TDA1541A "piggybacking" on analog metric pcb?

[Tam Lin]

A DIR to CXD adapter is doable but good luck finding anything like that on eBay.

[Mayday]

No, I was simply trying to say that if it can be done for SAA/TDA, it should be doable for CXD/TDA or AD1896/TDA. Not an adapter though, I'm(trying anyway) designing the PCB myself(with help from some friends).
Keeping my options open, and also learning eagle, I made several devices. I can't use both CXD and AD1896, but I made both devices(and bought them) to have options when the time comes to build this DAC. This is as much a learning experience for me as it is an attempt to make a DAC that might be even better than the Analog Metric I currently use.

[Tam Lin]

You're the one who brought up the adapter idea. If you are going to design a circuit that uses a DIR9001 connected to a TDA1541, with or without an AD1896 or SAA7220, you don't need an adapter. Those chips speak the same language. The purpose of the CS8412/14 adapter you mentioned to to use a DIR9001 in place of a CS8412/14 in an existing PCB. Since you are designing a PCB for the DIR9001, there is nothing to adapt.

With a 44.1K input sample rate, the DIR9001 outputs a 64-bit frame that has a bit rate of 2.8 MHz. The maximum bit rate the CXD1244 can handle is 2.1 MHz. Converting a 64-bit, 2.8 MHz frame to a 48-bit, 2.1 Mhz frame is not trivial. But why bother? The CXD is decades-old technology using fixed point math and table-based interpolation. There are dozens of more modern chips that can do a better job without any interface issues.

[Mayday]

Originally Posted by Tam Lin

You're the one who brought up the adapter idea. If you are going to design a circuit that uses a DIR9001 connected to a TDA1541, with or without an AD1896 or SAA7220, you don't need an adapter. Those chips speak the same language. The purpose of the CS8412/14 adapter you mentioned to to use a DIR9001 in place of a CS8412/14 in an existing PCB. Since you are designing a PCB for the DIR9001, there is nothing to adapt.

With a 44.1K input sample rate, the DIR9001 outputs a 64-bit frame that has a bit rate of 2.8 MHz. The maximum bit rate the CXD1244 can handle is 2.1 MHz. Converting a 64-bit, 2.8 MHz frame to a 48-bit, 2.1 Mhz frame is not trivial. But why bother? The CXD is decades-old technology using fixed point math and table-based interpolation. There are dozens of more modern chips that can do a better job without any interface issues.

I know, just meant it as an example.
I'm the first to admit that my knowledge is limited at best.
What IC would you put between DIR9001 and 4pcs TDA1541A?
I am very grateful for all input, critique and ideas.
Also, english is not my first language so I might not be able to make myself understood as well as I'd want at times.

[Tam Lin]

Originally Posted by Mayday

What IC would you put between DIR9001 and 4pcs TDA1541A?

Nothing. The devotees of the TDA1541A seem to prefer it non-oversampled. The supposed benefits of oversampling CD audio are relaxed LP filter requirements and increased sample width. Oversampling the 16-bit TDA1541 gives only the first one.

[Mayday]

I'm backwards that way I guess, I love the 1541 but I'd like to keep OS.

[Mayday]

Anyone that knows where to find cxd1244 lib for Eagle? The device I made is not working in layout-mode.

[Mayday]

Never mind, found my error.

[Mayday]

This project is moving along slowly. I'm in the process of designing one of the reciever boards, the one with 2pcs 1244. I'll make one with AD1896 too, to be able to compare the both and then decide which one to use.

[Mayday]

Did a little work on the DAC-board today. No where near finished, but I'm learning eagle as I go.