Re: Klaus, I envy your board (and patience)
The motivation is the promise of a sound performance result you have dreamed of! I have tested passive and OPA I/U-conversion before, but nothing compares to this D1 modified circuit. Passiv was somehow soft, OPA with feedback nasty and artificial in sound. D1 original also somewhat soft, but with CCS it is gone. Maybe the same story like the evolution from P1.0 to P.17.
Since my nice board is sourced no longer by a TDA1547 but by 4 x PCM1704 with super slow roll off filter I know what is possible... The achieved neutality of music reproduction is undiscribable.
Oh, what would this musik world would be w/o the one and only? His circuits make higest end musik reproduction reasonable!
Regards
Klaus
Cobra2 said:I'm dreaming of sutch a thing myself, for both Teac VRDS-10 & Marantz CD-16...but have not the time (or skill?) to make it p-p...
Arne K
The motivation is the promise of a sound performance result you have dreamed of! I have tested passive and OPA I/U-conversion before, but nothing compares to this D1 modified circuit. Passiv was somehow soft, OPA with feedback nasty and artificial in sound. D1 original also somewhat soft, but with CCS it is gone. Maybe the same story like the evolution from P1.0 to P.17.
Since my nice board is sourced no longer by a TDA1547 but by 4 x PCM1704 with super slow roll off filter I know what is possible... The achieved neutality of music reproduction is undiscribable.
Oh, what would this musik world would be w/o the one and only? His circuits make higest end musik reproduction reasonable!
Regards
Klaus
Attachments
i'm a ballcrusher, i know...
klaus,
just another explication in your subtitution of tda1547 for the PCM1704...
Just for the fact that i'm not very satisfied for the sound of my cd, heavily tweaked in the power supplies and in the clock but not in the dac and in the output stages, i would like to know if maybe i can replace the 2tda and saa with something with more performance... maybe also for the hdcd...
My marantz cd10 has this configuration saa7310-> npc sm5803-> saa7350-> 2xtda1547 (double dac) working in differential mode .
So, my curiosity is in what hardware have you replaced the tda, and if you use the 20 bit resolution... or you have find some other solution.
i'm not very expert of cd data stream and at the moment i don't know if it's possible to upgrade an old cd like mine in a hdcd...
4 PCM1704
... differential mode or have you paralleled they?
for the output stage i seem to have known what you have done...
Bye
Doc
PS maybe we have to migrate in the digital forum...
klaus,
just another explication in your subtitution of tda1547 for the PCM1704...
Just for the fact that i'm not very satisfied for the sound of my cd, heavily tweaked in the power supplies and in the clock but not in the dac and in the output stages, i would like to know if maybe i can replace the 2tda and saa with something with more performance... maybe also for the hdcd...
My marantz cd10 has this configuration saa7310-> npc sm5803-> saa7350-> 2xtda1547 (double dac) working in differential mode .
So, my curiosity is in what hardware have you replaced the tda, and if you use the 20 bit resolution... or you have find some other solution.
i'm not very expert of cd data stream and at the moment i don't know if it's possible to upgrade an old cd like mine in a hdcd...
4 PCM1704
... differential mode or have you paralleled they?for the output stage i seem to have known what you have done...
Bye
Doc
PS maybe we have to migrate in the digital forum...
Re: i'm a ballcrusher, i know...
Hey Doc,
one irritation. I replaced my DAC - and so the TDA1547 - but my implemented I/U + output stage baord remained the same (of course with changes due to different DAC currents...). I am no expert if a new DAC IC could so easily be implemented into another surrounding - I guess no.
I use the PCM1704 in differential mode - IMHO the biggest benefit, because all Pass devices wait for real symmetrical input. It is driven by a Heyink DSP module (German DIY supplier) with four times oversampling and slow roll off filter.
Regards
Klaus
DoctorWho70 said:klaus,
just another explication in your subtitution of tda1547 for the PCM1704...
