Quite a scientific approach Bernhard. I wonder if it works the other way around when gear sounds metallic, flat and uninvolving.
That's rather an over-simplification or is that non- simplification.
If both preamps are CR outputs, and most of the tube buffers for 1541's I've seen are, AND the next preamp is also CR output that's two sets of phase shifts you've got and that is not the way to get musical, transperant or holographic sound, but that is just my opinion and experience, all you experts might disagree.
Me, I dont use CR's anywhere .
Ok i had my two cents worth -I'm getting out of here.
If both preamps are CR outputs, and most of the tube buffers for 1541's I've seen are, AND the next preamp is also CR output that's two sets of phase shifts you've got and that is not the way to get musical, transperant or holographic sound, but that is just my opinion and experience, all you experts might disagree.
Me, I dont use CR's anywhere .
Ok i had my two cents worth -I'm getting out of here.
jean-paul said:
1541A nonos is very clearly sound enhancing by adding harmonics and has a very recognizable sonic signature.
So I wonder about the big difference between opa x and opa y ...
I am glad it has a very recognizable pleasant sonic signature compared with the sometimes unmusical newer DAC chips. However I am open for suggestions for better types ( regardless of whether they add even harmonics or not ).
Please explain the opa x and opa y thing as I thought tubes were involved here 😕
Please explain the opa x and opa y thing as I thought tubes were involved here 😕
There are many ways to describe the TDA1541, A or otherwise, and neutral is definitely not one of them.
Ahem, you're right about it being not the most neutral ( edited my post ) rfbrw. Slip of the tongue, sorry. It sure has its own character, one of the reasons why it is so popular. But then again, most chips I know have more or less their own character. It's a matter of taste which one likes most, regardless of measurements that may not come out too positive on that one. It is time for something else though, time goes on and so does technology.
May I ask which DAC chip you're working with now, rfbrw ?
May I ask which DAC chip you're working with now, rfbrw ?
jean-paul said:
A tricky question that. I tend to float between projects as my level of interest varies with weather. I have some PCM1738's still in the bag, a AN DAC3 with PCM63's in bits and as I write, balanced CS4390's . Oh and I once considered,worse still breadboarded, but in my defence never fired up, a staggered dac with 8 TDA1543's but I am much better now.
Like you I have some PCM1728/1738s in a bag but my aversion against SMD parts is the reason I never made a board for them. When I can avoid SMD I will avoid SMD. Although some time ago, UDA1351TS/UDA1350AH were the last "newer" SMD chips I tried ( which sound OK but not more than that ). It probably will surprise you but most of the time I listen to first generation Philips 1 bit systems now instead of multibit TDA machines. Nevertheless I am experimenting with more recent multibit chips but till now I haven't found what I am looking for. A serious lack of time adds up to it.
PCM63 and CS4390 are a bit old cake as well like TDA15xx, PCM63 being still one of the best IMHO. BTW what do you think of PCM69 ? I have some K types but I can't recall I ever heard them in a cdplayer.
Would not have thought you'd even consider using TDA1543, let alone 8 staggered 😉
PCM63 and CS4390 are a bit old cake as well like TDA15xx, PCM63 being still one of the best IMHO. BTW what do you think of PCM69 ? I have some K types but I can't recall I ever heard them in a cdplayer.
Would not have thought you'd even consider using TDA1543, let alone 8 staggered 😉
About 10 years ago I worked on a 4ch DAC that used the DF1700/PCM69 combination. I had wanted to go with the CS4329 or a SM5842/PCM63 combination but was overruled. I had the last laugh when it turned out that whenever the dac was in competition with one from Axon, it lost every time. I wasn't too pleased when I walked in to a machine room in London to see racks stuffed with Axon DACs.
Re the TDA1543s. I plead temporary insanity.
Re the TDA1543s. I plead temporary insanity.
Dear all,
I was planning for the next PCB for the PCM63K.
It will common use the CS8414 for the digital receiver.
BTW, the tube buffer output stage will common use with the TDA1541A NON-oversampling DAC to less some money for the diyer. It means can upgrade in my DAC kit from remove the TDA1541a chips & added one more PCB with PCM63K's.
Any advise for choose PCM63K or PCM1407~~???
Any suggestions will be welcome because I had some CS8420 on hand.I can test more circuits.
Second is the DEM clock & the re-clock of TDA1541a DAC was funish right now.
The PCB will follow with two parts
1. Real 44.1K clock which use crystal to be the oscillator.
LT317/337 for the regulator. ( USER can exchange the lower PPM grade chips) will run with 9 pins DIP switch for tunning the accurancy of the clock to tunning the sound stage.
