Listening tests of TDA1541A vs S1 vs S2

[pop11]

Yesterday, we (4 of us) finally have time to do some listening tests on:

TDA1541A
TDA1541A S1
TDA1541A S2 (a real one, not a fake )

in my modified NOS CD960.

The tests were done blind, so needed to teach my GF to how to pull and insert the TDA1541As, that was very very scary

The sound:

In conclusion, the normal chip has the most energy, the S2 is the softest, S1 is in the middle. Texture details were pretty much the same.

For pop music, the votes were divided, 2 of us prefered the S2 version and one liked the normal version, the final one liked the S1.

For jazz music, again the votes were divided, normal and S2 received 1 vote each, except S1 received 2.

For classical music, 2 prefered the S1 version and 1 liked the normal version. The final one couldn't decide between normal and S2.

So in summary, the score line is:

.....................Normal......S1.....S2
Pop...................1............1.......2
Jazz..................1.............2......1
Classical..........1.5...........2.....0.5
---------------------------------------------
Total................3.5..........5......3.5

As you can see, the results were a bit of surprise for us , we thought that the S2 should win hands down, but I guess you just never know what will happen in blind listening tests.

So "in our system" with "our ears", overall we prefer the S1. Of course, this is by no means conclusive.

Wouldn't it be nice that one can switch between normal, S1 and S2 on the fly ...

P.S. Just a side note, to be perfectly honest, when the tests were done blind, the difference in sound was quite small, I really would not lose any sleep over it, whether my system uses a normal, S1 or S2 version. But for now, S1 will stay.

[tschrama]

Hi pop11,

Thank you for going to the trouble of organizing what seems a real valid test. I did something simmilar, allthough not quiet as valid; me and a friend listening to the normal, S1 and S2 (I did the swappping so not blind for me atleast); only 1 piece of music (Buena Vista Social Club) .. It seemed that there was no significant difference.... we could not make up our mind.. Is my system not up to tests like this? I think it is, as a comparison with a CirrusLogic Evaluation board of a 96KHZ/24bit DAC showed.. the CirrusLogic was clearly superior....


Regards.
Thijs

PS
Don't ask for proof if I say I cann't hear a difference.......

[hjelm]

Thanks for the evaluation!

I could imagine that the more accurate chip vould be more sensitive to clock jitter but i assume your nos CD960 clock is stable.

[ZERS]

thanks for this test.

It seems that the "normal" chip sounds not so bad

[Peter Daniel]

It's not that bad, but to me S2 provides more refinement. It is true that it's much softer in highs (comparing to other chips).

Also, as Bernhard observed, regular chips are not all equal. You might have had the better sounding one

[Pedja]

I think I can confirm that the levels of selection is not one way road of improvement.

The TDA1541A/S1 (sourced locally, I believe it is genuine) was somewhat more refined but was also more congested than TDA1541A (which came from Reichelt about one year ago). Also, with S1 I was pushed to walk a bit around the room to catch some bass notes (which indeed has more to do with my room but tells something about the chip). Non A in which was stamped R1 (sourced locally, no idea what it is in fact), was least congested, actually was somewhat hollow.

My preference among these is TDA1541A from Reichelt. Method used for the test is leavening of the chip in for a day or two. After that I asked myself have I enjoyed, have I experienced something nice, was I irritated and overwrought, and do I in my life still want to listen to the music or not. I have done this test alone.

Pedja

[Bernhard]

It is really difficult, the chips are all not equal in their classes.

Some S1 are better, some worse, same for 1541A and 1541 and 1541A R1.

I have tested a lot for distortion and to me it looks like testers at P+++++s were

[pop11]

Just for fun, I rerun the test again, only me and my GF this time, but BOTH sighted and blind tests.

In sighted test, I prefer "S2" every time , it seems that the "S2" is more refine than the others, everything just a little better.

Then came the blind test again (my GF was getting good at pulling and plugging those 1541s ), the difference in sound quality was again fairly small. In fact, a few times I thought I was surely hearing a "S2", in fact it was either a "S1" or a "normal".

The final choice really come down to the materials played. For jazz and classical, I liked the "S1" or "normal" a bit better, for pop, I prefer the "S2" a bit more.

Damn it, to be real honest, I think I am just happy to use either one of them, "normal, S1 or S2"

[Strohmie]

Heh, what you expect is often what you get. If the S2 is supposed to be a better chip, and you know you're listening to it, you'll think it will sound better. And it's hard to listen to something without specific expectations, for good or bad. Gotta love psychosomatic effects. ^_^

I'm almost glad that the blind tests seem to have the result you've found...that way once I build a 1541A DAC I don't have to spend an extra arm or two to get an S2.

[pop11]

Seems that there is increasing interest on the "S1" chip and I have received quite a few emails asking where can one found some "S1" .

I got mine from cricklewood electronics in UK a while ago at about ~US$15 each , but now they no longer have any stock.

I guess "S1" is still around, especially in those Philips/Marantz service centres, try your luck.

Or elib could remark some of his "S2" to "S1" and sell them as "S1"