Just for the fact that i'm not very satisfied for the sound of my cd, heavily tweaked in the power supplies and in the clock but not in the dac and in the output stages, i would like to know if maybe i can replace the 2tda and saa with something with more performance... maybe also for the hdcd...
My marantz cd10 has this configuration saa7310-> npc sm5803-> saa7350-> 2xtda1547 (double dac) working in differential mode .
So, my curiosity is in what hardware have you replaced the tda, and if you use the 20 bit resolution... or you have find some other solution.
i'm not very expert of cd data stream and at the moment i don't know if it's possible to upgrade an old cd like mine in a hdcd...
4 PCM1704
for the output stage i seem to have known what you have done...
Bye
Doc
PS maybe we have to migrate in the digital forum...
Hey Doc,
one irritation. I replaced my DAC - and so the TDA1547 - but my implemented I/U + output stage baord remained the same (of course with changes due to different DAC currents...). I am no expert if a new DAC IC could so easily be implemented into another surrounding - I guess no.
I use the PCM1704 in differential mode - IMHO the biggest benefit, because all Pass devices wait for real symmetrical input. It is driven by a Heyink DSP module (German DIY supplier) with four times oversampling and slow roll off filter.
Regards
Klaus
Klaus,
Thank you very much for your patience, i have ordered yesterday the 2sk and i think that next week i'll be able to mount something.
I've found also the complementary 2sj... so i think to respect your current values but i'll try to replace the irf with the two fets mentioned before.
i have maybe to test before with the pspice...
bye and re-thanks
Doc
Thank you very much for your patience, i have ordered yesterday the 2sk and i think that next week i'll be able to mount something.
I've found also the complementary 2sj... so i think to respect your current values but i'll try to replace the irf with the two fets mentioned before.
i have maybe to test before with the pspice...
bye and re-thanks
Doc
Hi to everybody.
I am using the PCM1704 with the D1 output stage for over a year now with the original circuit and all I can say it is outstanding.
I just got some pcbs made for the D1 I/V stage so if anybody is interested please look here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=51962
I am using the PCM1704 with the D1 output stage for over a year now with the original circuit and all I can say it is outstanding.
I just got some pcbs made for the D1 I/V stage so if anybody is interested please look here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=51962
Any ideas to improve the circuit?
Hi guys,
Finally i have time to spend in the simulation of a differential out stage for my cd 10...
referring to the original idea of Mr Pass's D1 stage and the modify apported by klaus i need to sum two of this stage because my cd have two double dac tda1547 that work in differential configuration... so this is what i have simulated...
please tell to me what do you think can be improved...
i think first to apply two CCs instead of the two 2k resistors...
thank you in advance
Hi guys,
Finally i have time to spend in the simulation of a differential out stage for my cd 10...
referring to the original idea of Mr Pass's D1 stage and the modify apported by klaus i need to sum two of this stage because my cd have two double dac tda1547 that work in differential configuration... so this is what i have simulated...
please tell to me what do you think can be improved...
i think first to apply two CCs instead of the two 2k resistors...
thank you in advance
Attachments
the out stage was posted on page 3 ...
I don't know how it sounds because i am modifying the original project made by klaus for using the d1 stage by mr. Pass on a tda1547 in the switched cap pins bypassing the embedded opamp... i am simulating the circuit to made the printed circuit an mount it to test the sound, after this i could maybe improve the sound modifying the bias currents or caps or i don't know..
Klaus and others tells that this stage sounds very well (excellent sound..)... but my problem is that i have to use for a differential stage with 2 tda1547 (one for channel).
So i have to sum the signal with a discrete op amp stage and a buffer...
I want to replace the entire power supply/out stage board of my cd10 with a new +/-15 v +/-30v (for this stage) totally renewed with a 4 jung discrete/op amp regulators... and i want to place all this circuit on a 15x15cm board...
I've made some modifies on the differential stage... i read on an old data sheet of national that using two double fet configured as in the schematic in the image could improve the CMRR...
