If anybody knows a model of player that uses Mediatek MT8580 or MT8581 - that way I could easily find the X-in pin. Now I have to choose between two pins and all I know is that one is X-in and the other X-out.
I remember when the Oppo 83 - their first Bluray player came out, I found that Philips used the same chip (or a variation) in their Bluray player. I was able to find a service manual for that - but Philips service manuals are often horrible and this one was no exception. But it did the trick.
So does anybody know a player other than Oppo that uses MT8580 or MT8581 chip?
Cheers, Joe R.
I remember when the Oppo 83 - their first Bluray player came out, I found that Philips used the same chip (or a variation) in their Bluray player. I was able to find a service manual for that - but Philips service manuals are often horrible and this one was no exception. But it did the trick.
So does anybody know a player other than Oppo that uses MT8580 or MT8581 chip?
Cheers, Joe R.
I think I may come out with a little explanation about my quietness in the last time, when about mods and practical informations/contribution from my part, even though I`ve got my 105 since quite long time now.
In the end of the last year I have been in a moving process (my place), and this meant for me that completely different priorities I have to care about. I just have done nothing with both 95 and 105 in the last time... It were quite frustrating to have this bran new player, and couldn`t do anything in this respect... My 95 is waiting too...
Now I`m almost finish to get ready my new workshop for the real work to begin, and I hope that soon I will be able to take a closer look and concentrate me on this last player model.
In the end of the last year I have been in a moving process (my place), and this meant for me that completely different priorities I have to care about. I just have done nothing with both 95 and 105 in the last time... It were quite frustrating to have this bran new player, and couldn`t do anything in this respect... My 95 is waiting too...
Now I`m almost finish to get ready my new workshop for the real work to begin, and I hope that soon I will be able to take a closer look and concentrate me on this last player model.
Hi Ric. We have been getting some feedback and much of it tallies well with my experience. What seems to be confirmed is that the SAW seems to excel at revealing detail, and even against the Crystek.
On that point, it seems to be good news.
Certainly at the very least competitive against the Crystek and it would seem that some will prefer it to the Crystek. Over-all it does match the level and as such is the winner price wise.
Now I am desperate to find a 54MHz SAW to convert to 27MHz. I even tried to see if Crystek made a 27MHz if I can't get SAW. But alas, it doesn't look like it.
I need a very good 27Mhz (or 54MHz), if I cannot get a SAW, and whatever is the best available at less than ridiculous prices.
If any ideas, would appreciate it. What do you reckon is the best 27MHz solution?
Cheers, Joe R.
Joe,
Who is this "we" that has been getting feedback about Crystek versus Saw? Exactly who listened to what and in what way? What frequencies were A/Bed and in what machines and in what position? How does dividing the frequency by two affect the sound? Can a 54meg Saw.....sawed in half...he he...really beat a 27 meg Crystek? The value and type of resistor on the output of the oscillator can make the oscillator sound terrible to incredible. If you don't have a great power supply, if you don't have the right bypass caps in the right direction, if you don't damp the oscillator, if you use the wrong kind of wiring in the wrong way, etc. etc. then the results are invalid. Everything has to be done to a very exact same super way for anything to be known. This is my experience with 35 plus years of tweaking. Casual A/Bs are not going to give you seriously correct results.
Anotherwords, I don't believe what you say about the Saw because you are not descibing in any detail who did what and in what way. "We" are getting feedback....is not enough for me.
This is the main problem I have with most info posted anywhere. Someone makes some sweeping statement that is never backed up by anything real......and what I mean real is: a really clear description of the listening tests including backround info on the listener (to see how tweaky the person is) and his listening setup.
Joe, there is enough info about you and your listening habits and tweakiness that I would trust an A/B done by yourself. So, have you A/Bed a 100meg Saw with an older Crystek 950 or the newer 575 and what were your results? This is what I am interested in. Someones direct listening experience. Not "we" have gotten feedback.....whatever that means.
