UDP-203 DAC coupling capacitor upgrade.
A simple, relatively cheap and non experimental upgrade.
Just replace the electrolytic stock coupling capacitor from the DAC board with a Panasonic OSCON and in parallel a Wima film capacitor. And do this for each of the eight channels.
Did not expect much because it is just a basic modification, but the results of the "blind men's test" were quite a positive surprise.
I wonder how this Mod sounds on a virgin UDP-203, without a LPM and upgraded clocks.
(Photo bottom DAC board with the Wima's I borrowed from Jae Hong Lee. Did not want to take the DAC board out again for photo, the connectors are not that great and I don't want to break them)
A simple, relatively cheap and non experimental upgrade.
Just replace the electrolytic stock coupling capacitor from the DAC board with a Panasonic OSCON and in parallel a Wima film capacitor. And do this for each of the eight channels.
Did not expect much because it is just a basic modification, but the results of the "blind men's test" were quite a positive surprise.
I wonder how this Mod sounds on a virgin UDP-203, without a LPM and upgraded clocks.
(Photo bottom DAC board with the Wima's I borrowed from Jae Hong Lee. Did not want to take the DAC board out again for photo, the connectors are not that great and I don't want to break them)
Attachments
Coris,
Does it make you wonder if modifications really make a difference when the stock Oppo 205 measures amazingly well?
Review and Measurements of Oppo UDP-205 UHD Player | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
I'm honestly curious regarding your thoughts. I have a modfied Oppo 203 but I use the HDMI output only.
Best,
Anand.
Does it make you wonder if modifications really make a difference when the stock Oppo 205 measures amazingly well?
Review and Measurements of Oppo UDP-205 UHD Player | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum
I'm honestly curious regarding your thoughts. I have a modfied Oppo 203 but I use the HDMI output only.
Best,
Anand.
Well, it does not make me wonder if improvements it make a difference. I know by own experiences, and I am sure it are differences (at least, is not only myself who have such opinion).
What is a little bit special here, is that one who listen to a stock 205 (or whatever), or it measure it, cannot figure out what the differences are, or how a improved device it can perform, sounds (or about its video performances). The differences are to be revealed only after one may experience a improved device. That one who measure or appreciate a stock device, have not come (yet) to that point to appreciate, or experience how it perform a improved device. There are here two distinct users categories. While the category of users who had a stock device and then experience a improved one, can see/hear the differences, another category it cannot. Because the first category of users were not interest or had not (yet) the opportunity to face the two devices in the same appreciating session, in a test stock versus improved, or in a blind test. I cannot remember I have ever read, or heard about a such serious test: stock vs improved.
This fact it have many causes: big practical inconveniences in organising a such test, practical difficulties in finding two original identical devices, where one it was improved, a highly competent and honest/neutral (no commercial interests involved) testing team, and so on...
However, I wonder very much about how a stock 205 it can measure well, with a very noisy cheap SMPS inside, with huge ripples in analogue power system, with design faults, and so on, and so on...
I will not contest the (linked) measurements and its results, but I am very sure that a improved device it could measure even better, and it perform in fact even better.
Oppo products it excel in that are (were) average quality products (low enough cost produced, and sold as well), based on a quite high quality hardware. Therefore it are improvable. Their hardware it allow such. Not all qualities of the hardware used in design are revealed by (the right ) implementation or in conjunction with the other sections of the functional system. Software system is also another very important part of the whole thing...
I assume you improved at least the PSU in your 203. You could see and hear the differences (SMPS vs LPS). Did you?
Then it is another aspect in all this. A good measuring device it not necessary mean a good performing device for the human perceptual systems. Someone may think or assume, when seeing results of good measurements, that the thing it should perform accordingly well (because it measure well), when confronted with the human perceptual senses. This logical assertion/connection is not always true in fact... There are nuances...
Anyway, the measurements of stock things as the improvements of the same things it goes on further (a little bit paralleled...). For the all involved satisfactions...
What is a little bit special here, is that one who listen to a stock 205 (or whatever), or it measure it, cannot figure out what the differences are, or how a improved device it can perform, sounds (or about its video performances). The differences are to be revealed only after one may experience a improved device. That one who measure or appreciate a stock device, have not come (yet) to that point to appreciate, or experience how it perform a improved device. There are here two distinct users categories. While the category of users who had a stock device and then experience a improved one, can see/hear the differences, another category it cannot. Because the first category of users were not interest or had not (yet) the opportunity to face the two devices in the same appreciating session, in a test stock versus improved, or in a blind test. I cannot remember I have ever read, or heard about a such serious test: stock vs improved.
