How to implement dual PCM56 from CS8412

rfbrw · 2004-10-28 4:13 am

Kuei Yang Wang said:
And be also aware that the delay will be 22.7uS. In that time sound travels approximatly 7.8mm.

That only applies to air at STP. If you happen to be encased in lead or live on Jupiter things are a bit different.

ThorstenL · 2004-10-28 11:59 am

Konnichiwa,

rfbrw said:
That only applies to air at STP. If you happen to be encased in lead or live on Jupiter things are a bit different.

Well, I'm neither encased in lead nor do I live on Jupiter (but if you do it would explain a few things), so what happens under such conditions is of little concern to me.

From a pragmatic viewpoint I find the inverted LE to work well enough and to be simple enough to not cause other problems. The added circuitry for stopped clock operation (and or some of the other approaches) did not provide me with any audible improvement, in fact all sounded worse in varing degrees.

Sayonara

zinsula · 2004-10-28 12:31 pm

Van Hai, in this app note you'll find an example of stopped clock operation:

http://www.analog.com/UploadedFiles/Application_Notes/383160163AN207.pdf

Read the last paragraph on page 1.

And if you are fond of NON OVERSAMPLING:

http://www.geocities.com/nonospcm1704/universal_shifter.html
http://www.geocities.com/nonospcm1704/

Ciao, Tino

Van Hai · 2004-10-28 3:39 pm

post #23

thank sinsula, it was great info.

if i go for non os do i still need SM5807?

Cheer

rfbrw · 2004-10-28 10:29 pm

Kuei Yang Wang said:
Konnichiwa,
Well, I'm neither encased in lead nor do I live on Jupiter (but if you do it would explain a few things),

Let it slide ........ let it slide.............

From a pragmatic viewpoint I find the inverted LE to work well enough and to be simple enough to not cause other problems. The added circuitry for stopped clock operation (and or some of the other approaches) did not provide me with any audible improvement, in fact all sounded worse in varing degrees.

Pretty much how I feel about this nos stuff in general, with the TDA1541 and TDA1543 being particularly grim. Truth be told, I did not like the TDA1540 and it was downhill from there.
Be that as it may, I would suggest to anyone interested in this stuff to try all possible options and then decide.

rfbrw · 2004-10-28 10:30 pm

Van Hai said:
thank sinsula, it was great info.

if i go for non os do i still need SM5807?

Cheer

No

Peter Daniel · 2004-10-28 10:53 pm

rfbrw said:
Be that as it may, I would suggest to anyone interested in this stuff to try all possible options and then decide.

After a year of fiddling with TDA1543, I finally tried properly implemented TDA1541 and I'm truly impressed. I agree with Kuei, it sounds better than the smaller chip.

I also have ML35 DAC (using PCM100 HDCD filter and Ultra Analog custom, balanced DACs), and the non oversampling TDA1543 with passive output was marginally better and parallel nos TDA1541 S2 blows ML DAC on any given day. I shouldn't be actually saying that, as I'm planning to sell ML DAC. I hope not too many Audiogon surfers read those obscure threads on this forum

PS: I also have matching ML31.5 transport and it blows away my implementation of CD-Pro on any given day.

I bought those two units mostly for experimentation purposes and as an aid in my search for better digital.

Jocko Homo · 2004-10-29 4:02 am

If you knew what was inside that fancy Ultra AnalLog DAC, you would know why it sounds awful.

Jocko

Peter Daniel · 2004-10-29 5:08 am

I thought non oversampled TDA1541 sounds awful. That's why my first DAC consisted of parallel PCM1704Ks.

I still can't sell it, while TDA1543 DACs sell pretty well. Not that I'm selling them, but all the prototypes I did so far had been gone.

But, I'm still curious what's inside those fancy DAC boxes. And it doesn't really sound that awful.

PS: The unit I have has had HDCD upgrade done. They put the PCM100 chip in the socket using adapter with 1.5" long pins. That's pretty awful

banana · 2004-10-29 5:10 am

Jocko Homo said:
If you knew what was inside that fancy Ultra AnalLog DAC, you would know why it sounds awful.

Jocko

I heard that was PCM63 and NE5534 I/V, is that true?

Cobra2 · 2004-10-29 8:22 am

Ahhh! The famous HDCD downgrade...!

Peter, I thaught you knew that the main job of the PCM100 chip is to make non HDCD coded CD's sound worse... :devilr:

This is the UP-grade! (you should be able to diy this...).
http://www.audiotuning.de/english/index.html?1-51-digital.html

Arne K

ThorstenL · 2004-10-29 10:24 am

Re: Ahhh! The famous HDCD downgrade...!

Konnichiwa,

Cobra2 said:
Peter, I thaught you knew that the main job of the PCM100 chip is to make non HDCD coded CD's sound worse...

