There are several pages of discussion on that point earlier in this thread if you want to go back and look. I trust Russ' and Brian's judgement on this, and my ears love having their implementation of the metronome in my Opus chain. The guys are a great help and flexible, so I'd imagine they'd work with you if you really wanted the AD part more.
Just put in my order for the additonal power supplies and stuff needed for my recasing. Please don't rush on my account, but I'm interested if you have a timeframe on the Opus TXD. I know you said it's planned for the next batch...just curious what the ETA of the next batch is. Please excuse my excitement
Just put in my order for the additonal power supplies and stuff needed for my recasing. Please don't rush on my account, but I'm interested if you have a timeframe on the Opus TXD. I know you said it's planned for the next batch...just curious what the ETA of the next batch is. Please excuse my excitement
Re: SRC4192 vs AD1896
Hi,
I have already answered this question.
The simple answer is having listened to both and after doing a lot of research I prefer the SRC4192. Its as simple as that.
If you want to you can order a bare board and put the AD part on it. That's why we sell bare boards.
Cheers!
Russ
Clutz said:
Hi,
I have already answered this question.
The simple answer is having listened to both and after doing a lot of research I prefer the SRC4192. Its as simple as that.
If you want to you can order a bare board and put the AD part on it. That's why we sell bare boards.
Cheers!
Russ
Hi Russ,
Sorry about that, I didn't know where the search function was on diyAudio, but I found it. I've decided to go with the fully populated metronome board with the SRC4192 - I trust your ears. 🙂
BTW: Thanks for doing this!
Sorry about that, I didn't know where the search function was on diyAudio, but I found it. I've decided to go with the fully populated metronome board with the SRC4192 - I trust your ears. 🙂
BTW: Thanks for doing this!
I edited out my previous question meaning to replace it, but instead I accidentally took it out completely:
"I also noticed on your blurb for the OTTO you mention that it can "...easily be used as a mono 2:1 or 1:2 switch for balanced analog signals..." Is there a reason that it can only be used for balanced mono? As I understand it, with four contacts it should be able to switch stereo balanced shouldn't it? Please let me know if I'm wrong 🙂"
There is also a ground contact, I didn't count that since it's a common ground with both sources to the relay board 🙂
But I think I realized what context that statment was was meant by mono; when switching the balanced outputs from the dual-mono opus to the Ballsie which has inputs for all five outputs (+,+,-,-,G) for each mono board.
Is there anything bad about simply tying together the +'s and -'s respectively without load balancing resistors such as in the Ballsie?
"I also noticed on your blurb for the OTTO you mention that it can "...easily be used as a mono 2:1 or 1:2 switch for balanced analog signals..." Is there a reason that it can only be used for balanced mono? As I understand it, with four contacts it should be able to switch stereo balanced shouldn't it? Please let me know if I'm wrong 🙂"
There is also a ground contact, I didn't count that since it's a common ground with both sources to the relay board 🙂
But I think I realized what context that statment was was meant by mono; when switching the balanced outputs from the dual-mono opus to the Ballsie which has inputs for all five outputs (+,+,-,-,G) for each mono board.
Is there anything bad about simply tying together the +'s and -'s respectively without load balancing resistors such as in the Ballsie?
neb001 said:
1) You are not wrong it would work, we just did not list every possible use. 🙂
2) correct.
3) sure it could be interpreted that way.
4) Not really.I have done it and not noticed any problem.
Cheers!
Russ
I have a tendency to read too much into things as you have likely noticed. 🙂 Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions Russ, it's much appreciated.
Ben
Ben
To be totally honest, I wrote that blurb while doing other things (kids running aound and such) so was not really thinking it out. As long as you don;t mind sharing grounds, yes, balanced stereo is doable. I will update the page.
Hello,
Can someone help me with a few details regarding the power supplies for the Opus DAC. This thread is long, so sorry if this info has already been covered.
How much current do the LCDPS and LCBPS need from their respective transformer(s)? What is the current rating of the LM317 and LM337 supplied with the kits?
What DC voltages should each power supply be adjusted to?
Thanks.
Can someone help me with a few details regarding the power supplies for the Opus DAC. This thread is long, so sorry if this info has already been covered.
How much current do the LCDPS and LCBPS need from their respective transformer(s)? What is the current rating of the LM317 and LM337 supplied with the kits?
What DC voltages should each power supply be adjusted to?
Thanks.
Factory recommentds 15V, 15VA double secondaries, so each secondaries supplies 500 mA.
I have the DC voltages adjusted at 7.5V for both legs of the dual power supply, the 317 and 337 are "standard" thru devices that are capable of 1.5A max and are mounted on heat sinks
One leg of the PS powers the analog part of the OPUS DAC, the other leg powers the digital part of the OPUS, DAC, the OPUS SPDIF receiver, the Toslink module and the Metronome ASRC
I don't use the balsie
I have the DC voltages adjusted at 7.5V for both legs of the dual power supply, the 317 and 337 are "standard" thru devices that are capable of 1.5A max and are mounted on heat sinks
One leg of the PS powers the analog part of the OPUS DAC, the other leg powers the digital part of the OPUS, DAC, the OPUS SPDIF receiver, the Toslink module and the Metronome ASRC
I don't use the balsie
The modules actually draw very little current. A dual mono dac with reciever, metronome, and torx will draw less then 300mA. In this sense, the power supplies are way bigger then they need to be.
Our transformers are 25VA, but you could get away with as little as 10-15VA and be fine.
Our transformers are 25VA, but you could get away with as little as 10-15VA and be fine.
After looking at the data sheets for various chips related to the Opus DAC, I understand just how low current these devices are. What regulators (VRD and VRA) are used on board the Opus DAC itself?
Here’s what I have for the minimum (optimum) operating voltages of the power regulation devices for the Opus DAC. This data is pulled from the respective data sheets for these regulators.
National LP2985 needs 1V of head room on its input. There are two of these on the Opus DAC—one operating at 3.3V and the other at 5V—so the LCDPS should be able to be adjusted to 4.4V and 6V.
The LM317 and LM337 regulators on the LCDPS need 3V of head room on their inputs, so transformer secondaries should be able to be at low as 7.7V and 9V. In other words, you should be able to get away with operating the Opus DAC and modules (not the Ballsie) from a 18 VAC (9-0-9) center tapped transformer. I am not sure that I would cut it this close. Perhaps the minimum should be 24 VAC (12-0-12). Certainly, from what I can tell, the Ballsie benefits from the 15V.
Call me foolish, I am going to check with Plitron about having a transformer made that provides 4 secondaries all from a single transformer: 2 x 12V x 750mA and 2 x 15V x 1A. This way I can maximize space in my limited sized enclosure. Who knows, with Plitron if may be ridiculously expensive.
National LP2985 needs 1V of head room on its input. There are two of these on the Opus DAC—one operating at 3.3V and the other at 5V—so the LCDPS should be able to be adjusted to 4.4V and 6V.
The LM317 and LM337 regulators on the LCDPS need 3V of head room on their inputs, so transformer secondaries should be able to be at low as 7.7V and 9V. In other words, you should be able to get away with operating the Opus DAC and modules (not the Ballsie) from a 18 VAC (9-0-9) center tapped transformer. I am not sure that I would cut it this close. Perhaps the minimum should be 24 VAC (12-0-12). Certainly, from what I can tell, the Ballsie benefits from the 15V.
Call me foolish, I am going to check with Plitron about having a transformer made that provides 4 secondaries all from a single transformer: 2 x 12V x 750mA and 2 x 15V x 1A. This way I can maximize space in my limited sized enclosure. Who knows, with Plitron if may be ridiculously expensive.
That should be fine. We stock a 15-0-0-15 so we can stock only one trafo for a variety of products (15VA or 25VA depending on what Avel has in stock when I order, but usually 25VA).
Also from a supply stiffness point of view, a little more voltage than you need is better than cutting it close.
How to get OPUS USB to accept >48K?
It seems that OPUS USB is limited to 48K. Any solution for >48K to I2S?
It seems that OPUS USB is limited to 48K. Any solution for >48K to I2S?
I believe that 48khz barrier is a limitation of USB 1.1, and not specifically with the Opus USB module itself, but I very well may be wrong.
Re: How to get OPUS USB to accept >48K?
There is not much I can do about that one. 🙂 At some point there will be some high rate USB parts, but none are widely available yet. In the meantime I am investigating firewire and use 96khz and 192khz SPDIF out of my PC regularly (dejittered via WM8804).
Cheers!
Russ
glt said:
There is not much I can do about that one. 🙂 At some point there will be some high rate USB parts, but none are widely available yet. In the meantime I am investigating firewire and use 96khz and 192khz SPDIF out of my PC regularly (dejittered via WM8804).
Cheers!
Russ