I'm hoping that the large collective of practical experience can help me here, I'm going back and forth trying to get my head around how to use outputs from the two types of UcPure supplies (Quad, MKIII) in real life. I'd like to use them in a build - where the bits that need their own power - are:
#19C ReceiverPi Pro
#1D FifoPi
#35B StationPi Pro
#4B ES9038Q2M (or another DAC which would require same / similar supplies)
#20C TransportPi AES (possible as an interim, external DAC solution)
Looking at the manual for the UcPure Quad, J7 & J9 are switching outputs, J10 &J13 the continuous, does that mean that it has 4 possible rails that can be utilised at once? I say this just as having used the search function on the thread I couldn't see that in practice, so I assume I have to be wrong. Assuming you can use more than one rail, Does it have a negative effect on the power by using more than one or two of them or just drain it faster?
I asked Ian through his site but I assume he's busy, any help with this would be really appreciated, I've been thinking about this on and off for a month or so!
#19C ReceiverPi Pro
#1D FifoPi
#35B StationPi Pro
#4B ES9038Q2M (or another DAC which would require same / similar supplies)
#20C TransportPi AES (possible as an interim, external DAC solution)
Looking at the manual for the UcPure Quad, J7 & J9 are switching outputs, J10 &J13 the continuous, does that mean that it has 4 possible rails that can be utilised at once? I say this just as having used the search function on the thread I couldn't see that in practice, so I assume I have to be wrong. Assuming you can use more than one rail, Does it have a negative effect on the power by using more than one or two of them or just drain it faster?
I asked Ian through his site but I assume he's busy, any help with this would be really appreciated, I've been thinking about this on and off for a month or so!
There is only one rail on the UCQuad, fed from the UltraCap Quad. The 4 output connections are all in parallel & directly connected to the UltraCaps, with the switched outlets connected thru relays & the by-passible fuse. They are all usable at the same time, but they are not separate or isolated from each other in any way.
There is no blanket answer on the sonic impact of powering multiple boards from a single UCQuad, it really depends on what boards & how they are connected. Theoretically a separate supply (separate UCPure or UCQuad or other supply) for each board should be the best sonically, but there are some combinations where the impact will be minor... & others major.
I know this doesn't definitively answer your questions, but if you can propose how you are thinking of configuring your setup & how you would be using it we can better provide feedback on the pros & cons.
Greg in Mississippi
There is no blanket answer on the sonic impact of powering multiple boards from a single UCQuad, it really depends on what boards & how they are connected. Theoretically a separate supply (separate UCPure or UCQuad or other supply) for each board should be the best sonically, but there are some combinations where the impact will be minor... & others major.
I know this doesn't definitively answer your questions, but if you can propose how you are thinking of configuring your setup & how you would be using it we can better provide feedback on the pros & cons.
Greg in Mississippi
@Greg Stewart What if we power the FIfo pi and the ES9038Q2M Dual Mono II DAC with the same UCPure? Would that degrade sonic quality?
Theoretically yes. But the UCPure supplies are very good iny experience & whether you would hear the difference between sharing a single UCPure between them or powering them separately with two will depend a lot on quality of the rest of your setup.
No reason not to start with that & add another later.
In the meantime focus on layout so you can connect the FiFoPi & DM DAC II with short low impedance high quality connections.
I, like Ian, prefer the Eaton UCs (see his posts for p/n). But I found they needed to be damped to sound their best. I use 3 wraps of 1/2” strips of Dynamat Xtreme starting with one at the positive end & the other two spaced out so that when the UCs are mounted the damping rings are offset & don't interfere with each other.
BTW I use 4 DIY'd UC supplies on my FiFoPi & DM DAC II setups. 4 separate ones are clearly better than one of each on the FiFoPi & DM DAC II. After I do some comparisons to confirm my suspicions that Ian's UCPure supplies are better I plan to go to 4 UCPures but need to spend time laying out how to fit them & the UCQuad powering my Allo.com USBridge Sig in the available space, along with the +- supply on the output stage.
They are LARGE!
I hope this helps.
Greg in Mississippi
No reason not to start with that & add another later.
In the meantime focus on layout so you can connect the FiFoPi & DM DAC II with short low impedance high quality connections.
I, like Ian, prefer the Eaton UCs (see his posts for p/n). But I found they needed to be damped to sound their best. I use 3 wraps of 1/2” strips of Dynamat Xtreme starting with one at the positive end & the other two spaced out so that when the UCs are mounted the damping rings are offset & don't interfere with each other.
