer using the same dac, but the unbalancer is very transparent and natural in combination with the BIII. All depenents extremly on the right selection of passive parts and tubes though.

  Reply With Quote
Old 28th February 2013, 05:00 PM   #180
diyAudio Member
danny_66's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lierde
The unbalancer seems to be a remarkable circuit compared to the traditional differential parafeed.
How is the balancer and the I/V resistor (value?) connected to your buffalo ?
  Reply With Quote


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another Tube I/V converter/preamp for balanced DACs with SE output:build thread pauldune Tubes / Valves 4 31st May 2013 02:50 PM
DACs Jerseydevildog Digital Source 1 25th November 2007 06:24 PM
DACs? MashBill Pass Labs 3 28th February 2007 09:43 AM
Parallel different DACs roibm Digital Source 1 4th November 2004 10:54 AM
Audio DACs, Instrumentation DACs. Brian Guralnick Digital Source 10 3rd November 2002 04:56 PM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:20 AM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2