Who is this "we" that has been getting feedback about Crystek versus Saw? Exactly who listened to what and in what way? What frequencies were A/Bed and in what machines and in what position? How does dividing the frequency by two affect the sound? Can a 54meg Saw.....sawed in half...he he...really beat a 27 meg Crystek? The value and type of resistor on the output of the oscillator can make the oscillator sound terrible to incredible. If you don't have a great power supply, if you don't have the right bypass caps in the right direction, if you don't damp the oscillator, if you use the wrong kind of wiring in the wrong way, etc. etc. then the results are invalid. Everything has to be done to a very exact same super way for anything to be known. This is my experience with 35 plus years of tweaking. Casual A/Bs are not going to give you seriously correct results.
Anotherwords, I don't believe what you say about the Saw because you are not descibing in any detail who did what and in what way. "We" are getting feedback....is not enough for me.
This is the main problem I have with most info posted anywhere. Someone makes some sweeping statement that is never backed up by anything real......and what I mean real is: a really clear description of the listening tests including backround info on the listener (to see how tweaky the person is) and his listening setup.
Joe, there is enough info about you and your listening habits and tweakiness that I would trust an A/B done by yourself. So, have you A/Bed a 100meg Saw with an older Crystek 950 or the newer 575 and what were your results? This is what I am interested in. Someones direct listening experience. Not "we" have gotten feedback.....whatever that means.
Everything doesn't happen at once. I didn't know you were going to hammer the "we" - my post was an interim one, I thought you realised that. No "sweeping statements" intended.
The "good News" is that the SAW is indeed competitive according to guys I know that play around with Buffalo DACs and I suggested trying to do the SAW because I knew they were using 100MHz 957 Crystek and the same Epson Toyocom 100MHz SAW was available to them. Their location is Malaysia and there are well known to a business associate of somebody I do business with in Kuala Lumpur.
In fact THEY READ THIS THREAD! (Hi David).
So please Ric (Deja Vu), I thought I was conveying something positive, and also would love YOU to try the SAW since you yourself said "I want the SAW to win - it's cheaper" and hence we both have a similar interest, because that is what I want too. But also that it may not actually be a cheap replacement, but an alternative to the Crystek.
I am simply trying to get MORE people to try the SAW, because there is a natural resistance against it (I know because I have faced it even from people WHO make them), they are NOT meant for audio. Only those with Sabre DACs can use it and THEY are the only ones who can point OTHERS in the right way. I think I am trying to achieve something POSITIVE - and I want your help.
The "we" above, have in fact sent me a 100MHz 957 Crystek, so I shall indeed try it.
All I am saying is that a consensus is emerging: The SAW is more detailed, perhaps less romantic (and I may actually think it may be taking an additive away), has really great PRAT. Don't forget that Coris too here has given it the thumbs up. Up to him to explain how (power supplyn etc) he is using it. He did swap a Crystek out and a SAW in and that is at least a valid observation.
Notwithstanding what may or may not affect the oscillator in an installation, we could have endless discussions about that alone. In Malaysia, they have used the Russell White's power supply. You may know more about that than I do. Also, what Coris is using, you are free to ask him. I also use our Terra-Firma power supply, which is a servo-controlled power supply that is tuned/filtered down to an extreme low frequency and of course low noise elsewhere.
I too had reservations about dividing-by-two option. But really no choice other than try it - and it surprised me. Both the 50MHz SAW and the 98MHz capable version of the 4040 chip, is powered by the same T-F as a "unit". Yes, I am also particular to the wire I use, I use a twisted pair single-core silver-clad high purity copper wire.
Is the Crystek available in 27MHz? I would love to know, and use that in the Oppo 105 here, which is due to be sent to Taiwan. Also, to set up guys elsewhere, including KL and Europe, to do the identical upgrades there.
And, that was the other intention of my post, what is the best 27MHz candidate available right now, and if you have any ideas/suggestions?
Ohhh. Actually, just occurred to me that maybe you are also looking for the same thing. I don't think of you as a competitor, the world is big enough for everybody. So maybe this is something you want to keep to yourself? On the other hand, perhaps we can simply point to the fact that our implementations are different, something that you stress yourself as 'differentiation.'