This fact it have many causes: big practical inconveniences in organising a such test, practical difficulties in finding two original identical devices, where one it was improved, a highly competent and honest/neutral (no commercial interests involved) testing team, and so on...
However, I wonder very much about how a stock 205 it can measure well, with a very noisy cheap SMPS inside, with huge ripples in analogue power system, with design faults, and so on, and so on...
I will not contest the (linked) measurements and its results, but I am very sure that a improved device it could measure even better, and it perform in fact even better.
Oppo products it excel in that are (were) average quality products (low enough cost produced, and sold as well), based on a quite high quality hardware. Therefore it are improvable. Their hardware it allow such. Not all qualities of the hardware used in design are revealed by (the right ) implementation or in conjunction with the other sections of the functional system. Software system is also another very important part of the whole thing...
I assume you improved at least the PSU in your 203. You could see and hear the differences (SMPS vs LPS). Did you?
Then it is another aspect in all this. A good measuring device it not necessary mean a good performing device for the human perceptual systems. Someone may think or assume, when seeing results of good measurements, that the thing it should perform accordingly well (because it measure well), when confronted with the human perceptual senses. This logical assertion/connection is not always true in fact... There are nuances...
Anyway, the measurements of stock things as the improvements of the same things it goes on further (a little bit paralleled...). For the all involved satisfactions...
Last edited:
Coris,
First I think it is great that you offer modifications to the Oppo 203/205 series of players. And I am glad that you have customers who are happy with your modifications and ideas.
However, I see little to no objective evidence of how your modifications whether they be linear power supply implementations, various clock schemes, and redesign of the analog output stages IMPROVE the stock Oppo 2XX series players. If you showed some before and after measurements with a credible device like the Audio Precision 555 (as Amir has done in the aforementioned link), it might lend credence to your redesign work. Or else, the end user/client will never know how your work is better than Jaehong Lee (Oppo Mods), ModWright, Ric Shultz, etc...it's just picking whoever has the most favorable highly subjective reviews (or best website, or best pictures) in systems that none of us are familiar with. There is so much bias with these reviews. So much bias for the modification to SOUND BETTER.
The other reason to show measurements like what is seen in the ASR forum above, is to show that you are not making the Oppo 2XX series of players to measure WORSE. I know you are sure. Show us objectively that you are sure that your design is BETTER.
My Oppo 203 has an improved linear power supply, implementation of two new clocks (one for the main system clock and one for the HDMI clock), and some resonance damping. So I am not opposed to modifications. But modification without objective proof seems to be a dangerous circle. And I realize that. I will admit that I enjoy the diy aspect of this hobby and that was one of the impetuses of performing the modification. It is fun. But is it objectively better?
Please understand that this is the diyaudio forum. You will see, especially in the solid state forums, Pass Labs, etc...that there are several designers who are providing objective proof that their designs as COMPETENT. That competency is important to show that you are accountable for your work. Or else what will we do? Use the "Golden Ear" of an audiophile who is 65 years old and suffers from presbyacusis who has never had his hearing tested? Listen to an "audiophile" who has a tiny room with modal resonances and incompetently designed loudspeakers from a woodworker who doesn't know how to design a crossover? Listen to an individual who has bought the modification but feels justified to say positive things about the modification because he/she spent so much money?
Think about it. It is scary.
Perhaps Oppo 2XX series are such considerable improvements (at least objectively) than their former models that modifications have to be done with considerable care so as to not disrupt that which is essentially an excellently engineered product. Or not done at all. And the link from ASR above solidifies that even more. Are there aspects that we cannot measure? Perhaps. But our understanding now particularly with psychoacoustics has improved considerably in the last 20 years. Measurement devices have CONSIDERABLY improved. What is important is to do the measurements with a device with the highest resolution and then correlate that with listening.
Best,
Anand.
First I think it is great that you offer modifications to the Oppo 203/205 series of players. And I am glad that you have customers who are happy with your modifications and ideas.
