A few observations from my own experiences:
First, my system consists of:
* Much modified Bride of Son of Zen (BoSoZ) Preamp.
* Pass derived 50W Aleph-X monoblocks.
* Chipamps.com LM3875 Gainclone configured as an Integrated Amp
* XGC amplifier (balanced gainclone amplifier using LM3886's and Pass Labs Supersymmetric Feedback input stage)
I should mention that the BoSoZ and Aleph-X were modified to extend their bandwidth out to ~200kHz.
1) I have compared the sound of a PlayStation to a mid-Fi level Toshiba DVD player in my system. I have not measured the performance of either. In my system (and I emphasize that because different systems interact differently, so my comments are only valid within my system context) the Toshiba handily outperforms the Playstation. From the Playstation, listening fatigue sets in veryu, very rapidly. Just too hard sounding.
2) I have had an opportunity to audition Peter Daniel's NOS DAC in my system, with mixed results. With the Gainclone integrated, the NOS DAC sounded very detailed, open and airy, without generating any any listening fatigue. In this combination, I can heartily recommend Peter's DAC.
3) However, when Peter's NOS DAC was combined with my BoSoZ and Aleph-X's, Peter's Dac sounded closed, etched and hard. Very confused by such an obvious difference, I did some measurements, and the unfiltered high-frequency noise was causing the preamp and amp to cascade harmonics down the frequency spectrum well into the audible band. Peter's DAC did not cause this behaviour with either of my Gainclone based amps. This is surprising since the GC's also have very good high frequency bandwidth extension. I do not have a clear understanding why this is, but I present it as a possibility that the unfiltered high frequency noise can adversely affect some equipment in a very audible, and measureable way.
4) It really does not take much technical knowledge to understand that upsampling pushes quantization noise to higher frequencies, so that better filtering methods can be used to eliminate the high frequency noise with less affect on the audible spectrum. To flatly state that the advances in upsampling and output filtering have no value beyond marketing demonstrates a very closed mind. Yes, there are also negative effects to upsampling, and poor implementation of upsampling is not going to perform well. I just wouldn't be so quick to completely dismiss the technology as having no value.
5) With so many incredible philosophers in our history to study, it saddens me to see someone solely fixated on Nietzsche. There is value in Nietzsche's works, but his is the world observed from only one viewpoint. A mountain looks very different when viewed from all sides.
My two bits. Each person should assign whatever value to them that they feel is appropriate. I'm just as capable of being full of cr*p as every other person.
First, my system consists of:
* Much modified Bride of Son of Zen (BoSoZ) Preamp.
* Pass derived 50W Aleph-X monoblocks.
* Chipamps.com LM3875 Gainclone configured as an Integrated Amp
* XGC amplifier (balanced gainclone amplifier using LM3886's and Pass Labs Supersymmetric Feedback input stage)
I should mention that the BoSoZ and Aleph-X were modified to extend their bandwidth out to ~200kHz.
1) I have compared the sound of a PlayStation to a mid-Fi level Toshiba DVD player in my system. I have not measured the performance of either. In my system (and I emphasize that because different systems interact differently, so my comments are only valid within my system context) the Toshiba handily outperforms the Playstation. From the Playstation, listening fatigue sets in veryu, very rapidly. Just too hard sounding.
2) I have had an opportunity to audition Peter Daniel's NOS DAC in my system, with mixed results. With the Gainclone integrated, the NOS DAC sounded very detailed, open and airy, without generating any any listening fatigue. In this combination, I can heartily recommend Peter's DAC.
3) However, when Peter's NOS DAC was combined with my BoSoZ and Aleph-X's, Peter's Dac sounded closed, etched and hard. Very confused by such an obvious difference, I did some measurements, and the unfiltered high-frequency noise was causing the preamp and amp to cascade harmonics down the frequency spectrum well into the audible band. Peter's DAC did not cause this behaviour with either of my Gainclone based amps. This is surprising since the GC's also have very good high frequency bandwidth extension. I do not have a clear understanding why this is, but I present it as a possibility that the unfiltered high frequency noise can adversely affect some equipment in a very audible, and measureable way.
4) It really does not take much technical knowledge to understand that upsampling pushes quantization noise to higher frequencies, so that better filtering methods can be used to eliminate the high frequency noise with less affect on the audible spectrum. To flatly state that the advances in upsampling and output filtering have no value beyond marketing demonstrates a very closed mind. Yes, there are also negative effects to upsampling, and poor implementation of upsampling is not going to perform well. I just wouldn't be so quick to completely dismiss the technology as having no value.
5) With so many incredible philosophers in our history to study, it saddens me to see someone solely fixated on Nietzsche. There is value in Nietzsche's works, but his is the world observed from only one viewpoint. A mountain looks very different when viewed from all sides.
My two bits. Each person should assign whatever value to them that they feel is appropriate. I'm just as capable of being full of cr*p as every other person.
gotta love it - 4 of the posters in this thread are on my ignore list. Wonder why.....
Snipe on 🙂
I actually built some of these things everyone here seems to know so much about.
Snipe on 🙂
I actually built some of these things everyone here seems to know so much about.
metalman said:
You are entitled not to like the PlayStation. But when you say it sounds hard, I have no option but to doubt what you say.
The reason I like the PSX is because it doesn't sound hard, that it doesn't become grating as other CD players. Since I work in front of the PC hours at end and always have music on, that's key to me.
I'm not fixated on Nietzsche. He just happens to be the most quotable. You can only take him by bits and pieces anyway. Give me a fun quote by Heidegger and I'll use it.
To PHN and Sassen,
You guys are turning my thread into a personal vendetta on each other, and this really has nothing to do with my original question. If you still want to argue, please start another thread. If you want to post here, may be it's better not to respond to each other. No point in getting your blood pressure up. And I have ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN HOW THE PLAYSTATION SOUNDS!
Guys, let's get back on track here. Regarding the DDDAC1543, what coupling cap value and brand has worked well for you? Has anyone thought about a transformer based output for the DDDAC1543?
Regarding Tent DAC, how easy is it to source all the components for this DAC? Guido has some components listed that he sells, but to get the complete kit, looks like you're going to have to look around. It doesn't seem like a DAC a novice DIYer can build.
I haven't heard any real meaningful comment on the sound of the Tent DAC, except that it sounds good. Anyone out there?
You guys are turning my thread into a personal vendetta on each other, and this really has nothing to do with my original question. If you still want to argue, please start another thread. If you want to post here, may be it's better not to respond to each other. No point in getting your blood pressure up. And I have ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN HOW THE PLAYSTATION SOUNDS!
Guys, let's get back on track here. Regarding the DDDAC1543, what coupling cap value and brand has worked well for you? Has anyone thought about a transformer based output for the DDDAC1543?
Regarding Tent DAC, how easy is it to source all the components for this DAC? Guido has some components listed that he sells, but to get the complete kit, looks like you're going to have to look around. It doesn't seem like a DAC a novice DIYer can build.
I haven't heard any real meaningful comment on the sound of the Tent DAC, except that it sounds good. Anyone out there?
Black Gate 4.7uF / 50V C type (for coupling) sounds very good and is cheap. The best value for money. And I have tried many film types... even Black Gate various E configs.
Regarding good DAC design, I am very happy with Pedja's TDA1541 DAC. If you pair it with good transport - it's very close to analog reproduction. I have changed a lot of things, but the concept, design and basic PCB are all there for you. You can experiment with all stages to your hart content. Compared to anything else (high end DAC's included) it sounds fantastic. The other DAC's or stand alone CD players always sound artificial.
I haven't compared this DAC with 1543 version(s) nor with TentLabs DAC.
Extreme_Boky
Regarding good DAC design, I am very happy with Pedja's TDA1541 DAC. If you pair it with good transport - it's very close to analog reproduction. I have changed a lot of things, but the concept, design and basic PCB are all there for you. You can experiment with all stages to your hart content. Compared to anything else (high end DAC's included) it sounds fantastic. The other DAC's or stand alone CD players always sound artificial.
I haven't compared this DAC with 1543 version(s) nor with TentLabs DAC.
Extreme_Boky
Thanks Boky,
It seems like many DIYers use 47microF coupling caps in their DAC. Is this a "magic number"? Would going slightly above or below make a noticeable difference?
It seems like many DIYers use 47microF coupling caps in their DAC. Is this a "magic number"? Would going slightly above or below make a noticeable difference?
MGH said:
Read this thread and contact Algar_emi about the Tent DAC
The only part that Guido does not have is the CS8412 - and you can find it elsewhere.
I have most of the parts and plan to built it ......one day.....
4.7uF Black Gate C type sounds very good and was picked from various types / values. I have tried 10uF C type with rather not as good subjective high frequency results.
