Non Oversampling DAC-complementing CD-PRO - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 7th September 2002, 01:24 AM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default Non Oversampling DAC-complementing CD-PRO

After succesfully finishing my CD-PRO, next obvious step is to add a DAC using I2S. My first choice is AD1865 (after reading many comments from Elso. ). I finished a DAC before, based on BB1704 chips and the results are really impressive.

Since AD1865 is not directly I2S compatible I have to implement AD application note found somwhere on a forum (unless somebody did it already )

Any suggestions for I/V stage? If not, I'll probably use Pass Dac 1 output stage. Since I want to place everything directly under transport I don't have much space to deal with tubes (unless I provide auxilary output and use tubes outside the player).

The DAC will be truly balanced and chips will be parallelled. Guess I have enough?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ad.jpg (32.4 KB, 7024 views)
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 01:45 AM   #2
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
I have just found an interesting link, if somebody is interested in 1541 chip.
http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell...io/Adagio.html
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 03:31 AM   #3
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: .
Peter,
Have you considered the PCM-63 or the PCM-1702 as a half way house solution ?

ray.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 04:18 AM   #4
Wombat is offline Wombat  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Wombat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Well, if i can talk about any DAc, i can about an PCM 63-K.
In 1991 i had a well designed one and i had to give up the
illusion it still is top of the art.

Even the pulse ones from Sony are superior meanwhile (most in bass response)

There was a picture-disc player that outperformed it long ago.
It was a cheap 1541 design - not claimed High-End - but better!

I don´t know the 1702, but the PCM 63 is a waste of time today i believe.


Wombat
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 05:27 AM   #5
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: .
Tastes differ I suppose but the PCM-63 has appeared in many of the better dacs over the past decade or so.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 06:04 AM   #6
Dave is offline Dave  New Zealand
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: New Zealand
Peter here are a couple of thoughts,

Put the master clock in the DAC and send it back to the transport.

Use surface mount de-coupling capacitors and ferrite beads on the digital section including the DAC chips.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 06:57 AM   #7
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Zamboanga, City of Flowers, Mindanao
Send a message via Yahoo to Elso Kwak
Lightbulb NON-OS AD1865 DAC

Hi Peter,
If you want to implement the AD1865 in the CD-PRO you do need glue logic. I am not so happy with AD application note. The most simple circuit; minimal component count; is with a shift register. 74HC164.
If you wish to construct a separate DAC component you could use the CS8412. The latter chip can be put in mode 6, 18 bits output mode and you only need a inverter to get a inverted LATCH signal.
After much experimenting I gave up the idea of a balanced DAC with the AD1865N-K, simply because it sounds better non-balanced. Also found that of the two methods to get separation into left and right audiochannnel: stopped clock technique and inverted LATCH; the latter gave the better sound. I did not hear the time difference or delay between the channels that is obvious with inverted LATCH.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 12:56 PM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
Default I that what you are talking about?

That schematic was posted before by Ergo.
Attached Images
File Type: gif i2s.gif (21.2 KB, 6791 views)
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 01:02 PM   #9
diyAudio Member
 
Peter Daniel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Send a message via AIM to Peter Daniel
I wouldn't like to use CS8412 (although I have one), because in my opinion the whole advantage is to use I2S interface and feed it directly to the DAC. Best sound, is what they say.

As to PCM1702, I've built already a DAC implementing parallel 1704 chips, using Dave's board. The sound beats my air bearing TT.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg dac.jpg (94.3 KB, 6595 views)
__________________
www.audiosector.com
“Do something really well. See how much time it takes. It might be a product, a work of art, who knows? Then give it away cheaply, just because you feel that it should not cost so much, even if it took a lot of time and expensive materials to make it.” - JC
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th September 2002, 02:28 PM   #10
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Zamboanga, City of Flowers, Mindanao
Send a message via Yahoo to Elso Kwak
Wink Re: I that what you are talking about?

Quote:
Originally posted by Peter Daniel
That schematic was posted before by Ergo.
Hi Peter,
Yes something like that.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TDA5141 oversampling or non-oversampling ? Bernhard Digital Source 4 1st September 2004 11:27 AM
Non-Oversampling DAC lucpes Digital Source 42 6th July 2004 04:06 AM
DAC without oversampling Peter Daniel Digital Source 3 27th February 2002 03:19 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 07:24 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2