Early here, got a busy day ahead, so I just quickly hammered away the above. Please don't pick on a single word, as that means the flow of my thinking is interrupted (I type fast and I type 'ideas' rather than words, and then can be misunderstood easily if the the overall picture is not taken into account - it is NOT meant as sweeping statements.)
Cheers, Joe R.
Joe,
I think you are getting your numbers mixed up. The 957 is available up to 50meg. The 950 (older low jitter clock) and the recently released 575 are available at 100 meg. So, someone is sending you a ? clock (either 950 or 575?) to try against your saw? Looking forward to hearing about your sonic results. By the way, the very old 950 is not a 575. So, you would really have to A/B the 950 versus the 575 versus the Saw to really know anything about the latest Crystek oscillators. If you only A/Bed versus the older 950 what does that tell you about the very new 575?.....nothing. The 950 was designed years ago.....have they updated it? Does it sound the same as the 575? I doubt it. I believe the 950 is what is used in the Buffalo DAC......so, if that is what everyone of the "we" has A/Bed their SAW against.....well....what does it tell you about the newer 575? You see how fussy I am? This fussiness is about finding out as much of the truth about something that is possible. The truth of our beings is Love and Joy. Everything else is a constant changing fun game. What is the leader today, goes into the trash bin tomorrow. Only Love is eternal. Enjoy.....In Joy!
I think you are getting your numbers mixed up. The 957 is available up to 50meg. The 950 (older low jitter clock) and the recently released 575 are available at 100 meg. So, someone is sending you a ? clock (either 950 or 575?) to try against your saw? Looking forward to hearing about your sonic results. By the way, the very old 950 is not a 575. So, you would really have to A/B the 950 versus the 575 versus the Saw to really know anything about the latest Crystek oscillators. If you only A/Bed versus the older 950 what does that tell you about the very new 575?.....nothing. The 950 was designed years ago.....have they updated it? Does it sound the same as the 575? I doubt it. I believe the 950 is what is used in the Buffalo DAC......so, if that is what everyone of the "we" has A/Bed their SAW against.....well....what does it tell you about the newer 575? You see how fussy I am? This fussiness is about finding out as much of the truth about something that is possible. The truth of our beings is Love and Joy. Everything else is a constant changing fun game. What is the leader today, goes into the trash bin tomorrow. Only Love is eternal. Enjoy.....In Joy!
Last edited:
Hi Joe,
Thought I'd chip in.
A 100mHz Epson SAW was compared to the 100mHz Crystek (must be the older type) fitted as standard to the Twisted Pear BII. Two BII dacs with transformer "I/V" previously set up as full dual mono were reconfigured to operate as individual stereo units. One dac was fitted with the SAW and a 0.1uf smd cap as per manufacturer's recommendation. The outputs of each dac could be switched on the fly to feed the pair of I/V transformers. Of the 5 listeners, 3 clearly favored the SAW, and 2 (including myself) were undecided though one of us would choose the Crystek if forced to. The SAW, even to me, appears to have better resolution.
I won't go into details of my system suffice to say that it is a very very good set up. The listeners were all males and two of them are musicians. None knew the nature of the comparison and were told to note down preferences for dac A or B based on playback of material that we were all familiar with. This was not a group listening test but each person listened individually and on different days.
Later a bad cold stopped my further evaluating the dacs and I loaned them out to a friend with a totally different type of system. He clearly preferred the SAW fitted dac. His feedback was very much in line with what the others were saying.
I will start loaning out my dacs again soon and will provide Joe with more feedback. In the meantime, the SAW fitted dac is "slowly winning" me over as I listen to it over an extended period. I need a lot of convincing before something is fitted with some permanence in my system.
I recommend others here to try the SAW oscillator. It is a cheap enough diy experiment that won't take more than a few minutes to undertake. If you don't like it, the process is easily reversed. I'd be happy if someone would send me the new Crystek in 100mhz to A/B against the SAW and older Crystek.
Cheers,
David
Thought I'd chip in.