BTW I use 4 DIY'd UC supplies on my FiFoPi & DM DAC II setups. 4 separate ones are clearly better than one of each on the FiFoPi & DM DAC II. After I do some comparisons to confirm my suspicions that Ian's UCPure supplies are better I plan to go to 4 UCPures but need to spend time laying out how to fit them & the UCQuad powering my Allo.com USBridge Sig in the available space, along with the +- supply on the output stage.
They are LARGE!
I hope this helps.
Greg in Mississippi
Thanks for that Greg, really, that helps a great deal. With that I know how to go for the base case and I can start with less PSUs and then play around / scale up from there if I want👍
With the setup, my thinking had been to make a DDC / something that can input native DSD upsampled with HQPlayer and output to a DAC (TransportPi as an option, maybe...). I probably lean towards the DSC2.5 but will likely try both that and Ian's 9038 at different times if I have the flexibility with up to 4 outputs from the UcPure Quad, and I'd then have one 3.3v and one 5v of those.
Parts wise, in the snapshot below, the blue is what I'd order and the required power (if powering separately), below, the orange and green how I'm imagining the PSUs could work there, with DAC and FifoPi on the continuous power. Do you think that's a good use of the possible 5v and 3.3v sources? Does it seem like I'm doing anything daft, missing something obvious or missing something that might improve things?
Cheers, Elliot
With the setup, my thinking had been to make a DDC / something that can input native DSD upsampled with HQPlayer and output to a DAC (TransportPi as an option, maybe...). I probably lean towards the DSC2.5 but will likely try both that and Ian's 9038 at different times if I have the flexibility with up to 4 outputs from the UcPure Quad, and I'd then have one 3.3v and one 5v of those.
Parts wise, in the snapshot below, the blue is what I'd order and the required power (if powering separately), below, the orange and green how I'm imagining the PSUs could work there, with DAC and FifoPi on the continuous power. Do you think that's a good use of the possible 5v and 3.3v sources? Does it seem like I'm doing anything daft, missing something obvious or missing something that might improve things?
Cheers, Elliot
@Greg Stewart - Sounds very interesting about damping the UC's to sound their best. Any possibility to get some pictures showing your setup and how the damping looks like ?
Last edited:
@ElliotA, working on a detailed reply for you, it may be a few days, busy...
@HankRevo, attached are.pictures of:
- Damped Tecate UCs in a UCQuad
- My main Ian Stack with a FifoPi & DM DAC on an Allo.com USBridge Signature & Ian's OPA861 IV stage. The USBridge Sig is powered by a UCQuad with original Maxwell UCs. The FiFoPi & 3 rails of the DM DAC are powered by Uptone Audio LPS-1.2s with each feeding 325F Maxwell UC buffers, 4 in parallel for the FiFoPi. The OPA861 iV is powered by the 3.3v rails of Ian's LiFePO4 battery board configured as +-3.3V.
Greg in Mississippi
@HankRevo, attached are.pictures of:
- Damped Tecate UCs in a UCQuad
- My main Ian Stack with a FifoPi & DM DAC on an Allo.com USBridge Signature & Ian's OPA861 IV stage. The USBridge Sig is powered by a UCQuad with original Maxwell UCs. The FiFoPi & 3 rails of the DM DAC are powered by Uptone Audio LPS-1.2s with each feeding 325F Maxwell UC buffers, 4 in parallel for the FiFoPi. The OPA861 iV is powered by the 3.3v rails of Ian's LiFePO4 battery board configured as +-3.3V.
Greg in Mississippi
Attachments
Thanks @Greg Stewart - great and easy modification, looks very very interesting and something to try.
& my oops, I said 3 wraps, really 4 wraps.
I was an early adopter of UCs & tried them with Ian's early, very rudimentary UC board. I have tried UCs from four different manufacturers & a number of various p/n's. Not all sound good, BTW.
I went on to assemble my own UC pairs that I energized with various raw power supplies. Based on my DIY experiences over the years, I damped the UCs as a matter of course & never compared them damped vs raw. The smaller UC pairs in that setup pix are those.
When I 1st tried Ian's UCPure & UCQuad boards I orginally didn't damp.the UCs. My initial comparisons between the Eaton & Tecate UCs in this state had the Tecates on top.
After damping the Eatons were.clear winners, that is how much the sonics changed.
Try it, I bet you'll like it!
Greg in Mississippi
I was an early adopter of UCs & tried them with Ian's early, very rudimentary UC board. I have tried UCs from four different manufacturers & a number of various p/n's. Not all sound good, BTW.
I went on to assemble my own UC pairs that I energized with various raw power supplies. Based on my DIY experiences over the years, I damped the UCs as a matter of course & never compared them damped vs raw. The smaller UC pairs in that setup pix are those.
When I 1st tried Ian's UCPure & UCQuad boards I orginally didn't damp.the UCs. My initial comparisons between the Eaton & Tecate UCs in this state had the Tecates on top.
After damping the Eatons were.clear winners, that is how much the sonics changed.
Try it, I bet you'll like it!
Greg in Mississippi
I wanted to post about this the other day, but I didn't want to change the subject away form the UCPure discussion. Any way, the other day I saw this video in my YouTube stream, and thought it was pretty fascinating.
Turns out Ian does make a I/V board that you can swap out the OPA's. Based on the video above, I'd say it's 100% worth a try. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna try it myself in the next couple months.
https://iancanada.ca/products/6a-i-v-std-mkii-standard-opa-i-v-stage
I talked to the guy from Sparko, and he said the OPamps on that board are dual and recommended swapping all three. And Ian's board requires -+12v! Which does work with Sparko OPAmps.
Curious what peoples thoughts are on this!
Turns out Ian does make a I/V board that you can swap out the OPA's. Based on the video above, I'd say it's 100% worth a try. I'm pretty sure I'm gonna try it myself in the next couple months.
https://iancanada.ca/products/6a-i-v-std-mkii-standard-opa-i-v-stage
I talked to the guy from Sparko, and he said the OPamps on that board are dual and recommended swapping all three. And Ian's board requires -+12v! Which does work with Sparko OPAmps.
Curious what peoples thoughts are on this!
I made a suitable cap and neutrik powecon connector with shielded cable for the 230v input external neutron star clock.
Now I just have to install a pair of Elna Silmic Eelcos with the correct value for the shunt 3.3v regulator input Dual Mono ll DAC.
Now I just have to install a pair of Elna Silmic Eelcos with the correct value for the shunt 3.3v regulator input Dual Mono ll DAC.
Attachments
Last edited:
@ElliotA, first some questions...
- The Amanero, ReceiverPi ProII, StationPi ProII, and TransportPi AES add a lot of inputs and outputs. What ones do you really need?
- What output stage do you plan to use with the ES9038Q2M Dual Mono DAC II? You didn't list one and it doesn't work without one.
- Are you planning to run the ES9038 DM DAC in asynchronous or synchronous mode?
@Clausen, I have used Ian's IVStd board extensively. The Sparkos discrete OpAmps were very good in them. Since I was using it in a balanced setup, I only changed the initial two dual OpAmps and left the one that converts balanced to single-ended empty. I was trying some circuit mods awhile back, didn't like the initial results, need to get back to that. I found with upgraded OpAmps that circuit was near on-par with Ian's OPA861 I/V stage when both were well-powered.
I will say I slightly preferred the New-Class-D dual OpAmps over the Sparkos, but I believe they are no longer in business.
Others preferred the OPA1612 in that application. The Sparkos sounded more like music to me, but eveeryone hears, interprets, & prefers differently.
I am listening to my tweaked Allo.com Katana right now which also used the Sparkos circuit, though their implementation.
Greg in Mississippi
- The Amanero, ReceiverPi ProII, StationPi ProII, and TransportPi AES add a lot of inputs and outputs. What ones do you really need?
- What output stage do you plan to use with the ES9038Q2M Dual Mono DAC II? You didn't list one and it doesn't work without one.
- Are you planning to run the ES9038 DM DAC in asynchronous or synchronous mode?
@Clausen, I have used Ian's IVStd board extensively. The Sparkos discrete OpAmps were very good in them. Since I was using it in a balanced setup, I only changed the initial two dual OpAmps and left the one that converts balanced to single-ended empty. I was trying some circuit mods awhile back, didn't like the initial results, need to get back to that. I found with upgraded OpAmps that circuit was near on-par with Ian's OPA861 I/V stage when both were well-powered.
I will say I slightly preferred the New-Class-D dual OpAmps over the Sparkos, but I believe they are no longer in business.
Others preferred the OPA1612 in that application. The Sparkos sounded more like music to me, but eveeryone hears, interprets, & prefers differently.