However, I see little to no objective evidence of how your modifications whether they be linear power supply implementations, various clock schemes, and redesign of the analog output stages IMPROVE the stock Oppo 2XX series players. If you showed some before and after measurements with a credible device like the Audio Precision 555 (as Amir has done in the aforementioned link), it might lend credence to your redesign work. Or else, the end user/client will never know how your work is better than Jaehong Lee (Oppo Mods), ModWright, Ric Shultz, etc...it's just picking whoever has the most favorable highly subjective reviews (or best website, or best pictures) in systems that none of us are familiar with. There is so much bias with these reviews. So much bias for the modification to SOUND BETTER.
The other reason to show measurements like what is seen in the ASR forum above, is to show that you are not making the Oppo 2XX series of players to measure WORSE. I know you are sure. Show us objectively that you are sure that your design is BETTER.
My Oppo 203 has an improved linear power supply, implementation of two new clocks (one for the main system clock and one for the HDMI clock), and some resonance damping. So I am not opposed to modifications. But modification without objective proof seems to be a dangerous circle. And I realize that. I will admit that I enjoy the diy aspect of this hobby and that was one of the impetuses of performing the modification. It is fun. But is it objectively better?
Please understand that this is the diyaudio forum. You will see, especially in the solid state forums, Pass Labs, etc...that there are several designers who are providing objective proof that their designs as COMPETENT. That competency is important to show that you are accountable for your work. Or else what will we do? Use the "Golden Ear" of an audiophile who is 65 years old and suffers from presbyacusis who has never had his hearing tested? Listen to an "audiophile" who has a tiny room with modal resonances and incompetently designed loudspeakers from a woodworker who doesn't know how to design a crossover? Listen to an individual who has bought the modification but feels justified to say positive things about the modification because he/she spent so much money?
Think about it. It is scary.
Perhaps Oppo 2XX series are such considerable improvements (at least objectively) than their former models that modifications have to be done with considerable care so as to not disrupt that which is essentially an excellently engineered product. Or not done at all. And the link from ASR above solidifies that even more. Are there aspects that we cannot measure? Perhaps. But our understanding now particularly with psychoacoustics has improved considerably in the last 20 years. Measurement devices have CONSIDERABLY improved. What is important is to do the measurements with a device with the highest resolution and then correlate that with listening.
Best,
Anand.
Last edited:
The best part is you can send Amir at Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum and he will measure your modded dac for the cost of shipping one way. Win-Win
Anand
Well, thanks for your opinions/advices. I may precise that I am only one in between many others who activate in this field, first on a hobby basis. I do what I do and I present here my findings or ideas for improvements, as many other does. I am a part of the many DIYers, and modders out there who enjoy this hobby first as it is: a hobby. I do not pretend that I am doing the best in the world, and I do not advertise here for my ideas and solutions. I sustain my ideas, but I am receptive to the critics and comments. Here is an arena for such exchanges for experiences, solutions, improvements, etc. In my turn, I am critical when I appreciate the things it could be done in a different way.
Doing measurements as you suggest (or even ask for) in your post, it could be a hobby in itself for someones, it may mean a very solid investment, in both time and measurement devices. All this it also mean that the one involved in such tremendous and very expensive work may have in addition, some very solid interests in promoting one or another, demonstrate that the one or another device it measure better/best, and that product it is recommended for the customers or the interested ones out there. Honestly, I am very far from such scenarios, activity or interests in promoting or demonstrate that my ideas are the best for one or another to buy it. There is a big difference in between presenting (showing) one or an other, and advertising for one or another...
At a more reasonable scale I have done and presented here many measurements for different of my ideas or solutions. All this on hobby basis, the same as other participants here into this thread or whatever are doing. By the way, if you will chose to go back into these posts here, you will find many of my measurements, and even I showed how big is the ripple in analogue power stage of the 205...
I do not want impose, convince or advertise to the rest of the world, about/for my solutions. Those who chose to adopt it and are satisfied with the results, may say thanks and that`s all. Those who are critical or opponent to my ideas or solutions, will go further looking for better, or something else... Or may comment about what is to be commented. As usually, they who adopted my solutions, they were satisfied with the results... The same, the ones who may appreciate that my solutions it worsen the original approach/device, are free to looks for something better, or different.
Those peoples who own an Oppo device, may chose themselves to use it as it is (because it is a well engineered product), while the other ones, who may want more, or are not satisfied with that well engendered product, may find and adopt what they may appreciate as an improvement. Those who may want to show one or another, through measurements, with most sophisticated and expensive tools, may do it as they want. So simple it is...
I will conclude my comments in this field, with a question: it your modified 203 player, measure better than the well engineered original one?