A 100mHz Epson SAW was compared to the 100mHz Crystek (must be the older type) fitted as standard to the Twisted Pear BII. Two BII dacs with transformer "I/V" previously set up as full dual mono were reconfigured to operate as individual stereo units. One dac was fitted with the SAW and a 0.1uf smd cap as per manufacturer's recommendation. The outputs of each dac could be switched on the fly to feed the pair of I/V transformers. Of the 5 listeners, 3 clearly favored the SAW, and 2 (including myself) were undecided though one of us would choose the Crystek if forced to. The SAW, even to me, appears to have better resolution.
I won't go into details of my system suffice to say that it is a very very good set up. The listeners were all males and two of them are musicians. None knew the nature of the comparison and were told to note down preferences for dac A or B based on playback of material that we were all familiar with. This was not a group listening test but each person listened individually and on different days.
Later a bad cold stopped my further evaluating the dacs and I loaned them out to a friend with a totally different type of system. He clearly preferred the SAW fitted dac. His feedback was very much in line with what the others were saying.
I will start loaning out my dacs again soon and will provide Joe with more feedback. In the meantime, the SAW fitted dac is "slowly winning" me over as I listen to it over an extended period. I need a lot of convincing before something is fitted with some permanence in my system.
I recommend others here to try the SAW oscillator. It is a cheap enough diy experiment that won't take more than a few minutes to undertake. If you don't like it, the process is easily reversed. I'd be happy if someone would send me the new Crystek in 100mhz to A/B against the SAW and older Crystek.
Cheers,
David
Last edited:
David,
Were the two DACs a/bed into the output stage before changing the clocks? Another words......do you know for sure that the two DACs sounded exactly the same when they both had the same brand of clock? When you installed the SAW into one of the DACs did you use the same length and type of wire, damp the oscillators the same, use the exact same power supply as the one with the Crystek? Did you also add the .1 surface mount cap across the Crystek oscillator?
The point of the above is: EVERY single thing you do makes a sonic difference. So, when you are doing an A/B every single thing has to be done the same.
I am not saying your sonic observations are not valid. But this game is really really subtle. I have been A/Bing things for over 35 years....and as our sound systems get even tweakier than smaller and smaller things make more and more difference. When you have 100 veils then removing one makes very little difference.....but when you have only a few small veils then playing with anything makes a serious sonic difference.
Were the two DACs a/bed into the output stage before changing the clocks? Another words......do you know for sure that the two DACs sounded exactly the same when they both had the same brand of clock? When you installed the SAW into one of the DACs did you use the same length and type of wire, damp the oscillators the same, use the exact same power supply as the one with the Crystek? Did you also add the .1 surface mount cap across the Crystek oscillator?
The point of the above is: EVERY single thing you do makes a sonic difference. So, when you are doing an A/B every single thing has to be done the same.
I am not saying your sonic observations are not valid. But this game is really really subtle. I have been A/Bing things for over 35 years....and as our sound systems get even tweakier than smaller and smaller things make more and more difference. When you have 100 veils then removing one makes very little difference.....but when you have only a few small veils then playing with anything makes a serious sonic difference.
Ric,
Having been playing around with Hifi for more than 20 years I agree, a lot of things make a difference. I can only do my best to make sure that things are as "equal" as possible when doing the A/B.
The two BII were exactly the same in all aspects right down to power supplies and current draw etc. before one was fitted with the SAW. I don't know if they sounded exactly the same as individual stereo units as they were running as dual mono prior to fitting one with the SAW.
Surely, one has to accept that they would. If one is challenged here, I would then put it to you that even two Crystek oscillators, though "exactly" the same, may sound different.
The Crystek did not have the 0.1uf smd cap as I would have thought that Twisted Pear followed manufacturer's recommendations when fitting it. So yes, in that respect there is a slight difference. Am I going to sweat over it? Nope. I have at least tried to make a comparison and one as fair as I could. That the differences in sonics of the two dacs isn't so subtle is good enough to tell me that the clocks do sound different. As I mentioned, I am undecided which is best and I sent Joe a Crystek for his own evaluation.
