Guys, how's this implementation of the Soekris DAC going to end up being like? Please do give me feedback as it's really appreciated. Thank you!
Also, is it possible to use two Soekris boards to output a balanced signal without using the onboard balanced drivers? If not, how can you go about to doing this? Thanks!
Thinking of getting me a Soekris,and I have a pair of Jensen 600/600ohms trafos,are there any bennefit of using it at the RAW output?
Or is it just another component in the signal path?
Or using them at the ballanced out?😱
Or is it just another component in the signal path?
Or using them at the ballanced out?😱
About the same output impedance so no change there on the raw output. Maybe galvanic isolation is a benefit in your setup.... why not try?
//
//
Use them for galvanic isolation if you have ground loop / noise issues. If not, they are just another not-that-transparent component in the signal path.
Nope - just control. Noth in "path".
Still, get a sooth one so to not jump in resistance etc...
//
Still, get a sooth one so to not jump in resistance etc...
//
You who have used Salas shunt regulator,how high have you set the shunt current,Pos and negativ?
About +300/-200ma. Also its well worth using a Hypnotize board for this as it will also give you power up/down protection against the plops the DAM produces plus it also has a B1 buffer that you can use with the raw output.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/blogs/tea-bag/296-salas-hot-rod-dcb1.html
Last edited:
Yes I am using it and I cannot detect any degradation of the sound. Additionally it provides better impedance matching when using the raw output. It is also DC coupled so no capacitors in the signal path.
Schematic of the B1 is here (except there is no input volume control pot) : http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/atta...-gb-dc-coupled-b1-buffer-shunt-psus-salb1.gif
Last edited:
Any people tried replacing the Si514 oscillator with Si570, which is the highest grade in the Silicon Labs ?
It is pin compatible ...
but whether the stock crystal cmos or differential output?
It is pin compatible ...
but whether the stock crystal cmos or differential output?
I doubt that it would make any difference with the current topology. I would think that the increased accuracy would be engulfed by the FPGA. But if the clock was used to re-clock what came out of the Spartan I think it could make for an improvement - at least measurement wise. I must admit that I have had to re-assess my thinking about jitter impact after using the DAM.
//
.... And are not software compatible. I am planning to add firmware support for the Si570, have some other projects I'm working on....
Power is not a problem if the dam1021 is supplied with lower voltage, like +- 7V DC, otherwise the added 0.1A will be a thermal problem for the 3.3V linear regulator.
But I doubt that anybody would be able to hear any difference in a controlled ABX listening test, even if the design is updated to have the clock not pass though the FPGA....
Sören, when cost is so minor... why not go for the better technical solution. Maybe you can not hear it - others might? 🙂
Here I'm thinking only re-clocking - not clock.
//
Here I'm thinking only re-clocking - not clock.
//
Hi folks.
Is there a common view about the "best" USB-I2S interface for the DAM?
I have seen that many people use the Amanero because it provides the 3.3V required for the isolator -- if I'm not mistaken.
However. I had a look at the Audio-GD version of the Amanero board. It looks quite different from the stock version. Especially buffer/decoupling caps seem to be added.
It seems there's space for improvement.
Then there's the DiyinHk module. They claim to run the newest XMOS chip with 48MHz clock. And they also claim to be best on the market. OkOk. But they also need external 3.3V.
Then there's the JLsounds and the WaveIO.
I do own a JLSOUND. But that's tied to a JLSounds DAC. That one required tweaking to perform best. Beside that it requires another piggy back oscillator board to perform best as it seems. And it also requires external power to perform best.
Please let me know your preference and how you've powered it.
Beside that I'd like to know if anybody uses USB filter(s) on the USB link and the chosen USB interface.
Thx.
Is there a common view about the "best" USB-I2S interface for the DAM?
I have seen that many people use the Amanero because it provides the 3.3V required for the isolator -- if I'm not mistaken.
However. I had a look at the Audio-GD version of the Amanero board. It looks quite different from the stock version. Especially buffer/decoupling caps seem to be added.
It seems there's space for improvement.
Then there's the DiyinHk module. They claim to run the newest XMOS chip with 48MHz clock. And they also claim to be best on the market. OkOk. But they also need external 3.3V.
Then there's the JLsounds and the WaveIO.
I do own a JLSOUND. But that's tied to a JLSounds DAC. That one required tweaking to perform best. Beside that it requires another piggy back oscillator board to perform best as it seems. And it also requires external power to perform best.
Please let me know your preference and how you've powered it.
Beside that I'd like to know if anybody uses USB filter(s) on the USB link and the chosen USB interface.
Thx.
I don't think there is a common view on what "best" means in the context of USB-I2S interfaces.
Given that the DAM is very well protected (galvanically and clocking wise), there haven't been a lot of reports of differences. I personally don't think it matter. And there are technical reasons supporting this view.
Get the cheapest one that works well I'd say.
//
Get the cheapest one that works well I'd say.
//