Why not use the balanced output without transformer or capacitor?
When you do not measure DC on the output of the balanced connection it would not be a problem, and I expect he sound quality would go up. It did in my case, but as I am using an input transformer in my amps my experience may not be compairable to other cases..
When you do not measure DC on the output of the balanced connection it would not be a problem, and I expect he sound quality would go up. It did in my case, but as I am using an input transformer in my amps my experience may not be compairable to other cases..
Clivem - good to see you back
Missed reading your thoughts and of your trials with output configurations.
Does this mean you have dismissed the active approach and that you have found transformers the best you have found, so far?
Please, let us know your current thoughts.
Missed reading your thoughts and of your trials with output configurations.
Does this mean you have dismissed the active approach and that you have found transformers the best you have found, so far?
Please, let us know your current thoughts.
LOL. You haven't missed anything. I don't post very often, but when I do check-in with the forum I always see if there have been any updates to this thread.
I spent quite some time with a simple Broskie cathode follower as the output from the DDDAC. Active, but not active in terms of gain. (I still think there is a benefit to be had from combining both phases into a single ended output, whether you do it via a transformer or an active device, like the BCF.) I really do need a 2V output to drive my very low gain headphone amp, so I went back to the Broskie unbalancer circuit, differential driver in front of the BCF providing gain. Nothing really interesting there.... 4xECC88, 200V B+, long-tail CCS set for 10mA for the input tubes, so 5mA each, something like a 25k plate resistor, so ~75V on the plates. 200R cathode resistors for the BCF portion sets Ia to roughly 10mA for the output tubes. Can't remember what value I/V resistor, but it was chosen for 2V RMS out of the unbalancer. Sounds good. You could spend a lot more $$$'s and end up with worse. I stopped tinkering some time ago. In this configuration, it's been to a few listening sessions with other audiophools. One hosted at a hi-fi dealership where it was put up against a very high-end, (translation: very, very, very expensive and shall remain nameless), DAC and resulted in two people, there and then, asking where they could buy one. (Hi-Fi dealer trying to sell his many 1000 $$$$ DAC, which was the main reason for hosting the evening, really not amused at this point. Another place I'll never get invited back to. LOL.) Anyway, I digress. Passive transformer output or active output, I'd recommend either in preference to the passive cap output.
Forgetting the NOS and DF thing for a moment, the beauty of one of the things Doede picked-up on with the PCM1794 is that it is a recent generation, current output DAC which tolerates a decent size I/V resistor, which you'll never get away with elsewhere, like with the 1704 where you'll pay a heavy sonic penalty if you try. Which means that yes, passive cap out is an option, but that passive transformer is an option as well as more traditional gain stages, whether tube, or perish the thought, the traditional virtual ground op-amp. Which makes it great for tinkering with various output stages, even if that wasn't really what Doede intended.
Last edited:
LOL,
now I could say, I yes that is exactly what I intended Seriously, I always like people to experiment with my KITs.... and this time this really happens. I am very pleased with that
FRESH NEWS: today the PCBs with SMD assembled parts arrived, so I can start with the new prototypes with SPDIF Input...
to be cont'd
My DDDAC1794 is running after about 6 hours of assembly time. Initial upgrade included Tantalum IV resistors and Cinemag 15/15B output transformers. I downloaded the WaveIO Windows driver which magically found its way to the JRiver music playing software on my Windows 8 core i7 computer. No problems getting the computer to communicate with the WaveIO board through the DDDAC1794.
After 20 hours of music playing time the sound quality already surpasses my Sony SCD-XA5400ES with CD's. This is amazing because new wires, caps, resistors usually take about 300 hours to break in which means the best is yet to come.
I bought 8 270ohm tantalum 1% 1/2 watt resistors from Parts Connection so that I could find pairs at 135ohms that matched within .1% at the balanced outputs for each channel. The DC offset for the 2 channels is 1.3mv and 0.4mv which doesn't seem to present any problems for the Cinemags. The Cinemags have a 10K load. I paid less than $120USD for the pair of Cinemags which is much less than what high-end capacitors cost.
My next upgrade will be a DIY upgraded USB cable with an external 5VDC premium power supply for the WaveIO.
Like many others I feel compelled to share pictures of my DDDAC1794 on a wooden board.