Anyone have tested this configuration? better or worse than a single fet?
...I don't know how it sounds because i am modifying the original project made by klaus for using the d1 stage by mr. Pass on a tda1547 in the switched cap pins bypassing the embedded opamp... i am simulating the circuit to made the printed circuit an mount it to test the sound, after this i could maybe improve the sound modifying the bias currents or caps or i don't know..
Klaus and others tells that this stage sounds very well (excellent sound..)... but my problem is that i have to use for a differential stage with 2 tda1547 (one for channel).
So i have to sum the signal with a discrete op amp stage and a buffer...
I want to replace the entire power supply/out stage board of my cd10 with a new +/-15 v +/-30v (for this stage) totally renewed with a 4 jung discrete/op amp regulators... and i want to place all this circuit on a 15x15cm board...
I've made some modifies on the differential stage... i read on an old data sheet of national that using two double fet configured as in the schematic in the image could improve the CMRR...
Anyone have tested this configuration? better or worse than a single fet?
Attachments
THX 4 your answer
for the CCS, we can remove the ZTX? like the png
we can keep a differential pair in the IV?
In fact I would like to do a line preamp like Aleph P1.7 but with 2SK389/109, capacitor coupled FREE ! (thus with servo) and with an output buffer.
AND one IV on the same structure
for the CCS, we can remove the ZTX? like the png
we can keep a differential pair in the IV?
In fact I would like to do a line preamp like Aleph P1.7 but with 2SK389/109, capacitor coupled FREE ! (thus with servo) and with an output buffer.
AND one IV on the same structure
Attachments
This is what i read...
Klaus said:
This is what Klaus tells about the configuration of simple ccs with fet+resistor or the other with the ztx... i followed the tests of klaus... but if you want you can modify the mounting of the pcb and bridging with a wire or with the gate resistors the components that you want to cancel... this is not a problem... you could test all the configurations without problems with a complete pcb... more difficult is adding components on a simple pcb instead to remove some parts... this is what i think when i project a board, when there isn't problem of space...
maybe it's possible but i have to mantain the zeros points for the common of the dac outs, for me it is not good to place a single ccs in the differential stage for having the d1like stage and the differential op amp in the same chain... the modifiying of the currents move the voltages of the sources of the two main fet in the d1 stage... so for a my idea (that can be wrong) this can't be a good stage... (sorry but my explication in english can be very hard to know...
)So i thinked to use a separate stage to sum the two signals...
But this can be wrong....
I'd love to have a complete stage without capacitors coupling... but i have to fight ever with some many volts of dc voltage to decouple in the final stage , i thinked about to resolve this problem but for the moment i haven't a solution...
But maybe there is a simple solution that i've not thinked... or that i don't know....
ideas and suggestions are welcome...
for the pcb i think to project it with orcad... and after i would like to do a homemade pcb printing the design on a transparent paper and doing a obscenity to mount and test ( and maybe to leave it in the definitive mounting...).
I've asked to my boss how much costs doing a pcb double face with a ready design (not made by third parts) and in italy it can costs for few pieces some hundreds euros... (i live in italy and i think that there there is the most great thieves in fact of components selling and tecnologic services, here the free market doesn't exisists...).
i maybe can design the complete pcb, and i can subsequently post it here... if someone know a cheaper way... my work is free, but please help me in projecting this stage
Bye to all
DoctorWho70
UltimateX86 said:
Hi,
YES, it does! It is funny, the first time since years I just want to listen to music and no more want to test alternative settings. It just sounds like "real music". The bass and voices especially are just incredible.
Maybe the transparency is just 95% of e.g. a super clean OPA627, but the musical flow and feeling of the music is just "right" – missing feedback maybe.
I prefer the buffer - if the output load plus cable and so on become part of the active I/U load resistor I can not imagine that this is so fine - one buffer stage IMHO is not so bad.
Regards
Klaus
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.