Looking at your pictures I see that the SPDIF connector should have been at the same side of the board as the L/R connections. After having drawn multiple tens of versions (in months) there finally is a final version. Then, when you have the first example in your hand you think: that could have been designed better
Nice build. You do need to clean the PCB's with PCB cleaner. The flux only has negative effects when it stays on PCB's after soldering. What are the blue electrolytic caps (brand/type) ? The heatsink seems overrated and the fins are mounted the "wrong" way but nothing will go wrong with 70 mA load. You might want to try a 4.7 µF tantalium cap for C8 too.
If I would be a USB user I would go from USB to I2S and not SPDIF. Just think of all the conversions back and forth again when going from USB to SPDIF and from SPDIF to I2S. It would not come as a surprise to me that there is a lot of difference in sound quality in USB to SPDIF devices but I am a USB-less person so I can not make any statements really... When DVI was introduced we were told that missing 2 conversion steps (D/A -> A/D) would result in a much better image quality. How disappointing it was when we did not see a difference...
The WM8804 is a well designed chip and it has a good PLL so it might be that is in practice better to use the USB to SPDIF converter connected to the SPDIF input of the DAC. Everything is possible.
Please can you test this and tell us the results ?
The blue caps are Vishay BC 470uf 35V, I have try 20uf - 100uf Silmic II, BG STD 47-100uf, BGN 47uf, Sanyo Oscon and I finally settled on the Vishay BC for the time being (personal taste).
I might not going to use the s/pdif from the USB interface, just the I2S for connecting to the dac but I will test the different between the 8804 s/pdiof and the CM6611 module.
I bought a bottle of PCB cleaner just too lazy to clean the flux.
I agree the UCC is better than the LM317 for pre-regulation. I found the simple 780 regs outperform many costly and complex regs in the application of pre-regulation.
I just built a prototype of my ES9023/WM8804 DAC yesterday. The TI 780-05 is used as the pre-regulator.
Comments are welcomed.
I just built a prototype of my ES9023/WM8804 DAC yesterday. The TI 780-05 is used as the pre-regulator.
Comments are welcomed.
I will check the offset. Let me try going down in value, I got some 1uf BG NX on hand.
Last edited:
Those are exactly what I want to try but can't find them anymore for normal prices. If you need other values: I am open for trade. Keep the wires a bit shorter. I use 10 µF BG PK for the Vref. I have 4.7 µF NX but did not try them there as values lower than data sheet values did not came in my mind. 100 µF 6.3 V NX does it well for V+.
Marlowe, your build looks very good. You try to squeeze the best out of it by not using connectors and you are right but it will limit flexibility while experimenting. How does it sound ? As EUVL stated FKP/MKP do it good for the output filtering. Try a 4.7 µF tantalium for C8 if you can. Twist the output wiring.
Needless to say maybe but after testing building it into a metal case would be optimal.
Marlowe, your build looks very good. You try to squeeze the best out of it by not using connectors and you are right but it will limit flexibility while experimenting. How does it sound ? As EUVL stated FKP/MKP do it good for the output filtering. Try a 4.7 µF tantalium for C8 if you can. Twist the output wiring.
Needless to say maybe but after testing building it into a metal case would be optimal.
Last edited:
Hi jean-paul,
All the wires are loosely twisted that makes the sound more natural and more relaxing to me.
I have an ES9022 DAC from EUVL and have done a series of tweaking on it. Both DACs share the same characteristic. To me, the tweaked EUVL 9022 is more musical and softer, and the prototype of Group Buy ES9023 is a bit cleaner. Both are very good DACs at all.
The output filter caps using in the tweaked ES9022 are the Relcap tin foil polystyrene, and they work perfectly for this situation (better than PP). I will try to install the Relcaps in the ES9023 as well.
I will try a 4.7uF tantalum cap for C8. Thanks.
All the wires are loosely twisted that makes the sound more natural and more relaxing to me.
I have an ES9022 DAC from EUVL and have done a series of tweaking on it. Both DACs share the same characteristic. To me, the tweaked EUVL 9022 is more musical and softer, and the prototype of Group Buy ES9023 is a bit cleaner. Both are very good DACs at all.
The output filter caps using in the tweaked ES9022 are the Relcap tin foil polystyrene, and they work perfectly for this situation (better than PP). I will try to install the Relcaps in the ES9023 as well.
I will try a 4.7uF tantalum cap for C8. Thanks.
Last edited:
While I encourage comparison of DACs (the more the merrier) there is a caveat comparing I2S to SPDIF DACs even when they have the same DAC chip. SPDIF DACs have the negative aspect that they have eh.. SPDIF with its mangled clock. So I2S DACs should be better from the start as I2S is clearly superior. In fact I would choose I2S over any other interface when a DAC board will be built in a device. SPDIF is a curse but a standardized curse nonetheless.
Given that you compare a tweaked I2S DAC to our standard SPDIF DAC and they both sound alike there is still hope
It is OK that you like the sound better with loosely twisted wires but fact is that twisting is essential with 50 MHz around. Shielded wire would be even better but I admit I don't use it either...
Given that you compare a tweaked I2S DAC to our standard SPDIF DAC and they both sound alike there is still hope
It is OK that you like the sound better with loosely twisted wires but fact is that twisting is essential with 50 MHz around. Shielded wire would be even better but I admit I don't use it either...
Last edited:
Don't. The reason for my advice for tantalium at that spot is the very low ESR of film and ceramic 1 µF caps which the regs don't like. Ok there is a bead in between but that works both ways.
I do regret that I haven't put that cap closer to the XO. One of those details that you notice when the first board comes in.
I do regret that I haven't put that cap closer to the XO. One of those details that you notice when the first board comes in.
Last edited:
I just enclosed the DAC in a small box. The wires are re-arranged as close to the enclosure as possible.
The transformer and the rectifier diodes (MSR860s) are put in another aluminum box.
In addition, I swapped the C8 with a Nichicon SMD tantalum 4.7uF capacitor. The sound became slightly cleaner to my ear.
The transformer and the rectifier diodes (MSR860s) are put in another aluminum box.
In addition, I swapped the C8 with a Nichicon SMD tantalum 4.7uF capacitor. The sound became slightly cleaner to my ear.
Hi Skylab,
For you information, the current modifications on my EUVL 9022 DAC are listed as follows.
1. Add a Scientific Conversion pulse transformer in the SPDIF input.
2. Swap the 75ohm resistor in the SPDIF input with a Naked Z-foil TX2575 resistor.
3. Swap the output filter caps with a pair of Relcap RT tin-foil/polystyrene film caps.
4. Swap the caps in VREG, NEG, and CN-CP with Black Gate N/NX caps.
All in all, the original setting from Patrick is well-tweaked and sounds pretty good.
I just exchanged some parts to fit my personal preference.
For you information, the current modifications on my EUVL 9022 DAC are listed as follows.
1. Add a Scientific Conversion pulse transformer in the SPDIF input.
2. Swap the 75ohm resistor in the SPDIF input with a Naked Z-foil TX2575 resistor.
3. Swap the output filter caps with a pair of Relcap RT tin-foil/polystyrene film caps.
4. Swap the caps in VREG, NEG, and CN-CP with Black Gate N/NX caps.
All in all, the original setting from Patrick is well-tweaked and sounds pretty good.
I just exchanged some parts to fit my personal preference.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.