Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 14th May 2013, 09:51 AM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobbit13 View Post
On previous posts:
I did not say CS8421 is bad, just that the specs are a bit below the popular SRC4192. But I'm confident that using the ES9023 in asynchronic modus, with a good 50MHz XO will be an improvement over feeding it with the CS8421.
CS8421 have very big variety in performance. 44.1-> 48 can do -171dB dynamic range and -177dB THD+N and PCM2707 16 bit becomes 24 bit. But 44.1 -> 192 is -130dB THD+N. Not special. This far, I prefer SRC to 96Khz.

I will try the bypass on pin6 to see if it is a benefit or no.

I agree that asynch can be better. I try the Epson SAW 50Mhz before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobbit13 View Post
The LT1086 is a quite noisy regulator (0.1mV noise), thus using low-ESR caps in front and after this regulator will improve things, using reference diodes instead of the adjustment resistor will help as well, but seems overkill.
Noise is % of output, and output depend on gain of 1.25V ref, so noise is increased by gain. But what if there is not any gain and we use a zener at the base.....then noise is not increase by gain, and noise is ~40uV + zener. It is clever use. There is much to read about such regulators and it might change your ideas about using low esr cap. The result is not always good.

Simple Voltage Regulators Part 2: Output Impedance

Using 3-pin regulators off-piste: part 1

http://tech.juaneda.com/en/articles/lm317.html

I see people recommend Micrel regulator but datasheet says it has 1uV per rt Hz, so it has over 200uV noise rms. I don't know why people recommend this part. Maybe someone can explain. maybe my math went wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobbit13 View Post
R8 shoud be present (+130k for 3.6V) otherwise the ES9023 clips on loud input. If the sound quality improves if you lower the volume of the input, (in Windows) then R8 is missiing.
PCM2707 is 16 bit only. It must not use windows volume control because it must decimate data and need the dithering. Anyway, I am using 140K right now for 3.5V because I did not like the sound for no R8.

I try the analogue input with the output of the Es9023 DAC (using te7022) I make before. It is very similar to the kit DAC. The weakness in this kit is the LM4766 power amplifier in the treble range.
__________________

Last edited by Nanoloop; 14th May 2013 at 10:16 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2013, 12:20 PM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
I marked on the PCB for some changes.

B is low pass filter on output to detect DC offset into uc1237. I change the capacitor to Silmic 47uF 25V with 100nF film bypass.

D is filter in amplifier feedback circuit. The caps seem genuine Nichicon Muse and there film bypass.

C is DAC output filter. I change to pps film 0805 cap.

A is resistor connected to pin6 for bypass CS8421.

MCLK show impedance resistor and pin10 MCLK out resistor. Asynch MCLK can be connected on the pad after removal of the 33R. MCLK out must be turned off with high voltage through 47K resistor into pin10.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg change.jpg (204.5 KB, 217 views)
__________________

Last edited by Nanoloop; 14th May 2013 at 12:23 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th May 2013, 02:44 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
I make some small changes with 3 capacitors upgrades only and R8. Sound is not changed as I expect. I keep it playing continuously. Now there is even little distortion. Of course, I reverse the changes, but distortion continue. Amp sound is correct but now DAC sound is bad.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 05:17 AM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
I find the distortion is made by oscillation. The LT1086 have not enough capacitance close by, and it must feed long trace (with big via) to ES9023. The PCB have only 10uF electrolytic marked for the output. It also have 10uF tantalum at the base. The datasheet says this is not good. And then there is the long trace also. So, this is bad.

So for the LT1086 output, I change the 10uF electro to 120uF Panasonic FM and also add smt 22uF tantalum in parallel on the opposite side of the PCB. The datasheet says this will guarantee stability.

Before the 2 LT regulator is 470uF. I make the mistake before. I did not see the PCB have markings to say this is 1500uF 16V, because marking is nearly under the LM1117. Kit have no such capacitor. There is 500mV of AC ripple and this is too much. If regulator can do -70dB then output can be 150uV. So, a bigger capacitor is needed. Now the transformer is 9VAC 3VA. It is warm.