Extreme_Boky
Extreme_Boky
MGH said:
If you are going into a very high input impedence, you can go quite a bit lower, but 4.7 is a good choice that provides a decent 3dB point for most applications. I agree on the BG 4.7's being a good choice, but for my impressions of a bunch of cheap output caps with a TDA1543 DAC, see my cap page at http://www.ecp.cc/cap-notes.html
MGH said:
You could try asking Joseph K over at DIYHifi.org. He has a Tentdac.
BTW, why these two designs?
The Tentdac you are all referring to is Guido's old design, he has a new design with the PCM1704 that'll be released in July.
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
Best regards,
Sander Sassen
http://www.hardwareanalysis.com
Thanks everyone for all the helpful info on the coupling cap issues and Tent DAC. I will need to make my decision soon. This DIY thing is great. There's such great community here from all over the world!
Sander,
While your list of good dac chips seems to be a valid reassumption of the presently available choice, I noticed that the pcm63 is missing..
Because of availability, or it has some quality problems in your opinion?
Yes, I am an old client of Tentlabs. If remember well, have ordered the kit in 2000. And given that it's still my main dac, though I'm torturing it with tweaks ~ constantly, it probably means that it's good? Or I am too lazy, hehe.
My very first player, anyway, was a philips with CDM4 & TDA1543. I was listening to that for many many years, finally started to tweak, though not non-OS. My next player, an again tweaked Onkyo flagship with pcm58 in it, had simply swept the floor with my philips, so it enjoys pension at a friend of mine.. Given the hype these times, sometimes I wish I still had it.. though surely not for it's sound.
MGH, your PM buton is not working.
And also I would be curious about the opinion of other builders, like
Algar_emi, Pedro, Alp and the others - though it was already visible that they were generally satisfied.
Ciao, George
While your list of good dac chips seems to be a valid reassumption of the presently available choice, I noticed that the pcm63 is missing..
Because of availability, or it has some quality problems in your opinion?
Yes, I am an old client of Tentlabs. If remember well, have ordered the kit in 2000. And given that it's still my main dac, though I'm torturing it with tweaks ~ constantly, it probably means that it's good? Or I am too lazy, hehe.
My very first player, anyway, was a philips with CDM4 & TDA1543. I was listening to that for many many years, finally started to tweak, though not non-OS. My next player, an again tweaked Onkyo flagship with pcm58 in it, had simply swept the floor with my philips, so it enjoys pension at a friend of mine.. Given the hype these times, sometimes I wish I still had it.. though surely not for it's sound.
MGH, your PM buton is not working.
And also I would be curious about the opinion of other builders, like
Algar_emi, Pedro, Alp and the others - though it was already visible that they were generally satisfied.
Ciao, George
Bernhard said:
Hi,
A lazy Sunday afternoon after watching the formula 1 replay.I compared the THD at 0db /1khz for the dacs here http://www.freeweb.hu/mestertuning/dac.php?lang=en . Tda1543 chip measures worse on that list by a long way! Burr-Browns dacs measure well but vary alot within their gradings. Early AD dac's are the same as Burr-Browns.
Pcm1704 measures best with tda1547 close.
To me it looks like for DIY 8X digital filter (SM filter? ), and pcm63 is easiest. Or if you can solder them: -DF1704, and pcm1704
Modify a bitstream player with saa7350 / tda1547 ?
The other good measuring dac's are surface mount, and if you have bad eyes, and a shakey hand like me i'd stay away.
I suppose it's a good thing that you have question marks behind that statement. Because I find it very interesting that most if not all of the detractors of the TDA1543 say they don't like the distortion. And then claim that those who do like it some how like the involvement caused by the distortion... but is this really true?
Doede...one of the fans of the fans of the TDA1543 had a PCM63. The DDDAC2000. But he does not use that chip anymore...why? I think the answer is because he likes the TDA1543 better.
Now I can hear everyone saying..yes but the TDA1543 only has 12bit resolution..and distortion..? So what?
Most CD'S only have 16bit resolution... The fact of the matter is that almost everyone has a different taste in the way they like music reproduced...and I "think" that those who like the TDA1543 find the TONE of instruments very important...there are a lot of people who don't care for the tone..but look for dynamics or PRAT or whatever..
Bas,
Before condemning the pcm63 chip itself, maybe you could have a second look at the technical solutions applied by Doede in that dac.
No reclocking of any kind; no signal integrity / purity considerations in the digital section; I don't know about the grounding [suspicious].
A complicated switching scheme on the dig. input..
When working with 8 times oversampling, these are better be well considered. If you take a look at all the presently famous designs, if they are applying OS, then they all reclock as well - NorthStar 192; Hagerman; Benchmark; Bel Canto; Rakk dac; Lavry etc. Some of them doing it with an ASRC, a very few of them doing a secondary PLL. And some of them are applying just the very same PLL of the Tent Dac!
I think Doede at that time was more concentrated on playing with different digital filters / receivers/ dacs, and stopped tweaking before descending into the endless circles of fine tuning..
Based on this, I would rather say that he found the tda1543 easier to twiddle with than the BB dac.
Also going to NOS is not so straitforward with the BB dac. By the way, I suppose You know well the Willenvaard dac [pcm63 / nos]?
Else.
From my part, I think after some ~7 years listening to it, I got well acquainted with the TDA1543 tonality, in that little player. After the first day of listening to a PCM 58, I just knew what fits me better.. and funny that You mention that, because it was exactly the tonality which grabbed me so much!
Ciao, George
Before condemning the pcm63 chip itself, maybe you could have a second look at the technical solutions applied by Doede in that dac.
No reclocking of any kind; no signal integrity / purity considerations in the digital section; I don't know about the grounding [suspicious].
A complicated switching scheme on the dig. input..
When working with 8 times oversampling, these are better be well considered. If you take a look at all the presently famous designs, if they are applying OS, then they all reclock as well - NorthStar 192; Hagerman; Benchmark; Bel Canto; Rakk dac; Lavry etc. Some of them doing it with an ASRC, a very few of them doing a secondary PLL. And some of them are applying just the very same PLL of the Tent Dac!
I think Doede at that time was more concentrated on playing with different digital filters / receivers/ dacs, and stopped tweaking before descending into the endless circles of fine tuning..
Based on this, I would rather say that he found the tda1543 easier to twiddle with than the BB dac.
Also going to NOS is not so straitforward with the BB dac. By the way, I suppose You know well the Willenvaard dac [pcm63 / nos]?
Else.
From my part, I think after some ~7 years listening to it, I got well acquainted with the TDA1543 tonality, in that little player. After the first day of listening to a PCM 58, I just knew what fits me better.. and funny that You mention that, because it was exactly the tonality which grabbed me so much!
Ciao, George
I did not condemn the PCM63? Did I? I don't even have an opinion on that chip. 🙂
And just like you said about the PCM63...the implementation matters a lot. So what I'm saying is people should not condemn the TDA1543 because it's cheap, easy to implement and has lousy specs. I have a DAC with PCM1794 which has low THD and very high dynamic range...but I don't find that spec remotely interesting or impressive..what does it mean?..does it mean that it sounds better than anything that has lower THD? It has twice the dynamic range of vinyl..does it sound twice as dynamic compared to a vinyl record?
...I have listened to systems with SINGLE TDA1543!!! not even paralleled and re-clocked etc....and it sounded absolutely stunning...lousy THD and all.
And just like you said about the PCM63...the implementation matters a lot. So what I'm saying is people should not condemn the TDA1543 because it's cheap, easy to implement and has lousy specs. I have a DAC with PCM1794 which has low THD and very high dynamic range...but I don't find that spec remotely interesting or impressive..what does it mean?..does it mean that it sounds better than anything that has lower THD? It has twice the dynamic range of vinyl..does it sound twice as dynamic compared to a vinyl record?
...I have listened to systems with SINGLE TDA1543!!! not even paralleled and re-clocked etc....and it sounded absolutely stunning...lousy THD and all.
Bas,
Here we fully agree. And to increase the democratic confusion, I would like to add, that I have heard 47Labs systems several time - at one time I just could not help but remember of that old "tonality" so familiar, and that was a top system with Avantgarde horns; at another time the small Shigaraki system with the LENS speakers - and that was one of the most refreshing sounds on that occasion [Otherways full of tubes and horns etc..]
Ciao, George
Here we fully agree. And to increase the democratic confusion, I would like to add, that I have heard 47Labs systems several time - at one time I just could not help but remember of that old "tonality" so familiar, and that was a top system with Avantgarde horns; at another time the small Shigaraki system with the LENS speakers - and that was one of the most refreshing sounds on that occasion [Otherways full of tubes and horns etc..]
Ciao, George
Bas Horneman said:
So what else shall be true ?
Bas Horneman said:
How do you define TONE ? The characteristic distortion of that Chip ?
As CD got 16 bit resolution, IMHO to correctly reproduce the signal, the DAC should not waste 4 bits.
On the other hand nobody needs faked 20 or 24bits.
Just compared TDA1541 and PCM56 @ 0dB.
No difference noticeable with my equipment.
Distortion < -90dB
But compare those @ -60dB, totally different.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.