2.Re-clock will use japan made 11.2896M --TCXO--( Temperature
compensate Oscillator) with TL431 chips. Motrolola 8 pins TL431 will follow with the PCB. This chips will be the best that I test, more stable & low noise.
3.I got one match pair TDA1541A S1 grade chips from Philips repair parts dept already. The Netherland electronic parts company told that they had over 30pcs S1 on hand which was remove from old philips machines. I order two chips already.
Does anyone can help me that how to test this S1 chips was real one or fake one!!!!!!
thanks
thomas
I was planning for the next PCB for the PCM63K.
It will common use the CS8414 for the digital receiver.
BTW, the tube buffer output stage will common use with the TDA1541A NON-oversampling DAC to less some money for the diyer. It means can upgrade in my DAC kit from remove the TDA1541a chips & added one more PCB with PCM63K's.
Any advise for choose PCM63K or PCM1407~~???
Any suggestions will be welcome because I had some CS8420 on hand.I can test more circuits.
Second is the DEM clock & the re-clock of TDA1541a DAC was funish right now.
The PCB will follow with two parts
1. Real 44.1K clock which use crystal to be the oscillator.
LT317/337 for the regulator. ( USER can exchange the lower PPM grade chips) will run with 9 pins DIP switch for tunning the accurancy of the clock to tunning the sound stage.
2.Re-clock will use japan made 11.2896M --TCXO--( Temperature
compensate Oscillator) with TL431 chips. Motrolola 8 pins TL431 will follow with the PCB. This chips will be the best that I test, more stable & low noise.
3.I got one match pair TDA1541A S1 grade chips from Philips repair parts dept already. The Netherland electronic parts company told that they had over 30pcs S1 on hand which was remove from old philips machines. I order two chips already.
Does anyone can help me that how to test this S1 chips was real one or fake one!!!!!!
thanks
thomas
Re: Huhu, funny thread !
Hi
Please carefully consider what may happen when cascading non linear stages creating even order harmonics............
(you may end up with odd harmonisc at the end)
cheers
Bernhard said:
Hi
Please carefully consider what may happen when cascading non linear stages creating even order harmonics............
(you may end up with odd harmonisc at the end)
cheers
No surprise
I assume you are talking about SAA7321/3 equiped machines - like the CD624, CD634, CD850........
How do they compare to the multibit machines sound-wise?
What type of modifications or upgrades do you make?
I've had a CD624 since 1991. It sounded quite good compared to it's competition at the time but I haven't compared it to anything else recently. Currently in the process of trying to take it's performance to the max. by doing the following:
List of modifications
Tent XO2 Clock module and XO supply PSU
Separate transformer, power supply and regs for the output stage
Separate transformer winding, power supply and regs for the DAC
Separate transformer winding, power supply and regs for the decoder
Separate transformer, power supply and regs for the servos
Upgrade powersuplies to everything else.
Improve decoupling on most IC's
Improve grounding for most IC's
Change opamp to OPA2134 or OPA2064
Replace all existing electrolytics with Nichicon Muse and some Os-Cons and a few Black Gate PK.
A rare oportunity to purchase a TDA1541A machine (Marantz CD60) presented itself recently and it's on it's way to me as we speak. At last I will be able to compare these two dacs (in similar machines - CDM4/19, SAA7310......) for myself, and in my own system. The above mods will eventually be applied to the CD60 (and maybe non-oversampling).
PCM63 is something else I would like to try at some stage in the future - have a SM5842 waiting for a home.
I assume you are talking about SAA7321/3 equiped machines - like the CD624, CD634, CD850........
How do they compare to the multibit machines sound-wise?
What type of modifications or upgrades do you make?
I've had a CD624 since 1991. It sounded quite good compared to it's competition at the time but I haven't compared it to anything else recently. Currently in the process of trying to take it's performance to the max. by doing the following:
List of modifications
Tent XO2 Clock module and XO supply PSU
Separate transformer, power supply and regs for the output stage
Separate transformer winding, power supply and regs for the DAC
Separate transformer winding, power supply and regs for the decoder
Separate transformer, power supply and regs for the servos
Upgrade powersuplies to everything else.
Improve decoupling on most IC's
Improve grounding for most IC's
Change opamp to OPA2134 or OPA2064
Replace all existing electrolytics with Nichicon Muse and some Os-Cons and a few Black Gate PK.
A rare oportunity to purchase a TDA1541A machine (Marantz CD60) presented itself recently and it's on it's way to me as we speak. At last I will be able to compare these two dacs (in similar machines - CDM4/19, SAA7310......) for myself, and in my own system. The above mods will eventually be applied to the CD60 (and maybe non-oversampling).
PCM63 is something else I would like to try at some stage in the future - have a SM5842 waiting for a home.
carlosfm said:
Do you like them?😱
I don't.
Have you tried the SAA7321 or just the SAA7350 in your CD52?