Well, thanks for your opinions/advices. I may precise that I am only one in between many others who activate in this field, first on a hobby basis. I do what I do and I present here my findings or ideas for improvements, as many other does. I am a part of the many DIYers, and modders out there who enjoy this hobby first as it is: a hobby. I do not pretend that I am doing the best in the world, and I do not advertise here for my ideas and solutions. I sustain my ideas, but I am receptive to the critics and comments. Here is an arena for such exchanges for experiences, solutions, improvements, etc. In my turn, I am critical when I appreciate the things it could be done in a different way.
Doing measurements as you suggest (or even ask for) in your post, it could be a hobby in itself for someones, it may mean a very solid investment, in both time and measurement devices. All this it also mean that the one involved in such tremendous and very expensive work may have in addition, some very solid interests in promoting one or another, demonstrate that the one or another device it measure better/best, and that product it is recommended for the customers or the interested ones out there. Honestly, I am very far from such scenarios, activity or interests in promoting or demonstrate that my ideas are the best for one or another to buy it. There is a big difference in between presenting (showing) one or an other, and advertising for one or another...
At a more reasonable scale I have done and presented here many measurements for different of my ideas or solutions. All this on hobby basis, the same as other participants here into this thread or whatever are doing. By the way, if you will chose to go back into these posts here, you will find many of my measurements, and even I showed how big is the ripple in analogue power stage of the 205...
I do not want impose, convince or advertise to the rest of the world, about/for my solutions. Those who chose to adopt it and are satisfied with the results, may say thanks and that`s all. Those who are critical or opponent to my ideas or solutions, will go further looking for better, or something else... Or may comment about what is to be commented. As usually, they who adopted my solutions, they were satisfied with the results... The same, the ones who may appreciate that my solutions it worsen the original approach/device, are free to looks for something better, or different.
Those peoples who own an Oppo device, may chose themselves to use it as it is (because it is a well engineered product), while the other ones, who may want more, or are not satisfied with that well engendered product, may find and adopt what they may appreciate as an improvement. Those who may want to show one or another, through measurements, with most sophisticated and expensive tools, may do it as they want. So simple it is...
I will conclude my comments in this field, with a question: it your modified 203 player, measure better than the well engineered original one?
Last edited:
I just did, didn't notice being scared for a nanosecond.
Just goes to show, fear is very subjective.
Coris,
Actually, I have no idea if the stock 203 measures well or is engineered to the level that the 205 clearly is as demonstrated in my original post (at least using Usb as the source and taking the signal from the balanced outputs. He is planning on measuring the unbalanced outputs in the future).
As such I have no idea if my modified 203 is any better or worse from a measurement standpoint in all humility. I might consider shipping it to Amir although it will not be as instructive as measuring a stock 203 for reference.
That being said, I am quite sure both the Oppo 203/205 were designed with a close eye on measurements (which is not true of several companies, Schiit being one glaring example), as such I am asking modifiers to consider showing the same.
I am quite aware it can be expensive! Especially with digital where there is a need to measure using high resolution equipment.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Best,
Anand.
Actually, I have no idea if the stock 203 measures well or is engineered to the level that the 205 clearly is as demonstrated in my original post (at least using Usb as the source and taking the signal from the balanced outputs. He is planning on measuring the unbalanced outputs in the future).
As such I have no idea if my modified 203 is any better or worse from a measurement standpoint in all humility. I might consider shipping it to Amir although it will not be as instructive as measuring a stock 203 for reference.
That being said, I am quite sure both the Oppo 203/205 were designed with a close eye on measurements (which is not true of several companies, Schiit being one glaring example), as such I am asking modifiers to consider showing the same.
I am quite aware it can be expensive! Especially with digital where there is a need to measure using high resolution equipment.
Thanks for your thoughts.
Best,
Anand.
Last edited:
For the most.
Until the day somebody pulls out a gun and you can see right into the barrel. That one is not going to miss. Subjective fear versus absolute fear? Perhaps.
Working on the Oppo 205 right now. Major reclocking, zero feedback analog stage with MHz bandwidth, the I/V going into low impedance and actual ground, 3rd order post-DAC filter (flat at 20KHz) and more. Anybody in Sydney, love it if anyone can come around for a listen. Would compare it against anything when done.
Should be finished by end of month, hopefully.
Should be finished by end of month, hopefully.
