Fascinating.
Id like to hear a DAC designed with your insights.
Is there a DAC around that uses this topology?
I have a RAKK DAC version 1 which uses PCM1794. I have 75 ohm resistors for the i/v and take a SE output straight into the grid of my line stage. The line stage is a 26 DHT in filament bias which is just about the best sound you can get. Less amplification factor (8) then the usual tubes like ECC88, but much better sound.
I'd be interested in any other DAC boards that could replace my RAKK ver 1. I'd like more output - I get about 0.5v out right now after the i/o resistors. I could use an ES9023 and that sounded very good in my system when I borrowed one.
That would be a solution I'd recommend.
I use USB input out of my Mac Mini.
I'd be interested in any other DAC boards that could replace my RAKK ver 1. I'd like more output - I get about 0.5v out right now after the i/o resistors. I could use an ES9023 and that sounded very good in my system when I borrowed one.
That would be a solution I'd recommend.
I use USB input out of my Mac Mini.
Attachments
This was the philosophy of the first RBCD players. Like everything else in digital audio cost came into play and many many compromises have been made since. That said building a 7th order filter can be tedious and time consuming, I am fairly satisfied with PCM1704 and good modern oversampling (ie not DF170x.) The rockna PCM1704 kit sounds a lot better than I expected.
Also no one has mention jitter. Most all who want a DAC are using it with a computer and direct USB can be terrible with noise and jitter.
DAC's get complicated any way you look at it. Every design is a compromise I think because designing a good one requires so much cross discipline expertise. You need a digital PCB designer, a micro-controller programmer, an expert analog guy, and a power supply guru.
The SM5842 +AD1865+tubes posted earlier is a decent compromise if paired with an ian Fifo.
Indeed it was, though they used active filters rather than passive after the DACs which probably suffered from IMD. Similarly ADCs were preceded by active AAFs (think Apogee) in the days before S-D modulators.
I agree with that.
I prefer to use a stream player with HDD built in connected to DAC by SPDIF and avoid to use USB connection.
My favourite DAC is PCM1794 or PCM1798 as it can play HD formats and does DSD also.
I had Beresford Caiman in my system for some time and I think this dac sounds poor.
Interesting, what is your streamer if not a computer ? Squeezebox ?
You not believe in recloker like the usb/spidf recloker for computer ?
The DAC you talk about seems to be old technics & chips.
I ask myself if a good recloking in SPIDF at the enter of the DAC with a wolfson 8804 and crystal (non softaware mode) can be a deal against hard tweak in streamer like squeezebox I have with a I2S output and a crystal chip near the DAC chip in the dac box. I give up the TDA1541 best thread and try the GB Gurrulinux DAC. the squeezebox duet is too precious to break it.
We talk not too much about streamer in DIYA nore DIY ones...
Not computer and not squeezebox. Squeezebox do not allow to install any HDD inside, it allows only LAN or WIFI. I checked several options and the sound from HDD connected to stream player via SATA is best. The same HDD removed form stream player and connected via USB sounds worse and difference is very big. My player to date is Dune HD, and I'm working on my DIY stream player based on Popcorn Hour C200 with regulated power supply, master clock and SPDIF signal buffer.
I don't believe in computer
Stream player is also a computer, but highly specialized to do one thing.
I don't care if it is old, It does the job and sounds very good.
If reading HD format, I could stuck with AD1865 or PCM63 or even ancient TDA1541A because I'm quite happy with their sound quality.
I don't like chips like Sabre or AD1955 or Asahi Kassei.
I think SPDIF is not main issue with squeezebox. I think the main issue is absence of SATA connection.
I think making a stream player from scratch is overkill if one may grab a decent player like Popcorn or Dune or even Hyundai Mbox and tweak it.
"I don't care if it is old, It does the job and sounds very good."
I am agree with that, it was just a question because of their marketing speach !
i have a squeezebox duet spidf link to a Raindrop hui AD1865 non oversampling (and no recloking spidf) but i 'm happy with just a synology server with wifi to squeezebox duet and a little tweak : just some sanyo oscon in the Squeezebox Duet for the xlink chip and the little wolfson converter chip ! it's as good as the ad1865 : I try many caps here : the less is the better for me with the squeezebox duet. No powersupply tweak : we have always a pifilter with the wire of the powersupply transformer, and a caps and a self in serie after in the squeezebox ! I tried but a linear powersupply was not better to my ears
I am agree with that, it was just a question because of their marketing speach !
i have a squeezebox duet spidf link to a Raindrop hui AD1865 non oversampling (and no recloking spidf) but i 'm happy with just a synology server with wifi to squeezebox duet and a little tweak : just some sanyo oscon in the Squeezebox Duet for the xlink chip and the little wolfson converter chip ! it's as good as the ad1865 : I try many caps here : the less is the better for me with the squeezebox duet. No powersupply tweak : we have always a pifilter with the wire of the powersupply transformer, and a caps and a self in serie after in the squeezebox ! I tried but a linear powersupply was not better to my ears
I do not have experience except a linear power supply which is valuable mod IMHO.
Yes indeed. I think 50W will be enough. And go for EI or R-core rather than toroidal.But 160w traffo is overkill for sure
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.