Dear all,
I read this thread and I would like to add a little of my experience with NonOS TDA 1541. I have built a double chip DAC, which is fed directly from the I2S bus of a CDPRO2. As an output stage I use Lesha's tubed buffer with a 6C45P.
Initially, the output stage was built using a resistor as an anole load. Later I replaced it with a CCS. I could never imagine the huge improvement this CCS broought to the DAC. A whole class up. There was a huge improvement in soundstage, which became extremely wide and deep. Also major improvement was noticed in seperation between instruments and resolution, minor details were more distinctive. In all, a very-very analog sound, now I have no hesitation listening to my CDs.
For the passive I/V I use a 22R resistor. I tried also 18R (to lower gain a little, since the 6C45P provides lots of gain), but the sound seemed kind of anaemic, lacking dynamics. The CCS is set at 18 mA, with Vg at -1.2 V.
I suggest anyone with a 6C45P output stage on his TDA1541 DAC should try a CCS.
Regards,
Evangelos
I read this thread and I would like to add a little of my experience with NonOS TDA 1541. I have built a double chip DAC, which is fed directly from the I2S bus of a CDPRO2. As an output stage I use Lesha's tubed buffer with a 6C45P.
Initially, the output stage was built using a resistor as an anole load. Later I replaced it with a CCS. I could never imagine the huge improvement this CCS broought to the DAC. A whole class up. There was a huge improvement in soundstage, which became extremely wide and deep. Also major improvement was noticed in seperation between instruments and resolution, minor details were more distinctive. In all, a very-very analog sound, now I have no hesitation listening to my CDs.
For the passive I/V I use a 22R resistor. I tried also 18R (to lower gain a little, since the 6C45P provides lots of gain), but the sound seemed kind of anaemic, lacking dynamics. The CCS is set at 18 mA, with Vg at -1.2 V.
I suggest anyone with a 6C45P output stage on his TDA1541 DAC should try a CCS.
Regards,
Evangelos
Fin said:
Yes, the SAA7350 is flat and undynamic.
But in my experience that's a characteristic of most bitstream (and delta-sigma) dacs.
Curiously, the YAC514 dac on my Yamaha cdp sounds good, better than those from Philips.
But nothing compares to a good multi-bit.
Dear all,
the first order of 12 pcs of TDA1541a S1 which I order from Holland is arrived. They all remove from old machine but unused.
The company told me was remove from Philips high grade parts wihch were repair stock.
I hadn't any instrument to test them but I made a simple hearing test compare with the standard TDA1541a. I only hear the background is more silience, little bit of punch dynamic was increase & little smooth sound stage. I can only hear will 6~8% inprovment.
But it actually quite good.
pls see the photos.
thanks
thomas
the first order of 12 pcs of TDA1541a S1 which I order from Holland is arrived. They all remove from old machine but unused.
The company told me was remove from Philips high grade parts wihch were repair stock.
I hadn't any instrument to test them but I made a simple hearing test compare with the standard TDA1541a. I only hear the background is more silience, little bit of punch dynamic was increase & little smooth sound stage. I can only hear will 6~8% inprovment.
But it actually quite good.
pls see the photos.
thanks
thomas
Attachments
Thomas,
I recalled someone talking about using rechargable battery as cathode bias to improve the sound of the 6C45 tube stage. Can you please explain how this can be done?
Also can the 6c45 runs on AC filament and do you recommend this change?
I recalled someone talking about using rechargable battery as cathode bias to improve the sound of the 6C45 tube stage. Can you please explain how this can be done?
Also can the 6c45 runs on AC filament and do you recommend this change?
Hi Marco,
Initially, I built Gary Pimm's BBMCCCS:
Battery Biased CCS
The one I built was an older version with lithium button cells, it's now revised.
Later, I tried Bas Horneman's battery biased CCS:
http://home.zonnet.nl/horneman/mosfet.htm
This CCS uses the DN2540 depletion mode MOSFETs and could also be self biased, but with a battery bias it presents a higher impedance, which is better for a CCS.
Didn't notice any difference between these two, at least sounwise, but I would opt for the latter, as it uses less batteries.
Regards,
Evangelos
Initially, I built Gary Pimm's BBMCCCS:
Battery Biased CCS
The one I built was an older version with lithium button cells, it's now revised.
Later, I tried Bas Horneman's battery biased CCS:
http://home.zonnet.nl/horneman/mosfet.htm
This CCS uses the DN2540 depletion mode MOSFETs and could also be self biased, but with a battery bias it presents a higher impedance, which is better for a CCS.
Didn't notice any difference between these two, at least sounwise, but I would opt for the latter, as it uses less batteries.
Regards,
Evangelos
- Status
- Not open for further replies.