DIR9001 vs CS8416 and poss CS8412 - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, 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 12th January 2012, 02:12 AM   #11
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
@abraxalito - you are one of the few that understand what that xtall clock does in WM8805.
The usual "mantra" that I saw around here is that somehow "reclocks" the incoming SPDIF signal.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2012, 02:26 AM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 109
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Perhaps those naive punters think that because there's an XTAL there's a varactor inside the WM8805 and that makes for a lower jitter (from narrower bandwidth) PLL? From reading the datasheet though it looks as though the WM8805's key feature is that the PLL is digital rather than analog.
__________________
Seek not the favour of the multitude...rather the testimony of few. And number not voices, but weigh them. - Kant
The capacity for impartial observation is commonly called 'cynicism' by those who lack it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2012, 10:07 AM   #13
UV101 is offline UV101  England
diyAudio Member
 
UV101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
I wonder if the best way forward would be to use the WM in hardware mode with on a board thats capable of CPU integration later?

What realistically could be used to control the chip? PIC? I guess you are just writing word value to specific memory in order to set modes etc?
__________________
When Bitstream came out, I thought, “my God, what are we going to do...?” Ken Ishiwata http://www.hifisounds.co.uk
JA-88D Class A, Audio Aero Capitole MKII, Focal and Kimber "Leave Nothing as Standard"
  Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2012, 10:12 AM   #14
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 109
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
ThorstenL's actually worked with programming the part so I defer to his greater experience.

As regards CPUs, I'm a devotee of ARM so I'm planning to use LPC1313 or LPC1113 in my design. That's because these have the grunt to do a bit of DSP (oversampling filter for example) and are barely more expensive than a PIC (sub $2). They have hardware I2C so at least part of the interfacing is done already.
__________________
Seek not the favour of the multitude...rather the testimony of few. And number not voices, but weigh them. - Kant
The capacity for impartial observation is commonly called 'cynicism' by those who lack it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2012, 12:19 AM   #15
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
Realistically a PIC10 would be easier to implement and costs less than 1 USD. But... is it worth dealing with the added circuits and RF noise? Do you have the programmer for it? You won't gain performance - 192kHz sample rate does not perform better in modern DAC's - look at their data sheets. Cannot "travel" via most of optical converters either.

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 13th January 2012 at 12:24 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2012, 01:56 AM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 109
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoNic_real_one View Post
Realistically a PIC10 would be easier to implement and costs less than 1 USD.
It doesn't appear to have the requisite serial ports for I2S. So as a way of programming the 8805 its fine, but doesn't add much interesting by way of DAC features. Like volume control to offer just one possibility.

Quote:
But... is it worth dealing with the added circuits and RF noise?
All reward is dependent on risk. Why would there be more 'added circuits' than with your PIC10 idea? Or are you comparing CPU with no CPU at all?

Quote:
Do you have the programmer for it?
For sure, that's one reason I chose this rather than a family I don't have the kit for. It programs itself though, just needs an interface.

Quote:
You won't gain performance - 192kHz sample rate does not perform better in modern DAC's - look at their data sheets.
You're jumping to delusions - I wasn't planning 192kHz nor was I planning to use a 'modern DAC' in my design. But I agree with your point - taking the PCM1704 as an example, the THD goes up as the sample rate goes up.
__________________
Seek not the favour of the multitude...rather the testimony of few. And number not voices, but weigh them. - Kant
The capacity for impartial observation is commonly called 'cynicism' by those who lack it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2012, 10:06 AM   #17
UV101 is offline UV101  England
diyAudio Member
 
UV101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
I do have a pic programmer and limited experience of programming with it!! (Never used it in ager as I intended!)

I'd not really be interested in the advanced features of the receiver other than the input selector might be useful? I cant help but think external mechanical control would possibly be better?

All this considered, it still sounds like the advanced clocking of the WM8805 even in H/W mode may be prefereable to the DIR9001?
__________________
When Bitstream came out, I thought, “my God, what are we going to do...?” Ken Ishiwata http://www.hifisounds.co.uk
JA-88D Class A, Audio Aero Capitole MKII, Focal and Kimber "Leave Nothing as Standard"
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2012, 12:01 PM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Virginia
WM8805 does NOT have any "advanced clocking", I was sure that you will missunderstand that - see my discution above.
It locks on to the SPDIF signal with the PLL loop, exactly like any other receiver. With 50pS jitter - like DIR9001.

PS: My bad, PIC10 was just an ideea of cheap, simple (6 pin) way to program the ports. Sorry, for i2c lines, there is PIC12F1822 at 1.15$ and 8 pin.

Last edited by SoNic_real_one; 13th January 2012 at 12:08 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2012, 01:34 PM   #19
UV101 is offline UV101  England
diyAudio Member
 
UV101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Oxford
Ok my misunderstanding. Nothing to be had by using the WM8805 in hardware mode over the DIR. The DIR it is then
__________________
When Bitstream came out, I thought, “my God, what are we going to do...?” Ken Ishiwata http://www.hifisounds.co.uk
JA-88D Class A, Audio Aero Capitole MKII, Focal and Kimber "Leave Nothing as Standard"
  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
A little advice if poss.....? mashypie Full Range 2 14th November 2010 07:13 PM
FS: DIR9001 to CS8412 converter board spencer Swap Meet 101 24th August 2010 10:16 AM
DIR9001 to CS8412 for sale... sklimek Swap Meet 1 6th April 2009 12:17 AM
DIR9001 Vs CS8416 bou Digital Source 1 13th June 2007 01:26 PM
CS8412 or CS8416 pigoia Digital Source 4 12th April 2007 10:03 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:18 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