I am listening to my tweaked Allo.com Katana right now which also used the Sparkos circuit, though their implementation.
Greg in Mississippi
@Greg Stewart @Clausen I actually saw on Facebook last year that New-Class-D had stopped, but maybe you can still go here.
https://lctechs.dk/newclassd/index.php?kill=3
https://lctechs.dk/newclassd/index.php?kill=3
@Greg Stewart, the main input will be the Amanero but having the ReceiverPi Pro is to have the ability accept other input options, the TransportPi AES is for fun / testing, I doubt it would make it into a final build.
The StationPi Pro as much as anything, because it cleans up the build / stacks.
On output stage I'd been thinking a good I/V transformer and any DAC would take it's clock from the FifoPi where I'd add the ScPure clocks 👍
Cheers
Elliot
Oh, OK cool. The Sparko's guy told me to change out all of them, at least I thought that's what he said. He said every thing in the signal path, and since I asked him if I could just replace the ones for balanced like you said, and that's how he replied, but $80 is $80, so I'm still thinking Ill try that. Thanks for the feedback Greg!!! I am using his transformer board right now and I have no complaints. My brother has some really high end stuff, with a very nice Sim Audio CD player, and I was pretty shocked last time I was at his house at how obviously better his stuff sounded. But that was when i was running my Bluesound streamer. Haven't heard his since I built the Ian Streamer.
There are lots of variables in building an Ian streamer, but chances are pretty high - if done right - it would challenge the Bluesound. And likely win.
Hi Greg, I just placed a large order of Tecate and some Eatons. Mostly Tecate.
Is it a big difference? If so, I will cancel my order and go Eatons.
@sebbyp, in my setups & to my ears & preferences, yes. It surprised me. Both sets had plenty of run time. Maybe keep a set of Tecate in the order & you can post your thoughts too?
@ElliotA, then that sound like a good path forward. I suggest starting with the simplest setup AFTER READING THE MANUALS THOROUGLY tho, I've seen many posts here about something not working that would have been sidestepped with a better understanding of the boards and trying the simplest setup first to confirm basic operation before going more complex. BTW, again to my ears and preferences, I prefer the OPA861 (and tweaked IVStd) to any of the transformer outputs I've tried, including almost all of Ian's (I haven't tried his latest), another well-regarded one sold in the Vendor Forums, and another well regarded one in the overall DIY community..
@Clausen, I DID modify both the IVStd and OPA861 boards, replacing the main power input caps on both with United ChemiCon KYB series (which I prefer for analog use), and on the OPA861 board replacing the other electrolytics with Rubycon 20uF PML SMD film caps, and adding additional PML 10uF & 5uF bypasses on the bottom of the board. I need to get back to IVStd, apply some of the same mods, & troubleshoot why taking the balanced to single-ended components out of the circuit didn't sound better to me), but with those mods, yes, I preferred the OPA861 IV. The cap changes brought a level of clarity and naturalness across the spectrum, again, in my setups & to my ears & preferences. Sufficiently enough that I haven't felt motivated to revisit the IVStd mods with so many other projects.
Greg in Mississippi
@ElliotA, then that sound like a good path forward. I suggest starting with the simplest setup AFTER READING THE MANUALS THOROUGLY tho, I've seen many posts here about something not working that would have been sidestepped with a better understanding of the boards and trying the simplest setup first to confirm basic operation before going more complex. BTW, again to my ears and preferences, I prefer the OPA861 (and tweaked IVStd) to any of the transformer outputs I've tried, including almost all of Ian's (I haven't tried his latest), another well-regarded one sold in the Vendor Forums, and another well regarded one in the overall DIY community..
@Clausen, I DID modify both the IVStd and OPA861 boards, replacing the main power input caps on both with United ChemiCon KYB series (which I prefer for analog use), and on the OPA861 board replacing the other electrolytics with Rubycon 20uF PML SMD film caps, and adding additional PML 10uF & 5uF bypasses on the bottom of the board. I need to get back to IVStd, apply some of the same mods, & troubleshoot why taking the balanced to single-ended components out of the circuit didn't sound better to me), but with those mods, yes, I preferred the OPA861 IV. The cap changes brought a level of clarity and naturalness across the spectrum, again, in my setups & to my ears & preferences. Sufficiently enough that I haven't felt motivated to revisit the IVStd mods with so many other projects.
Greg in Mississippi