Funny thing. Many moons ago our Audio Club extensively tested a plug in Digital Filter upgrades for the Audio Synthesis DAX (UA based DAC, rather good actually). The unanimous conclusion was the HDCD Digital Filter sounded A LOT better than the NPC original used (SM5813 IIRC) on ordinary CD's. That was even WITH the 6db attenuation on non HDCD CD's. Have you ever compared the HDCD Filter to others under "all else being equal" conditions?

Sayonara

Cobra2 · 2004-10-29 11:11 am

"all else being equal"

- is the problem...(with the -6dB).
I have not yet heard a good HDCD player or DAC.
Maybe with the right I/V or analog-stage, it would be better? But as it is implimented by most... :xeye:

But it is never too late...

Arne K

ThorstenL · 2004-10-29 12:57 pm

Re: "all else being equal"

Konnichiwa,

Cobra2 said:
I have not yet heard a good HDCD player or DAC.

!!?? I know quite a few that are rather good (not the least the AS DAX). I use a modified Shanling CD T-100, which is HDCD and even stock it's pretty good.

Cobra2 said:
Maybe with the right I/V or analog-stage, it would be better? But as it is implimented by most...

In my mod I use a simple resistor I/V with the addition of a gentle bessel 2nd order LPF around a Valve amplification stage (a pretty good valve stage both objectively and subjectively). I am not sure if this is " the right I/V or analog-stage", it sounds bloody marvelous though.

Sayonara

Peter Daniel · 2004-10-29 1:50 pm

Re: Re: Ahhh! The famous HDCD downgrade...!

Cobra2 said:
Peter, I thaught you knew that the main job of the PCM100 chip is to make non HDCD coded CD's sound worse...

Kuei Yang Wang said:
The unanimous conclusion was the HDCD Digital Filter sounded A LOT better than the NPC original used (SM5813 IIRC) on ordinary CD's.

Indeed, HDCD upgraded DF should sound a lot better, with all CDs, then previously installed NPC filter. This had been mentioned in some reviews I've read.

The No.30.5 revision was supposed to incorporate HDCD decoding, but the delayed release of the Pacific Microsonics PMD-100 chip mandated using a conventional digital filter chip from NPC. But when the PMD-100 became available, Madrigal's design team introduced an HDCD upgrade kit for the No.30.5, consisting of the HDCD chip mounted on a small header board to replace the NPC chip, and a firmware change. This version was reviewed in the April 1995 Stereophile (Vol.18 No.5), with Robert Harley commenting on the "startling increase in soundstage transparency, image specificity, and the ability to keep individual lines separate."

Cobra2 · 2004-10-29 4:45 pm

"This had been mentioned in some reviews I've read."

Sorry do not read / believe ...

Kuei, your "shingeling" must be pretty modified, or we are on different (soundwise) planets...(most probably, as I have never heard anything good coming out of a tube, in my 40 y. experience , exept radar-signals...).

I personally like the the super-detailed, but musical way of sound.

End of discussion...do not want to fight! :apathic:

Arne K

Peter Daniel · 2004-10-29 5:00 pm

Don't wan t to argue either, but "startling increase in soundstage transparency, image specificity, and the ability to keep individual lines separate" sounds like " the super-detailed, but musical way of sound"

I actually read and believe, until proven wrong

rfbrw · 2004-10-30 2:31 pm

Re: Re: "all else being equal"

Kuei Yang Wang said:
Konnichiwa,

!!?? I know quite a few that are rather good (not the least the AS DAX). I use a modified Shanling CD T-100, which is HDCD and even stock it's pretty good.

Sayonara

Can this be ?? A player with HDCD,oversampling AND an ASRC?
Many an idol has been strung by his followers for a lot less.

hifi · 2004-10-30 10:33 pm

You bring the tar, and I´ll get the feathers ;o)

/micke

ThorstenL · 2004-10-30 11:52 pm

Re: Re: Re: "all else being equal"

Konnichiwa,

rfbrw said:
Can this be ??

By definition, everything is possible.

rfbrw said:

A player with HDCD,oversampling AND an ASRC?

Click to expand...

Note that the ASRC is switchoffable and hence in my case reliably "bypassed". Non-Os Mod is in the works....

rfbrw said:

Many an idol has been strung by his followers for a lot less.

Well, I'm not an Idol and I explicitly refuse followers. I always suggest to people to be theior own leader, that is the only way in wich I wish for followers. Otherwise, if you want a leader to follow, do me a favour, GET THE FUNK LOST!

Sayonara

Click to expand...

How to implement dual PCM56 from CS8412

Member

Previously: Kuei Yang Wang

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

RIP

Member

Member

Member

Previously: Kuei Yang Wang

Member

Previously: Kuei Yang Wang

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Previously: Kuei Yang Wang