Agree with you on the veils and I have no idea how many veils your's or Joe's systems have. Neither do you know how many veils mine has. The point here is that if more people evaluate the SAW, we can get some general consensus on what it does. And if you do it, you too will know. Instead of being so skeptical, why don't you try a SAW in your application?
Having been playing around with Hifi for more than 20 years I agree, a lot of things make a difference. I can only do my best to make sure that things are as "equal" as possible when doing the A/B.
The two BII were exactly the same in all aspects right down to power supplies and current draw etc. before one was fitted with the SAW. I don't know if they sounded exactly the same as individual stereo units as they were running as dual mono prior to fitting one with the SAW.
Surely, one has to accept that they would. If one is challenged here, I would then put it to you that even two Crystek oscillators, though "exactly" the same, may sound different.
The Crystek did not have the 0.1uf smd cap as I would have thought that Twisted Pear followed manufacturer's recommendations when fitting it. So yes, in that respect there is a slight difference. Am I going to sweat over it? Nope. I have at least tried to make a comparison and one as fair as I could. That the differences in sonics of the two dacs isn't so subtle is good enough to tell me that the clocks do sound different. As I mentioned, I am undecided which is best and I sent Joe a Crystek for his own evaluation.
Agree with you on the veils and I have no idea how many veils your's or Joe's systems have. Neither do you know how many veils mine has. The point here is that if more people evaluate the SAW, we can get some general consensus on what it does. And if you do it, you too will know. Instead of being so skeptical, why don't you try a SAW in your application?
Hi David
That is all I am asking for. Even Epson Toyocom who makes them, are wondering why I am interested in using them for audio and tried to make me look for a different line they thought more suitable. The SAW is a NON-audio oscillator. But not with the Sabre DAC, but resistance is there. Maybe we can overcome that, and Toyocom might make a 54MHz - look at all the multi-players out there using 27MHz, not just Oppo, and all those that are still to come. What about the Oppo 103, which has only the one 27MHz clock that does everything. Would love to know what a SAW would do there. I don't expect they will make anything lower than 50MHz, so 54MHz is more probable.
(But right now, SAW or otherwise, who makes the best 27MHz oscillator right now, I don't think Crystek has been in 957?)
Also, what about all the other Buffalo guys out there? Must be heaps of them. Everybody will have a chance to make up their own minds.
Cheers, Joe R.
Last edited:
Skeptical? Not in the least. I have no idea how a Saw sounds versus anything....nor do I really care. As I said earlier, I hope the Saw wins....it is cheaper. I just want to know what the truth is. This is my hope....that my little knowledge can help you find the truth....the truth about yourself is most important: (that you are a magnificient, beautiful God of Love, Wisdom, Power and Joy)...this clock thing is very unimportant in the grand scheme of things.
If a lot of people think the Saw really is that great I am sure I will try one. I have lots of things on my plate and a "better clock" is just one of many things to try. I am working on class A amps, open baffle planar/servo woofer speakers, and interconnect cables. So, I hope you all will do really good A/Bs with clocks and be my helpers.....we all lift each other up. My knowledge helps you, your knowledge (direct experience is the only real knowledge) helps me. This way we all grow and prosper.
There are lots of areas in a 105 that make more difference than some "better clock" in one place. Even removing the toslink connector makes a serious improvement in the sound. And if you never remove it, the machine will always have a serious limitation. I am a 100%/95% guy.....that is, you do everything possible on every part (100%) of your stereo to 95%......the last 5% is just obsession. You can spend way too much time on oscillators, or power supplies, or coupling caps, or output stages or damping or transport mods or WA Quantum chips or whatever. That last 5% is always changing as well, as we learn of new and better clocks, caps, power supplies, WA Quantum super chips mark II, whatever.
The game is perfection. We are trying to perfect our audio playback system. We will never get there. Only our true nature is perfect. This is where we dwell eternally. Our illusion is that we think we are not perfect...so then we spend incarnation after incarnation trying to "get it" (remember). We slowly get it and keep awaking to our perfection, becoming more and more loving, wise and joyful. This game too shall never end. It is the only game/dance there is.