Again it'll be rather subjective how much fear the person experiences in that particular situation.
Did you read about David Goodall, he's from your neck of the woods? If someone pulled out a gun on him while he was on the way to the Basel clinic do you think he'd be filled with fear? I reckon he'd have said 'Well, get on with it then!'.
104-year-old scientist David Goodall ends life listening to ‘Ode to Joy’ | FOX2now.com
Did you read about David Goodall, he's from your neck of the woods? If someone pulled out a gun on him while he was on the way to the Basel clinic do you think he'd be filled with fear? I reckon he'd have said 'Well, get on with it then!'.
104-year-old scientist David Goodall ends life listening to ‘Ode to Joy’ | FOX2now.com
Amir/NwWavGuy isn’t a measurement guru. His measurements have been questioned more than once by *competent* people. Furthermore his approach is hilariously contradictory. By his own admission he is incapable of telling the difference between dacs once they are level matched, even ones with poor distortion. So If he can’t hear the difference between The dacs he compares, why should we care about the distortion measurements? And again, based on his own objective viewpoint why even bother spending more than $100 for a Topping DAC? And Surely a balanced Dac can’t be $1000+ better either.
But yet we are supposed to take everyone to task who does not meet some internet defined measurement holy grail criteria. And we are supposed to drool over Oppo, Benchmark, Topping et al. for distortion numbers he admits he can’t. hear. anyway.
Maybe he and his followers should address the contradictions of their stance, than confronting unbelievers.
But yet we are supposed to take everyone to task who does not meet some internet defined measurement holy grail criteria. And we are supposed to drool over Oppo, Benchmark, Topping et al. for distortion numbers he admits he can’t. hear. anyway.
Maybe he and his followers should address the contradictions of their stance, than confronting unbelievers.
Last edited:
Is there any evidence pointing to them being one and the same? I've interacted with both online and they're quite different people in my experience. Looks to me this meme was started by some over at HeadFi but its pure imagination on their part. Amir doesn't have the detailed electronics knowledge that RocketScientist had, just for one thing.
Well, Amir actually has a very extensive tech background in both breadth and depth.
The current state of the art in measurement technology does not tell how good a unit sounds - although good measurement does portend to good engineering.
Good measurement is desirable, but not a sufficient indicator of good SQ. Good measurement is not even "necessary" as a predictor of good SQ. Witness that excellent tube gear can easily be beat in such metrics as frequency response linearity, distortion, noise etc by budget level solid state gear, yet sound much better or are more enjoyable.
Psychoacoustics is a complex subject a lot of research is still trying to grapple with. Even on Amir's site, you can see "Which DAC would you choose" showing measurements of 2 commercial grade $400 DACs and a $1700 audiophile DAC - no one came forth to say which was the better based on "measurements".
Other measurement "experts" like John Atkinson editor of Stereophile etc, who have been doing in-depth measurements as well as music production for decades will readily admit measurements do not necessarily indicate SQ.
As they say, if it sounds good, but do not measure so good, throw out the measurements!
The current state of the art in measurement technology does not tell how good a unit sounds - although good measurement does portend to good engineering.
Good measurement is desirable, but not a sufficient indicator of good SQ. Good measurement is not even "necessary" as a predictor of good SQ. Witness that excellent tube gear can easily be beat in such metrics as frequency response linearity, distortion, noise etc by budget level solid state gear, yet sound much better or are more enjoyable.
Psychoacoustics is a complex subject a lot of research is still trying to grapple with. Even on Amir's site, you can see "Which DAC would you choose" showing measurements of 2 commercial grade $400 DACs and a $1700 audiophile DAC - no one came forth to say which was the better based on "measurements".
Other measurement "experts" like John Atkinson editor of Stereophile etc, who have been doing in-depth measurements as well as music production for decades will readily admit measurements do not necessarily indicate SQ.
As they say, if it sounds good, but do not measure so good, throw out the measurements!
I agree. Or find the right measurement.
It would nice to see before/after measurements of modifications specifically to these players. It can be educational. And perhaps eye opening in some circumstances.
I'm not trying to be a troll, but unfortunately, I feel (perhaps with including Amir's website and his method of measurement) that measurements in and of themselves are viewed with an incredible dose of skepticism and even the mention of something being measured can derail a thread which is not my intention. I am not a fan nor do I dislike Amir's website.
Back to modification show!
(Which I do enjoy watching/observing and sometimes, performing). Best,
Anand.