True. I base my opinion on musicians i grew up with, with production studio and popular musicians in my country nowadays, so always something fresh to compare and listen to. Many base them just on numbers, some on pure subjectivism. We all are right in the end, but to our own ears 😁 I just prefer to listen to my gear closest to what i listened live.
I don't get it. It is common sense now all around that today's DACs - good implementations of recent AKM and ESS D/A units - not only measure much better but also sound much better than any of the old multibit stuff.
I fully understand the "love" to these old D/A ICs, but you are chasing a ghost in my opinion.
My impression is that you're not very deep into electronics, so why is your focus on "ruining" some fine old units while they will never be as good as todays ready-made >1000$ DACs?
Here in this forum you can even find the developer of the AMR CD77 very active atm in regards of TDA1541 development, for sure he will agree with me.
Good debate here! 😃 weissi I do understand your thinking and I do agree with you.. but the human ear I very flawed.. new Dacs should sound better I know.. but sometimes it just don’t…
There was this polish guy… hade website called lampiznator I think? He used to modify player with tubes and stuff. But that dude seemed to almost be in some cult about his work. That! Was probably biased work…
There was this polish guy… hade website called lampiznator I think? He used to modify player with tubes and stuff. But that dude seemed to almost be in some cult about his work. That! Was probably biased work…
And also I do like vinyl. And vinyl!! Is something nobody should like. All that warmth and natural. It’s just distorsion !?! But in some way. It’s pleasing to the human ear.
Last edited:
I consider powering the SAA7220P/B chip from the common +5 V rail as a design error.
If I had a Revox, I would install a piggyback dedicated +5 V regulator so that the original state could be restored.
If I had a Revox, I would install a piggyback dedicated +5 V regulator so that the original state could be restored.
Yes if the device is of the high end range, where they implement proper filters, not chifi run of the mill as mentioned above. ESS is still plagued by bad IMD hump. Quite noticable on ear. On the other hand, listening to old multibit commercial devices, doesn't do them justice. Modern tech improved upon what was lacking passive components wise, and pcb design. Pcm63, tda1541a, ad1862, ad1865 beat the living cr*p out of chifi when done proper. What i can suggest you is try and find a studio locally, ask if you can listen in on a recording session, and listen the recording after on a proper tda1541a and DS of your choice in the price range. You will learn a thing or two.
You may also want to ask yourself why the highest end gear still utilizes multibit architecture.
Well I could, but not worth the risk of tranport damage. Send me a PM and I will describe my recommendation.
I would recommend an LM2940T-5.0 regulator (with capacitors at the input and output pins as per the TI datasheet), close to the 7220. The regulator input voltage could be taken from a +15 V point of the PSU. The regulator output will supply pin 24 of the 7220, lift this pin or carefully cut the trace going to it before. The regulator GND (center pin) could be soldered directly to pin 12 of the 7220 that remains in place.
But let's hear others' opinions.
But let's hear others' opinions.
Oh thank you for your knowledge. Is this option as good as a separate power supply? I will try this probably on a Philips 960. As I promised not to touch the Revox 😅. But maybe the 960 is as “exclusive” as the revox
Last edited:
It is 😉.
Why don't you start with something like that:
gain some experience, then continue with the "heavy boys".
Why don't you start with something like that:
gain some experience, then continue with the "heavy boys".
If that is intended for me, as said, have a listen to a studio recording session and then listen to the file, and compare on your DS and what you call obsolete multibit dac. I'll quite Einstein here "The more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know."
As for experience, eh.. You do you buddy.
As for experience, eh.. You do you buddy.
That happens a lot. Some people like a full bodied Rioja, others a French Claret, still other only drink White wine (HOW DARE THEY be so racist).
The CD-77 was designed as "Digital to Analogue device" it's aim was to capture the positive qualities of Vinyl without loosing the positive sides of Seedee or digital sources. I will leave to others to state if what I did there was successful. Measurements are something that would give Amir nightmares.
I you actually labor under the delusion that there is material overlap between "objective measured signal fidelity" and "subjective sound quality", please buy the cheapest product Amir shills for.... OOPS, of course I meant Amir recommends. Pardon the Freudian slip.
If you are interested in the journey, buy a suitable CD-Plater or DAC to modify.
As for Digital Filter Less, More or Overkill (1 million Taps and a 22 seconds reverb sauce around every note), that is a subjective issue but also one of equipment compatibility.
As example, amplifiers with very low THD and high levels of negative feedback plus pedestrian slew rates often tolerate even full scale 20kHz HF signals extremely badly and the ultrasonic content of a Digital Filter Less (or minimal digital filter) DAC will pretty much kill all sound quality by causing a-harmonic and a-musical distortion in the Amplifier. If you insist using such amplifiers, oversampling filters are necessity.
Of course the general sound quality from such amplifiers is often a bit meh, despite excellent measurements in some specific headline domains, so it may equally valid to change amplification.
The AMR 77 Chain allowed digital filters to be used, but could operate without filter. The DAC Analogue Stage and the Gain Stage and Phase-splitter of the Amplifier were tube based and used no loop feedback. The output stage used cross coupled error extraction and cancellation. I do not remember anyone preferring digital filters over no digital filter.
Thor
Last edited:
That was a lot of… nothing really… sorry but. Do you have any experience in the AMR 777 dac? Is that thing in the same domain as the CD 77 ? It doesn’t have the TDA 1541 it seems
I prefer the Philips TDA1541 and the TDA1540 for their natural sound qualities, and if in a modern decent implementation they are very good.
I run a TDA1540D DAC, non oversampling and love it.
Nice to see Thorsten's input above, he knows these chips very well, and by all accounts his CD-77 was/is outstanding.
I run a TDA1540D DAC, non oversampling and love it.
Nice to see Thorsten's input above, he knows these chips very well, and by all accounts his CD-77 was/is outstanding.
Last edited: