No, Just to understand you surely do not need a tweeter but optimisation and where it is needed in spite of following a Be fame...
Ок, I got it! My friend have a microphone and soft. I ask him.
By the way - I did manage to compare Dodson 217mk2d and Miro Dac (although not quite right - Dac was connected in that day). Me and my friend was listened both devices on same tracks. He says that content winner is 1862 and by the sound the best was Dodson. The last one have a much resolution, colors and dynamics. Miro Dac have a more neutral, studio sound but also was really good. Perhaps with burn in period he also will gain the resolution and colors. I'll see soon!
...also all of this has also to see with the oap choice and all the decoupling caps and PS combo. I think all the mirodac sounds different because the choice versatility at building it and of course about each owner hifi around. That's why I do not review too much my dac confs btw.
@sworder84 Definitely play with different OpAmps. For more colored sound try OPA134 😉
Dodson 214 mk2-d uses PCM1704 as DAC. Can you check and tell us what are the OpAmps in this device? Especially the one OpAmp next to the PCM1704 chip.
Dodson 214 mk2-d uses PCM1704 as DAC. Can you check and tell us what are the OpAmps in this device? Especially the one OpAmp next to the PCM1704 chip.
Attachments
Releaseing Muses05 have been postponed until June due to lack of chips.
That I am looking forward to.
That I am looking forward to.
Sorry Miro, no. I was already returned the device to his owner. He asked me do not open the device. I was visiting at last year and we together listening Wadia 15 and this 217mk2. 217 was definitely better. Acoustic - B&W 802.
Hello Miro,
Finally got around to replacing the lm6171 opamps. I soldered up some 797 brz and am just now listening. The scratching issue is gone. I will continue listening and update with an impression. Initially the sound stage is improved and very much like the lm 6171. It seems odd that the 6171’s were creating this issue. I’m a bit disappointed with those as I’ve not really had a chance to evaluate them.
Well thanks for your help, it is very much appreciated
Have you bougth them from a reliable source ? The LM6171 is a very fast device, how did you socketed it ? Photograph ?
Is lm6171 not a dip case size ?
There is a chance the tower is too high for such a rapid oaps for a proper decoupling. We talk about that in the thread.
There is a chance the tower is too high for such a rapid oaps for a proper decoupling. We talk about that in the thread.
Yes it’s possible. When ordered a dip package lm6171 was not available. So I used soic with an adapter which does put the opamp almost 1/2” above the pcb. I couldn’t find anything that was closer. I saw a post that talked specifically about that but turned out was not an issue. But I’m not sure that configuration and mine were exactly the same.
At this point the 797 opamps haven’t shown similar issues. I do have an order for some lm6171 in dip package along with the correct socket. I will try them but overall distance from pcb doesn’t look like it will be that much different
We’ll see.
Thanks
At this point the 797 opamps haven’t shown similar issues. I do have an order for some lm6171 in dip package along with the correct socket. I will try them but overall distance from pcb doesn’t look like it will be that much different
We’ll see.
Thanks
Well it seems the scratch has returned. So perhaps the soic package is not ideal. That’s not to say it couldn’t be something else entirely. I will continue searching.
Last edited:
Problem is maybe not there...sometimes it is difficult to find for simple enthusiasts as us...
Is it on both channels or one ? Same channel is scratching if you invert the oaps from their socket ? Little by little you may be able to reduce the possibilities...
Is it on both channels or one ? Same channel is scratching if you invert the oaps from their socket ? Little by little you may be able to reduce the possibilities...
Looking at your work here https://www.diyaudio.com/community/...st-tht-i2s-input-nos-r-2r.354078/post-6992778 all seem very clean.
Some ideas meanwhile the dip8 arrival :
Check the JLsounds I2S set up at its the bottom as per what has been explained in the thread.
The traffo seems far enough but try to put a tin above to reassure you about coupled field.
Does the streamer does not upsample all your material, check if the same clicks occur at different sampling speeds : 44khz to 388khz.
Check also with magnyfing glass around the registers and their caps if it is clean. Idem around the jlsounds and the dac pcb...
Certainly the oaps but who knows, it costs nothing to check.
Some ideas meanwhile the dip8 arrival :
Check the JLsounds I2S set up at its the bottom as per what has been explained in the thread.
The traffo seems far enough but try to put a tin above to reassure you about coupled field.
Does the streamer does not upsample all your material, check if the same clicks occur at different sampling speeds : 44khz to 388khz.
Check also with magnyfing glass around the registers and their caps if it is clean. Idem around the jlsounds and the dac pcb...
Certainly the oaps but who knows, it costs nothing to check.
C17 and 18 have -12V/+12V on them and your caps are rated 25V. You can use caps that rated beyond the operating voltage but not below.