Powering a high-end USB DAC - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Amplifiers > Power Supplies

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 14th February 2013, 07:52 AM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Perhaps you need less efficient speakers.

Yah, the AD8270/8271 unity gain distortions are clearly a mistake---the 8271 THD+N graph suggests more like -110dB at the stated conditions but it looks like a sim to me and therefore may be optimistic (particularly as it's noticeably better than the +-6dB figures); it's not uncommon for Analog to do that on the assumption customers will apply margin. Linear and TI seem to do the same not infrequently (I much prefer National's practice of using actua measurements). The Burr-Brown parts I mentioned are primarily an audio lineup and Burr-Brown generally makes decent stuff. So it's fairly safe to expect the INA154 to track with the 134/2134's IMD and THD+N versus level behavior---the parts are in a performance class where I'd expect lower signal levels to be noise rather than harmonic limited and the 154 is higher spec than the 134s. (The INA149 is nice too but the high impedances needed for it to handle +-275V make it noisy for audio use.)

The AD8130 could be worth a look; the improved linearity, noise, CMRR, and PSRR over the LT6552 is a good return for the higher price and the wider voltage range makes it easier to fit into an audio application. (If TI has parts using this topology I've not found which parts selector they've hid them in.)

Last edited by twest820; 14th February 2013 at 08:02 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th February 2013, 08:04 AM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 101
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
I have samples of the AD8129 to hand ready to try in my next DAC design - I need the gain so figured I may as well go for that part. I was looking at TI for this topology earlier and also drew a complete blank Seems that the improved audio (as opposed to paper) linearity of the AD830-type parts might just be down to increased emitter degeneration in the LTPs over normal opamps. On NXP's datasheet for the TDA8945 (another obsolete one) they're showing 1k5 degen resistors in the input stage. I seem to recall the LTC6552 has a similar value yet it has individual current sources rather than a single shared one.
__________________
No matter if we meanwhile surrender every value for which we stand, we must strive to cajole the majority into imagining itself on our side - Everett Dean Martin
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th February 2013, 12:34 AM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Yeah, not many options in the high CMRR line receiver/line driver space if you need more than 6dB of gain. Kind of too bad as the THAT120x series is probably the nicest bootstrapped amplifier implementation around---as far as I can tell NXP is implementing some sort of bootstrap outside of That's InGenius patent and the AD8129/30 are, while not the same circuit topology, similar in boosting common mode input impedance via feedback. AD8476 and THAT1280 are also worth a mention but it's odd how richly populated the market for ADC drivers is while there's almost no parts for precision DAC output buffering. ADC drivers and line receivers can be repurposed for this if one doesn't need much gain. But putting an RCRC or RCRCRC antialias/antiglitch filter in front of them increases both the source impedance and its mismatch in differential out DACs, reducing both gain and CMRR.

As a result I'm in the middle of some MFB sims with the LME49724/OPA1632 and 0.1% resistors but I think I'll have to build a test coupon to verify the designs---the 49724 model neglects about half of the common mode effects and the 1632 model has a suspiciously large output common mode offset. But the topologies offer the ability to easily implement different gains to match whatever rails are in use along with the ability to separate AC and DC feedback paths and tap the summing junctions for filtering. And the implementation cost, complexity, and board area is competitive with most of the alternatives.

You may be right on the emitter degeneration. I haven't done enough with discretes to have a sense of where the optimum tradeoff would lie.
  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
FS: Full high-end Audio-gd system, async USB DAC, balanced with ACSS Electro3000 Swap Meet 0 12th October 2012 02:56 PM
Cleo: End to End 24bit 192khz USB DAC with tube output bcherry DIY HiFi Supply 7 3rd July 2010 11:15 PM
HLLY HIGH END DMK-IV USB DAC Headphone AMP Pre-AMP hllyelec Vendor's Bazaar 19 4th January 2010 01:10 AM
I made the usb based high-end dac yangsmm Chip Amps 1 8th August 2007 03:07 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:19 AM.


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