At the ES9023, I use a BC136 33uf electro. It has nice sound and quite large esr so it will not make oscillation from the long trace.

The result is surprising. I prefer this DAC sound to the external ES9023 I make before, and there is no R8.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg caps.jpg (182.5 KB, 168 views)
__________________

Last edited by Nanoloop; 15th May 2013 at 05:46 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 06:03 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
I measure the power for the digital supply. It uses 163mA AC @192khz and 146mA @ 96khz.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 09:43 AM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
I finished the first kit. I add R8 125K and sound is very good. CS8421 is a benefit. I bypass it and the sound is worse.

So now I will build the second kit with better regulator, larger capacitors, etc when these parts arrive.

It is a shame that only I build this ? It is a good kit for the money now the problems is fixed. The PCB is good enough and it is okay for solder and desolder. Maybe the small 10uF 35V SilmicII are fake. They test at correct value but they are exact same size as genuine 10uF 16V SilmicII. Some extra parts are needed but this is not much money. So, I can recommend it, especially if you a bass lover
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 02:46 PM   #17
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: GE
Nice to hear that you are satisfied. Can you summarize in the end which mods were most effective?

On your previous posts:
- interesting read on alternative use of regulators. I was not aware of this. I did calculate the noise relative to 3.6V output.
- what masterclock does the ES9023 get when you bypass the SRC?
  Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2013, 03:16 PM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Hi,

Good reading eh ? It is so surprising. Very smart.

I think the 3.5V LT1086 is most important. Bigger cap before and after is a must. After that, the signal path capacitor can improve the sound. But I have not tried new regulators. Do you know why Micrel mic5205 regulator is recommended ? Datasheet says 260nV rt hz, which is ~75uV rms. 5209 is worse.

I do not know if it is mclk from pcm2707 or cs8421. datasheet only says serial audio data port input is not changed. I think it must be pcm mclk but I am not certain. Sound is very bad with the bypass. I use 2.5V from regulator. maybe I should try with 1K series resistor. I think it is more worse than no CS at all and direct from pcm. bypass is not option.
__________________

Last edited by Nanoloop; 15th May 2013 at 03:42 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2013, 03:42 AM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Capacitor before LT regulator is increased to 1000uF. Ripple is 230mV on this. -75dB is ~40uV so 1000uF is okay.

180R is replaced with 2 infared LED at the base of LT1086. Output voltage is 3.55V. IR LED is very low noise so LT1086 is lowest noise possible for this.

Sound is better. I can easy hear this change. Bass dynamic is excellent. And there is more to get from this kit !
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ir led.jpg (148.4 KB, 122 views)
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 17th May 2013, 02:08 PM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
I try many caps for the ES9023. Sound is better than ES9023+te7022+sox resampler but the amplifier must be improved. It is hard to hear because amplifier is the limit.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Es9023 circuit 2.jpg (76.4 KB, 112 views)
File Type: jpg es caps.jpg (263.0 KB, 111 views)
__________________
  Reply With Quote

Reply


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
ESS ES9023 Sabre Premier DAC with integrated op amp twest820 Digital Line Level 61 27th April 2013 11:00 AM
Ess' DAC & ADC ES9006 ES9008 ES9012 ES9016 ES9018 ES9023 ES9102 ES9112 riversystem Vendor's Bazaar 3 1st April 2013 11:40 AM
WTB ES9023 DAC PCB by Subbu & Jean-Paul Reima Swap Meet 5 18th December 2012 07:39 PM
any experience with this ES9023 DAC kit? hop333 Digital Line Level 4 14th November 2012 01:03 PM
FULLY FINISHED ES9023 DAC KIT GROUPBUY heartwinter Vendor's Bazaar 43 30th April 2012 01:06 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:39 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2