If a lot of people think the Saw really is that great I am sure I will try one. I have lots of things on my plate and a "better clock" is just one of many things to try. I am working on class A amps, open baffle planar/servo woofer speakers, and interconnect cables. So, I hope you all will do really good A/Bs with clocks and be my helpers.....we all lift each other up. My knowledge helps you, your knowledge (direct experience is the only real knowledge) helps me. This way we all grow and prosper.
There are lots of areas in a 105 that make more difference than some "better clock" in one place. Even removing the toslink connector makes a serious improvement in the sound. And if you never remove it, the machine will always have a serious limitation. I am a 100%/95% guy.....that is, you do everything possible on every part (100%) of your stereo to 95%......the last 5% is just obsession. You can spend way too much time on oscillators, or power supplies, or coupling caps, or output stages or damping or transport mods or WA Quantum chips or whatever. That last 5% is always changing as well, as we learn of new and better clocks, caps, power supplies, WA Quantum super chips mark II, whatever.
The game is perfection. We are trying to perfect our audio playback system. We will never get there. Only our true nature is perfect. This is where we dwell eternally. Our illusion is that we think we are not perfect...so then we spend incarnation after incarnation trying to "get it" (remember). We slowly get it and keep awaking to our perfection, becoming more and more loving, wise and joyful. This game too shall never end. It is the only game/dance there is.
The current "state of the art" low jitter $25 clocks from Crystek are really very crude. Imagine what they could do at a $100-$500+ each price point. I am going to call them this week and demand such an item. He he. Have you seen the $10,000 Femtosecond clocks from MSB? They have at least 35db lower measured phase noise at 10hz than Crystek!!!!! What if Crystek could give us this for a few hundred dollars instead of $10,000.......now this would be way cool! I am sorry, but I cannot get all that excited about a "slightly better?" than Crystek oscillator.....the game is just beginning.....hold on to your hats!
Yes, I sweep very well......I have a gigantic broom of Love.......You are beautiful....each and every one is precious. We all feel this about our new borns.....why do we lose this feeling? Everyone is our son and daughter.....everyone is our brother and sister. We are magnificent!
Yes, I sweep very well......I have a gigantic broom of Love.......You are beautiful....each and every one is precious. We all feel this about our new borns.....why do we lose this feeling? Everyone is our son and daughter.....everyone is our brother and sister. We are magnificent!
Last edited:
I found this oscillator. It may be better than the stock one in the player:
Crystals and Oscillators | Oscillators | DigiKey
Crystals and Oscillators | Oscillators | DigiKey
Not in stock, single unit price $127.60 and $91.87 if ordering 10. Qty 250 $71.46
Here some some other chewable info. Have you guys played with the WA-Quantum stickers? I have gotten incredible results with these things. I will be putting a semiconductor one on a Crystek oscillator and see what it does.
How about the steel shield around the oscillators. Generally steel adds steely sound. How about cutting of the roof off a Crystek/SAW/whatever oscillator and replacing it with brass. Brass is not magnetic and has nicer resonance properties. Just thought of this last night. Definately going to try it. I bet it will make a slight improvement. I will also try the oscillator without a top, but I bet it will sound better with full shield on top. The older non surface mount oscillators were worse in that the whole thing was encased in steel....even the bottom and even the pins that came through the case on the bottom were steel. The Tent oscillators that Joe and I used for awhile are all steel like this.....I always thought they sounded a bit "hard".
How about the steel shield around the oscillators. Generally steel adds steely sound. How about cutting of the roof off a Crystek/SAW/whatever oscillator and replacing it with brass. Brass is not magnetic and has nicer resonance properties. Just thought of this last night. Definately going to try it. I bet it will make a slight improvement. I will also try the oscillator without a top, but I bet it will sound better with full shield on top. The older non surface mount oscillators were worse in that the whole thing was encased in steel....even the bottom and even the pins that came through the case on the bottom were steel. The Tent oscillators that Joe and I used for awhile are all steel like this.....I always thought they sounded a bit "hard".
Last edited: