Well they are like advised before Black Gates Standard, 220µF/16V instead of Elna RJH 470µF/24V + 100nF PPs bypass.
I did also removed the headphone section and the 12V lines at that time.
Remember I've all the Ray's older list on, 12V Raygulators and 0.22µF Wima MKP between pin & 8 at each opamps and nothing around the 5V lines. (still the 7805, better one as Ray's advised then).
Today I've moved (froward or... backward...) in touching my integrated amp, pre amp section. It does no good to sounds, anyway the new caps may burn in some I guess.
For the work done:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1202138#post1202138
Matthieu
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I did also removed the headphone section and the 12V lines at that time.
Remember I've all the Ray's older list on, 12V Raygulators and 0.22µF Wima MKP between pin & 8 at each opamps and nothing around the 5V lines. (still the 7805, better one as Ray's advised then).
Today I've moved (froward or... backward...) in touching my integrated amp, pre amp section. It does no good to sounds, anyway the new caps may burn in some I guess.
For the work done:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1202138#post1202138
Matthieu
avr300 said:
I completely agree. I went to a mates house the other day and listened to his £1000 Ruarks after hearing him say they are fantastic. They're too bright for me, but he loves 'em.
It must be hard to be a hi-fi journalist, giving descriptions of a sound when someone else may think something completely different.
Anyway, I'm now stuck without a cd player for a bit as it keeps blowing the lm337's in the discrete regs
Lee.
Hi LeeThomo said:
I have been reading your posts about this dac analog reg and you wrote "Put FC + 7805 on small piece of stripboard, solder on some legs and then feed the output straight onto u199 (remove u200)"
I replaced Q811 (7805) by a LM340AT and I got fantastic attack and overall body of the sound.
In this case can I expect improvements by using a 340 instead in the dac analog reg that you preconized ?
Best regards
Ricardo
Thomo said:
I completely agree. I went to a mates house the other day and listened to his £1000 Ruarks after hearing him say they are fantastic. They're too bright for me, but he loves 'em.
It must be hard to be a hi-fi journalist, giving descriptions of a sound when someone else may think something completely different.
Anyway, I'm now stuck without a cd player for a bit as it keeps blowing the lm337's in the discrete regs
Lee.
Ruarks - I would like to have a listen one day.
Blowing the 337? - what's that now? How? Can't be due to a short, it's internal protected. Is it getting hot?
Are you using Ray's layout? Sorry for not remembering.
avr300 said:
I drew my own layout so I could use smt resistors & BG AC's and also reduce the size of the boards. I think it's down to a faulty batch of lm337's. I first blew one straight away and then another lasted a week or two without being switched off. I went out for an hour or two today and came back to only one channel
It's the same reg that keeps going. I'm gonna get another of Brent's S-Powers and supply both channels from two regs.
Lee.
marantz 63 mod
Hi guys, OT- a newbie question- just acquired a bunch of Claitronic
miniature encapsulated transformer-rating- 1.5VA, 15V-dual?- i understand from spec-max 0.05A each sec. Would this be enough for any applications in the cd mod-ie-regulators?clock? or do you need more current?
Thanks quan.
Hi guys, OT- a newbie question- just acquired a bunch of Claitronic
miniature encapsulated transformer-rating- 1.5VA, 15V-dual?- i understand from spec-max 0.05A each sec. Would this be enough for any applications in the cd mod-ie-regulators?clock? or do you need more current?
Thanks quan.
Well running them parallel you will have 3VA and this is ok for servo regs and/or decoder regs. It will also be ok for dac regs too but I do think larger VA is really needed here.
*edit
I assume it's this one TX . It is actually 0.75VA per winding. It will not be suitable for the dac regs (especially the one on the analogue pin) IMHO.
Brent
*edit
I assume it's this one TX . It is actually 0.75VA per winding. It will not be suitable for the dac regs (especially the one on the analogue pin) IMHO.
Brent
CD63/CD67 Comparison
Hi,
I've just joined this Forum. I have been reading the threads with interest.
I've owned a basic CD63 for about 8 years and have been very happy with it. It has been unmodified, apart from some blu-tak on the lid and on the spinning wheel that clamps the cd. I blu-tacked the spinning wheel due to a problem with the discs not playing properly until fully warmed up. This mod improved the warm up time as well as greatly improving the bass performance. But just recently the CD63 has given up the ghost. I have since purchased an CD67 OSE player and have made most of the mods recommended by the users within this forum.
I have a few questions:
1) What were the main differences between the CD63 and CD67. They both appear similar and seem to be pointless having 2 different models which are basically the same?
2) I notice that the CD67 OSE is slightly wider with a less curved front. Is this because the line was manufactured in 'Indonesia'? As the CD63 is manufactured in 'Japan'. Were all the CD63/67 SE models manufactured in 'Indonesia'? What is the country of origin history with these?
3) On reading the instructions for removing trace noise, by cutting a piece of pcb track out, I notice that the circuit layout in the CD67 is different. It seems to have an extra amount of copper track on it. Is this for a reason? Should I still cut this track out?
4) I notice that the bog standard CD63 comes with the top notch Elna Caps. I was led to believe that the bog standard units didn't have the top notch Elna Caps?
I probably will have a few more questions later. But thanks in advance for any replies.
Hi,
I've just joined this Forum. I have been reading the threads with interest.
I've owned a basic CD63 for about 8 years and have been very happy with it. It has been unmodified, apart from some blu-tak on the lid and on the spinning wheel that clamps the cd. I blu-tacked the spinning wheel due to a problem with the discs not playing properly until fully warmed up. This mod improved the warm up time as well as greatly improving the bass performance. But just recently the CD63 has given up the ghost. I have since purchased an CD67 OSE player and have made most of the mods recommended by the users within this forum.
I have a few questions:
1) What were the main differences between the CD63 and CD67. They both appear similar and seem to be pointless having 2 different models which are basically the same?
2) I notice that the CD67 OSE is slightly wider with a less curved front. Is this because the line was manufactured in 'Indonesia'? As the CD63 is manufactured in 'Japan'. Were all the CD63/67 SE models manufactured in 'Indonesia'? What is the country of origin history with these?
3) On reading the instructions for removing trace noise, by cutting a piece of pcb track out, I notice that the circuit layout in the CD67 is different. It seems to have an extra amount of copper track on it. Is this for a reason? Should I still cut this track out?
4) I notice that the bog standard CD63 comes with the top notch Elna Caps. I was led to believe that the bog standard units didn't have the top notch Elna Caps?
I probably will have a few more questions later. But thanks in advance for any replies.
Hi delphi and welcome
1) The cd67 was a facelift model (basically) from the dac to the output sockets it is identical to the 63 also the psu is pretty much the same. The servo/decoder section is different on the 67, using the newer Philips chip.
2) They also made the 67 a few mm wider, probs to make it standard din size.
3) Which trace track are you talking about. If its the clock one then just get a good clock slapped in it. Rather than the cruddy xtal.
4) Early cd63 had boggo caps and the SE was fitted with Silmics and cerefines, copper cans on hdam, strut bar, bottom plate + a better tx. The late CD63 + cd63mkII used the SE components but left off the copper cans, strut bar and tx. This was done to keep the 63 ahead of the competition
Brent
1) The cd67 was a facelift model (basically) from the dac to the output sockets it is identical to the 63 also the psu is pretty much the same. The servo/decoder section is different on the 67, using the newer Philips chip.
2) They also made the 67 a few mm wider, probs to make it standard din size.
3) Which trace track are you talking about. If its the clock one then just get a good clock slapped in it. Rather than the cruddy xtal.
4) Early cd63 had boggo caps and the SE was fitted with Silmics and cerefines, copper cans on hdam, strut bar, bottom plate + a better tx. The late CD63 + cd63mkII used the SE components but left off the copper cans, strut bar and tx. This was done to keep the 63 ahead of the competition
Brent
Hi Delphi,
Welcome to this thread.
The track you mean are the muting tracks I think, that run across the center of the PCB towards the digital-out socket. In the CD63 they run in parallel with the (noisy) digital-out trace for a considerable length. This way noise can be coupled-in all over the place, because the muting traces go everywhere in the player. While tweaking a 63, I noticed a lot of noise on these lines while I was working on the player with a scope. I recommend taking out the muting circuit and some wire jumpers to isolate these traces, and couple them to ground in a few places with a few 100n's.
Or are you perhaps referring to the Acoustica.org clock-mod? This only applies to the CD63, but the clock of the CD67 can also be improved in a similar way. But, like Brent suggests, an external clock will give you far better results.
The CD67 has an improved lay-out with the muting traces running along the edge of the PCB, so this problem is cured for the most part. Also the lay-out is less complex and better organized. The three driver IC's are supplied with a regulated +5V instead of an unregulated +/-10V. This improves the stability of the laser- and motor servo's. With the 67, the servo section is integrated in the decoder chip, so the PSU is less complex regarding this area. One disadvantage of this could be the unability to clock the servo-chip separately, a mod that apparently brought good gains to some
.
Regards,
Ray
Welcome to this thread.
The track you mean are the muting tracks I think, that run across the center of the PCB towards the digital-out socket. In the CD63 they run in parallel with the (noisy) digital-out trace for a considerable length. This way noise can be coupled-in all over the place, because the muting traces go everywhere in the player. While tweaking a 63, I noticed a lot of noise on these lines while I was working on the player with a scope. I recommend taking out the muting circuit and some wire jumpers to isolate these traces, and couple them to ground in a few places with a few 100n's.
Or are you perhaps referring to the Acoustica.org clock-mod? This only applies to the CD63, but the clock of the CD67 can also be improved in a similar way. But, like Brent suggests, an external clock will give you far better results
.The CD67 has an improved lay-out with the muting traces running along the edge of the PCB, so this problem is cured for the most part. Also the lay-out is less complex and better organized. The three driver IC's are supplied with a regulated +5V instead of an unregulated +/-10V. This improves the stability of the laser- and motor servo's. With the 67, the servo section is integrated in the decoder chip, so the PSU is less complex regarding this area. One disadvantage of this could be the unability to clock the servo-chip separately, a mod that apparently brought good gains to some
.Regards,
Ray
Most regs are murdered, they don't die
Thomo - If you don't already have them, definitely add the two protection diodes shown on the data sheet to stop the caps on the 337s ADJ and output pins discharging backwards into the reg if the raw supply dips. It's an instant killer if thes ecaps are 10uF or more, and I think the 337s seem more susceptible than the 317s for some reason.