Marantz CD63 & CD67 mods list

Jump to Latest
#4,844
Re: Re: Transformer

rowemeister said:

With no news on custom TX I am going down this route for this player.
Click to expand...

Roewmeister,

I'm not having much luck on the replacement 240v Tx for my CD67SE (from the 100v one), would it be possible to have schematic/parts list for the pic you attached to that post #1533, I'll ask my wife if we can fit one of those on instead?

k.
 
#4,845
cd6000 not so good anymore

I know this is cd63/67 thread, but the 6000 is the same family not not as good sounding🙂
I have replaced all decoupling caps with elna silmic in audio areas and Oscons for digital. I have replace the resistors in RC to 1mH inductors. Remove output caps. separeate low noise supply for my new clock. 3300uF LM7805 3300uF panasonic FC caps for digital analog, 4700uF 4700uF lm317/337 3300uF for analog opamp and HDAM. 680 lm7805 3300 for decoder Lots of damping and LM6172 opamps.

Since all this work has been done the player now skips.
the only thing I can think is a poor solder joint somewhere, the laser is dying.

Is there any way of testing the laser or adjusting the voltage.

cheers Arthur
 
#4,846
Re: Re: Re: Transformer

jksmurf said:


Roewmeister,

I'm not having much luck on the replacement 240v Tx for my CD67SE (from the 100v one), would it be possible to have schematic/parts list for the pic you attached to that post #1533, I'll ask my wife if we can fit one of those on instead?

k.
Click to expand...

Post #1598 shows them fitted. The results are much better than KI tx.

Here are the the TX(s) winding diagram showing voltages.


An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.


Brent
 
#4,849
Hi guys,

I fancy trying out Ray's passive filter plus FET stage but I've pulled the analogue stage of my 67SE about so much I don't think it would survive.

I MAY just go for it anyway. I've seen Ray's photos but is there a 'stuffing guide'?

I could alternatively make it on veroboard, and at least I could try it without committing myself to it. Anyone done this?

Ideally I would make a PCB but I don't have the facilities.

Another thing - Ray - when I modelled it on LTspice (probably quite badly as I'm new to it!) the supply decoupling configuration of 470uF and 220uH seemed to add a resonance at about 500Hz. Did I mess something up? (Very likely...)
 
#4,850
Glenn2 said:
Hi guys,

I fancy trying out Ray's passive filter plus FET stage but I've pulled the analogue stage of my 67SE about so much I don't think it would survive.

I MAY just go for it anyway. I've seen Ray's photos but is there a 'stuffing guide'?

I could alternatively make it on veroboard, and at least I could try it without committing myself to it. Anyone done this?

Ideally I would make a PCB but I don't have the facilities.

Another thing - Ray - when I modelled it on LTspice (probably quite badly as I'm new to it!) the supply decoupling configuration of 470uF and 220uH seemed to add a resonance at about 500Hz. Did I mess something up? (Very likely...)
Click to expand...


Hi,

I posted a PDF of the output stage here, and it has some kind of placement list. I hope it's helpful. A piece of Veroboard is a very good alternative, I think it's not that hard to build, the circuit is very easy. I'm working on a PCB, but it's not finished yet.

As for the simulation, I never noticed any resonances. But it could be parasitic and caused by the calculations in the software. After all, it's still a simulation. Try changing the values a tiny bit, good chance it will go away.

Regards,

Ray
 
#4,851
6h5c said:



Hi,

I posted a PDF of the output stage here, and it has some kind of placement list. I hope it's helpful. A piece of Veroboard is a very good alternative, I think it's not that hard to build, the circuit is very easy. I'm working on a PCB, but it's not finished yet.

As for the simulation, I never noticed any resonances. But it could be parasitic and caused by the calculations in the software. After all, it's still a simulation. Try changing the values a tiny bit, good chance it will go away.

Regards,

Ray
Click to expand...

Oh yeah - sorry - I'd seen that but not read it properly - d'oh!

Thanks Ray.

Also, I simulated it with 220uH and 390uF which you prescribed as decoupling, and I get 543Hz resonance - doing the maths it makes some kind of sense. I get a sizeable kink in magnitude, phase and GD.

How much effect that would have on a real world circuit I don't know, but may affect sound in some subtle way. May be worth comparing RC vs LC in future? I dunno - my knowledge of these things is way behind yours. (Have an EE degree but that was yeeeeeears ago... 😀 )

Just playing with this spice software so have a new toy... 🙂
 
#4,852
Hello all
Fantastic thread (web site)😀 Have done most of the mods on Rays list to my 67se what a fantastic sound now + seperate dedicated radial for hifi .. noticable improvement but havn't quiet got my head around the cross bending leg business for Q801/801 ... i see audiocom does some nice cheap superregs on ebay for about £17 a pop .. is this the way to go with the 12 v circuit ? 4562's superb even the kids loving their cd story books more.
many thanks Ian
 
#4,853
ian21 said:
Hello all
Fantastic thread (web site)😀 Have done most of the mods on Rays list to my 67se what a fantastic sound now + seperate dedicated radial for hifi .. noticable improvement but havn't quiet got my head around the cross bending leg business for Q801/801 ... i see audiocom does some nice cheap superregs on ebay for about £17 a pop .. is this the way to go with the 12 v circuit ? 4562's superb even the kids loving their cd story books more.
many thanks Ian
Click to expand...


He he he another one!😀
 
#4,855
ian21 said:
Soz that should have read Q801/802 ... also is audiocoms superclock 3 noticably better over the 2 ? any thoughts please.
many thanks
Ian noob (ish)
Click to expand...

Hi Ian,

We're still waiting for Rowemeister to open his wallet and try the Superclock 3. Some reviews have said it's much better.

I'd say do it if the money isn't a big deal and especially if you're going to also sort the power supplies.

Simon
 
#4,856
6h5c said:
And there are reports that big caps around the DAC and opamps, like 1000u, also don't sound good. Most of the times I use 220...470u in those places. Ray.
Click to expand...

Ray,

I'm a bit confused (and so is my wife) a bit like Malefoda was earlier I think. Your earlier lists recommended large caps at Q803/Q806:

CD57
C803/804 220u/50V 6800u/35V Panasonic TSHA 578-915
C805/806 100u/16V 2200u/25V Rubycon ZLH 812-6445

CD67
C803/804 470u/35V 6800u/35V Panasonic
C805/806 470u/16V 2200u/25V Elna RSH

In the CD63 they got smaller
C803/804 470u/35V 2200u/35V Panasonic FC
C805/806 470u/16V 1200u/16V Panasonic FC

and above you mention big ones (like 1000u) do not sound so good. "around the DAC and Opamps".

Am I missing something here, am I looking at the wrong section in the list ... (Q803~Q806) are in the sub-heading Power Supply?? 😕 Peter Venema was also talking about Q805/Q806.

k.
 
#4,858
Peter Venema said:
I made a mistake with Q805/806 :cannotbe: the partcode has to be C805/806 and i use 470uF 16V black gates on this location, it sound beatifull!
Click to expand...

Peter no problem with that, we all make typos (whoops my post above should ALSO state C801~806) but the query still remains i.e. why such a big capacitance reduction (IIRC the tnt-audio suite also had BIG ones recommended ?? ) ... but the current thinking seems to be "make them smaller" esp. if BG's are used. Presumably even if BG's are NOT used, make 'em smaller than 4700uF is still the thinking. I really don't want to use BG's for various reasons, so if a normal eCAP but a good low ESR one is used is 470uF still OK?

k.
 
#4,859
jksmurf said:


Peter no problem with that, we all make typos (whoops my post above should ALSO state C801~806) but the query still remains i.e. why such a big capacitance reduction (IIRC the tnt-audio suite also had BIG ones recommended ?? ) ... but the current thinking seems to be "make them smaller" esp. if BG's are used. Presumably even if BG's are NOT used, make 'em smaller than 4700uF is still the thinking. I really don't want to use BG's for various reasons, so if a normal eCAP but a good low ESR one is used is 470uF still OK?

k.
Click to expand...


Hi.

I seem to remember that a long time ago, we had a discussion on the thread re.- caps around regulators.

It is important to understand how regulators work. ( the spec. sheets are good starts but there are many sites on the web ).

The concensus is that, within reason, the capacitor before the regulator should be large, the capacitor after the regulator should be 'optimum', neither too small nor too large. Usually, manufacturers use a small cap. as they are cheaper. The cap can comfortably be increased in value 2x or 3x or more but not hugely ! eg. from 100uF to 470uF is OK but not to 15000uF ! Otherwise the regulator ceases to regulate.

The discussion would not be complete without mentioning the position of the regulator relative to the rectifier/reservoir/load, local bypassing, earth-loops, type of capacitor, type of circuit, low or very low ESR, etc....

Black Gates are excellent low ESR caps suitable for audio circuits. Oscons are excellent for digital.
If for reasons of expense, you do not want to use Black Gates, use Cerafine, Silmic, Starget, Muse, ZL or similar good low ESR caps in the audio circuits.

BUT....

Do not go too high. 4700uF post regulator is not a good idea, 1000uF would be the maximum I would use.


Andy
 
#4,860
Jksmurf,

I think that a "smaller"capacitor can react quicker to impuls powerneeds than the bigger ones thus sounding better.

I replaced the capacitor on the print under the cd tray with a 100uF16V BG and the sound got more detailed and easy going.

I'll try 470uf16V BG after the 5V regulators and see what the impact is on the overal sound.

strange that you don't like Black gates I'am very content with the quality and soundperformance.


Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom