Hi, meldano.
If I would like powered the volume board (72323) from ultra low noise regulator what will be the current consumption by the board with 2/4 outs?
Regards
If I would like powered the volume board (72323) from ultra low noise regulator what will be the current consumption by the board with 2/4 outs?
Regards
Little puzzled over this, are you referring to the Sigma regs or the 78/79 ones? TPS7A47XX has good specs better than 49XX, am I missing something ?
Anyway, an all-smt solution is very convenient especially if you want to place it near the inputs. This has the advantage of very small signal cables needed.
Anybody actually made an AB comparison with power supplies ? (mainly the analog ones -+15)
Both are better than 78xx/79xx. It puzzles the mind why to use a better volume control IC and then powering it with standard regs certainly when the developer states TPS regs are the better ones to use?! I would never use a ready made third party TO220 version (that is also high) in a new design if I could add the regs directly to the PCB. Also the suggestion to use Sigma 11, New Class D UWB2 or Belleson is not logic to me but that is just an observation. A low noise regulator for the 5V would also be nice.
Rev 2.0? My comments are meant the constructive way. The construction would benefit from being mounted flat to the bottom with the volume PCB mounted vertically. It would make wiring to the RCA connectors more easy and one would don't need a high casing then. The way it is now AC wiring use be routed under the PCB and input wiring must be routed above the PCB and both need some space for the radius of the cabling. Also AC wiring and rectifiers should be kept as far away to the edge of the motherboard as possible. Like right of C20/C23. Logically there will also be the transformer and power switch so all AC stuff in one area and no AC carrying wiring in the vicinity of of audio circuits.
Rev 2.0? My comments are meant the constructive way. The construction would benefit from being mounted flat to the bottom with the volume PCB mounted vertically. It would make wiring to the RCA connectors more easy and one would don't need a high casing then. The way it is now AC wiring use be routed under the PCB and input wiring must be routed above the PCB and both need some space for the radius of the cabling. Also AC wiring and rectifiers should be kept as far away to the edge of the motherboard as possible. Like right of C20/C23. Logically there will also be the transformer and power switch so all AC stuff in one area and no AC carrying wiring in the vicinity of of audio circuits.
Last edited:
The Mainboard is only optional to allow every user to implement a full preamp control.
Not with claim of ultimate high end.
The main goal was a flexible solution. That’s given with the 78/79.
The result with NJR 78/79 is very good and it is possible to play with different regs.
Please note: Pass Labs use the NJR to supply the muses in their flagship preamp XP32 😉
Feel free to use the controller and build your own Mainboard. I will share the shematics for everyone asap.
Not with claim of ultimate high end.
The main goal was a flexible solution. That’s given with the 78/79.
The result with NJR 78/79 is very good and it is possible to play with different regs.
Please note: Pass Labs use the NJR to supply the muses in their flagship preamp XP32 😉
Feel free to use the controller and build your own Mainboard. I will share the shematics for everyone asap.
Hi I understand you want flexibility but how is one supposed to build this into a casing? I take the board should be used vertically mounted for the axle of the volume control to enter the front panel. This indicates that it should be mounted against the back panel. This will not be most flexible as then mentioned impracticalities occur. When it would be used mounted against the front panel one would have both long input wiring and AC wiring to the front panel. I designed various of these boards (without electronic volume control though) in the past and IMHO it should be a combination of best practical and technological choices. All the bells and whistles that software, displays and blue LEDs can do are secondary to optimal choices for hardware for best performance.
Why use a state of the art volume control and not want the best out of it? I just suggested that it would be more optimal with slight changes. Just adding pads for both types of regs and everyone is free to choose. Pads don't cost a thing.
What others use or don't use is not relevant. Others also can make mistakes or make less optimal choices. I have seen quite some devices by names with far from optimal choices but then again they can make a new version every now and then to keep sales going. Or they make 2 versions just to generate more revenue. Even "farting" and heavily distorting devices designed by names have fanatical followers. In fact when a name designs something people will buy it without blinking an eye.
Again: it are just suggestions to make it a more optimal design. I regularly revised my drawings various times. Most easy is to post that I can make it myself which I can but that does not make the design any better.
Why use a state of the art volume control and not want the best out of it? I just suggested that it would be more optimal with slight changes. Just adding pads for both types of regs and everyone is free to choose. Pads don't cost a thing.
What others use or don't use is not relevant. Others also can make mistakes or make less optimal choices. I have seen quite some devices by names with far from optimal choices but then again they can make a new version every now and then to keep sales going. Or they make 2 versions just to generate more revenue. Even "farting" and heavily distorting devices designed by names have fanatical followers. In fact when a name designs something people will buy it without blinking an eye.
Again: it are just suggestions to make it a more optimal design. I regularly revised my drawings various times. Most easy is to post that I can make it myself which I can but that does not make the design any better.
Last edited:
No problem to build it in a case.
If you don’t like this solution, please build your own 😉
I also build a state of the art version (include other regulators, oled grafic display, many software features, galvanic isolation for muses data line ...).
These version is much more expansive and not the goal of these project!
I think many people will love this smart tiny project.
If you don’t like this solution, please build your own 😉
I also build a state of the art version (include other regulators, oled grafic display, many software features, galvanic isolation for muses data line ...).
These version is much more expansive and not the goal of these project!
I think many people will love this smart tiny project.
Thanks a bunch for your reply. Sorted out the "hum" issue. Had to ground sgn_out to star_gnd with a ground lift (15r/100nf).
Technically it works just great.
Powering the adafruid display direct from the +5v at X5. No issues that I can see. However, would it be beneficial using 1000r/100nf (RC) thing?
Is it a way of dimming the display a bit?
Perfect 😉
If you have no issues with the display you have to do nothing.
To dim the display it is only possible to reduce the display voltage a little bit.
Dim by software is not implemented.
If you have no issues with the display you have to do nothing.
To dim the display it is only possible to reduce the display voltage a little bit.
Dim by software is not implemented.
Tests done.
Is anyone (ideal from germany) interested for a beta test?
Pre release documentation
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
Also I need help with mouser order numbers 😉
Is anyone (ideal from germany) interested for a beta test?
Pre release documentation
Microsoft OneDrive - Access files anywhere. Create docs with free Office Online.
Also I need help with mouser order numbers 😉
Hi meldano!
Did you take THD+N measurements on the finished volume board? If so, could you please share the results.
Regards
Did you take THD+N measurements on the finished volume board? If so, could you please share the results.
Regards
Hi meldano!
I am just starting audio electronics adventure, so please be understanding if my questions are annoying.
Why in your project you didn't use operational amplifiers and separation capacitors as recommended in the Muses72323 data sheet?
I would like very much to understand your project, it would help me decide to modify my amplifier.
Regards
I am just starting audio electronics adventure, so please be understanding if my questions are annoying.
Why in your project you didn't use operational amplifiers and separation capacitors as recommended in the Muses72323 data sheet?
I would like very much to understand your project, it would help me decide to modify my amplifier.
Regards
Hi,
I didn’t like OPA‘s 😉
In case of any active preamp an additional opa will change the sound.
Caps are a wide field. With my implementation you can choose your own cap if your source is not dc coupled.
BTW: The week I am ready to ship some muses pcb/controller kits.
Please contact me via PM.
I didn’t like OPA‘s 😉
In case of any active preamp an additional opa will change the sound.
Caps are a wide field. With my implementation you can choose your own cap if your source is not dc coupled.
BTW: The week I am ready to ship some muses pcb/controller kits.
Please contact me via PM.