After 20 hours of music playing time the sound quality already surpasses my Sony SCD-XA5400ES with CD's. This is amazing because new wires, caps, resistors usually take about 300 hours to break in which means the best is yet to come.
I bought 8 270ohm tantalum 1% 1/2 watt resistors from Parts Connection so that I could find pairs at 135ohms that matched within .1% at the balanced outputs for each channel. The DC offset for the 2 channels is 1.3mv and 0.4mv which doesn't seem to present any problems for the Cinemags. The Cinemags have a 10K load. I paid less than $120USD for the pair of Cinemags which is much less than what high-end capacitors cost.
My next upgrade will be a DIY upgraded USB cable with an external 5VDC premium power supply for the WaveIO.
Like many others I feel compelled to share pictures of my DDDAC1794 on a wooden board.
Attachments
" The Cinemags have a 10K load. I paid less than $120USD for the pair of Cinemags which is much less than what high-end capacitors cost."
That proves that capacitors are ridiculously overpriced by the high-end maffia!
You can also see this with Jensen paper in oils; when they discovered that the aluminium housing on the caps sound worse than a paper housing they started making paper housings and overpricing them shamelessly!
I just buy the aluminium housings and saw off the housing, this is the best free upgrade you can do
But transformers are almost always better than a cap.........................
That proves that capacitors are ridiculously overpriced by the high-end maffia!
You can also see this with Jensen paper in oils; when they discovered that the aluminium housing on the caps sound worse than a paper housing they started making paper housings and overpricing them shamelessly!
I just buy the aluminium housings and saw off the housing, this is the best free upgrade you can do
But transformers are almost always better than a cap.........................
I've recently installed a pair of cinemag 15/15B transformers and they have improved the clarity and vocal texture immensely, but i've noticed the bass has reduced considerably, the really low frequencies mainly. This is compared to the Mundorf caps i had in there, which i swapped back in to make sure i was imagining it. Id this an expected result of Tx coupled outputs? i have tried loading them with 10K and 15K resistors(in place if the 100k originally), but this didn't affect bass performance. Maybe the clarity i'm hearing in the upper frequencies is because of the reduction in lower frequenct not muddying them? Anyway just wanted some thoughts from people that use Cinemags.
Many thanks, Si
Many thanks, Si
I suppose it would be easy to measure the freq. response with a signal generator connectet to the primary on the transformer, and then measure the output with an AC voltermeter or a scope.
Then you can make sure if the transformer eats the bass.
I just made a transformer coupled preamp with Sowter transformers, and measuring this way I could see that the circuit started to attenuate at around 100 Hz, not much but easy to spot.
My setup were signal generator to DUT and to channel 1 on the scope, and output to channel 2. By tweaking the signal generator you can learn a lot about the circuit.
Then you can make sure if the transformer eats the bass.
I just made a transformer coupled preamp with Sowter transformers, and measuring this way I could see that the circuit started to attenuate at around 100 Hz, not much but easy to spot.
My setup were signal generator to DUT and to channel 1 on the scope, and output to channel 2. By tweaking the signal generator you can learn a lot about the circuit.
After the storage scopes have been much cheaper, you can get very decent analog scopes cheap.
I paid around $250 for my Tektronix 2 channel 100 MHz, and around $100 for my square/sinus generator.
I have just ordered my DDDAC so I have no experience with this particular DAC, but have in mind to connect it via balanced to unbalanced 1:1 trafoes from Sowther which I have on the shelf. One day I will try to measure the freq. response on those.
I paid around $250 for my Tektronix 2 channel 100 MHz, and around $100 for my square/sinus generator.
I have just ordered my DDDAC so I have no experience with this particular DAC, but have in mind to connect it via balanced to unbalanced 1:1 trafoes from Sowther which I have on the shelf. One day I will try to measure the freq. response on those.
My Cinemags have a very tight and authoritative bass. According to the Cinemag data sheet the output is down only 0.03db at 20hz. Maybe my Tantalum IV resistors matched within .1% have something to do with the bass being great in my system. Maybe excessive DC offset into the Cinemags might muddy up the base.
www.cinemag.biz/line_input/PDF/CMLI-15-15B.pdf
www.cinemag.biz/line_input/PDF/CMLI-15-15B.pdf
Last edited: