The absence of a bypass caps on the noise reduction pins for the step down voltage regulators is a gross oversight. But I wonder why they'd do so because as measured by secrets magazine, there was no visible US power line spectra lines to be seen. Maybe Oppo sent a 'souped-up' to the magazine reviewers(?), a practice done by other manufacturers as well. Or the EU version of the player has a slightly different BOM than the US version or you simply got a bad player?
You know, I`m personally very sceptic when about such reviews in one or another magazine... Have you ever read about a conclusion of these "reviews", as: "do not buy this product"... ?
These reviews are only useful for consumers to make a little bit more detailed idea about a product.
Oppo have corrected this big design issue in these players, when they designed the HA-1. They putted that cap in place in that device.
There is another big design issue when about the DAC chip in the BD players. This too is corrected in HA-1. This one I will not disclose it so far, because I correct it in my mods...
I chosen to make known about this bypass cap on regulators, because I found out (quite late...) that the whole power approach is wrong here, and it should be replaced by a better one. The 50Hz component it still be present in the DAC HF noise, even one put that cap in its place... This LF component disappear only by improving the whole DAC power system.
To remove the HF residual noises (modulated by a 50Hz component), by filtering it out through the further circuits, is not a solution at all. This LF component get into the DAC chip and it disturb its functionality. This disturbed functionality is to be found in the sound quality.
Well, there is enough difficult to find such issue reflected in outputted sound quality, when the digital system is powered by a SMPS, when filtering caps are of enough low capacity, and so on. I was enough surprised to notice few very subtle sound quality problems, after all the other design issues were corrected, by implemented modifications. After replacing these DAC regulators (last mod left), everything became fine...
There is also quite difficult for the most consumers to find out that a stock Oppo player is a mid class device, before one experience an improved such (same) product. Simply because the people do not know that it can perform better, and what actually mean that "better"... Those who had such experiences, are only few, and no any "magazine" have yet reviewed a moded device.😉
These reviews are only useful for consumers to make a little bit more detailed idea about a product.
Oppo have corrected this big design issue in these players, when they designed the HA-1. They putted that cap in place in that device.
There is another big design issue when about the DAC chip in the BD players. This too is corrected in HA-1. This one I will not disclose it so far, because I correct it in my mods...
I chosen to make known about this bypass cap on regulators, because I found out (quite late...) that the whole power approach is wrong here, and it should be replaced by a better one. The 50Hz component it still be present in the DAC HF noise, even one put that cap in its place... This LF component disappear only by improving the whole DAC power system.
To remove the HF residual noises (modulated by a 50Hz component), by filtering it out through the further circuits, is not a solution at all. This LF component get into the DAC chip and it disturb its functionality. This disturbed functionality is to be found in the sound quality.
Well, there is enough difficult to find such issue reflected in outputted sound quality, when the digital system is powered by a SMPS, when filtering caps are of enough low capacity, and so on. I was enough surprised to notice few very subtle sound quality problems, after all the other design issues were corrected, by implemented modifications. After replacing these DAC regulators (last mod left), everything became fine...
There is also quite difficult for the most consumers to find out that a stock Oppo player is a mid class device, before one experience an improved such (same) product. Simply because the people do not know that it can perform better, and what actually mean that "better"... Those who had such experiences, are only few, and no any "magazine" have yet reviewed a moded device.😉
Last edited:
Good catch indeed Coris ...
Can you measured the output noise from the XLR or RCA analog outputs when the player is paused or muted to see if the 50Hz noise is present on these outputs?
Can you measured the output noise from the XLR or RCA analog outputs when the player is paused or muted to see if the 50Hz noise is present on these outputs?
This modulated HF noise from DAC chip is always present, as the DAC is powered up, and it get the clock signal. Only the mute function it put it down. This HF noise it is missing as the clock is missing.
I was using to check the right state of the chip by having this "nice" modulated noise at the chip outputs...
This noise is of course not possible to hear it, eventhought it have this 50Hz component in it. On an original device, this HF (modulated) noise is not present at the outputs, because it is filtered out by the circuit special designed to do it so.
Once one remove that original Oppo filtering approach, and implement a very straight analogue signal processing, the sound become much better, but one get too this HF modulated noise. I measured this noise level for 0,6Vpp, which is huge. I used some techniques to get its level lower, and I succeeded, but the pattern of the noise it were always unchanged. I just concluded that it have to be so, and it is the way the chip it works. This until I have replace it the DAC standard regulators and introduced another one for the raw 7,5v. Applying this powering approach, the HF noise is no longer modulated and its level it decrease it to 80 mVpp, with the same unfiltered post DAC analogue signal processing.
To conclude, Oppo original design it filter out quite complete the HF noises on the device outputs (for a mid sound quality level).
This it mean, one will never see this modulated noise on the players outputs (no way to hear it). But this do not mean at all that this kind of noise it not exist any more. It does, and it disturb the DAC functioning. Somehow, the 50Hz main frequency it is induced into the DAC chip, through its power rails, because high ripple levels and poor regulating of the power designated to the DAC chip. This 50Hz component which is so strong that it modulate the chip HF noise and it increase its level, it obviously lower the quality of the audio signal outputted by the DAC. This negative impact it can not be filtered out...
Using another power approach for DAC chip, one notice at once the positive differences in sound quality. Everything become normal, after this 50Hz component it disappear from the DAC residual HF noise.
I was using to check the right state of the chip by having this "nice" modulated noise at the chip outputs...
This noise is of course not possible to hear it, eventhought it have this 50Hz component in it. On an original device, this HF (modulated) noise is not present at the outputs, because it is filtered out by the circuit special designed to do it so.
Once one remove that original Oppo filtering approach, and implement a very straight analogue signal processing, the sound become much better, but one get too this HF modulated noise. I measured this noise level for 0,6Vpp, which is huge. I used some techniques to get its level lower, and I succeeded, but the pattern of the noise it were always unchanged. I just concluded that it have to be so, and it is the way the chip it works. This until I have replace it the DAC standard regulators and introduced another one for the raw 7,5v. Applying this powering approach, the HF noise is no longer modulated and its level it decrease it to 80 mVpp, with the same unfiltered post DAC analogue signal processing.
To conclude, Oppo original design it filter out quite complete the HF noises on the device outputs (for a mid sound quality level).
This it mean, one will never see this modulated noise on the players outputs (no way to hear it). But this do not mean at all that this kind of noise it not exist any more. It does, and it disturb the DAC functioning. Somehow, the 50Hz main frequency it is induced into the DAC chip, through its power rails, because high ripple levels and poor regulating of the power designated to the DAC chip. This 50Hz component which is so strong that it modulate the chip HF noise and it increase its level, it obviously lower the quality of the audio signal outputted by the DAC. This negative impact it can not be filtered out...
Using another power approach for DAC chip, one notice at once the positive differences in sound quality. Everything become normal, after this 50Hz component it disappear from the DAC residual HF noise.
Last edited:
The same problem for both... My main focus is on stereo DAC.
Actually, Oppo`s powering approach for ES9018 is identical for all the payers (95, 105, 105D), as for HA-1.
Actually, Oppo`s powering approach for ES9018 is identical for all the payers (95, 105, 105D), as for HA-1.
Last edited:
Thanks for the detailed explanation Coris. I too am puzzled at the observations you've seen and perplexed as to why Oppo would design their products that way.
Are your all mods easy to implement in the 105 player for someone with just a screw driver?
Thanks,
David
"...why Oppo would design their products that way"? For economical reasons... Cheapest as possible production, for the highest possible sold price. Also a very well known (consumer products) business low. Then are the magazines, "reviews" and "awards" which do the rest...
As usual, the financial advisers are always powerful than the professional staff in a company...
Second (short) answer: no
But you should not care about this. It is enough to send me the one or both boards and I will do the rest. The only skills one need in such case, are for dismounting and mounting back again the boards into the chassis. For more details, please PM me.
As usual, the financial advisers are always powerful than the professional staff in a company...
Second (short) answer: no
But you should not care about this. It is enough to send me the one or both boards and I will do the rest. The only skills one need in such case, are for dismounting and mounting back again the boards into the chassis. For more details, please PM me.
Last edited:
Please rest assured, Oppo designs and produces their stuff up to a very high standard, all these mods are just fuckerdypuckerdy.
Coris posted some pics a while back on the 105 boards he modded and the visual build quality was really excellent as far as one could see.
How are you so sure about? Have you ever opened and examined an Oppo device, and its circuitry? Have you ever measured something on these devices?
Such discussion it have been before few times here. The existence of this thread it is a direct consequence of the opposite of your statement.
The existence of this thread is the direct consequence of two guys peddling their wares, consisting of nonsense solutions to non-existent problems.
The Oppo 105 measures essentially flawlessly:
Archimago's Musings: MEASUREMENTS: Oppo BDP-105 as USB DAC.
and
Oppo BDP-105 Universal Blu-ray Player Measurements and Analysis | Audioholics
and
OPPO BDP-105 Universal Blu-ray Player Review - HomeTheaterHiFi.com
and
Oppo BDP-105D review - Blu-ray Players
The inside of the Oppo BD-105 is tidy, well organized, and everything that needs to be shielded is shielded. It is an exemplary piece of audio engineering.
For example, there are no traces of supply induced spuriae in any of the measurements. Why would you then sell a power supply that is only bound to make matters worse? The same goes for all the other hacks I have seen passing in this thread. It pains me to see a good piece of engineering being ducked up by some bloody amateurs, but it drives me into angry action if they subsequently try to convince others to buy into their quackery.
That is why I return to this thread from time to time.
Vacuphile is right guys, beyond a certain spec of measurements and output, all amps, DAC's and speakers actually sound the same.
Going by this logic, I now realise you don't even need an Oppo, all you need is an $49 Blu-ray player, it's audio output is good enough, and human hearing is so limited, that any differences you hear are pure quackery.
Going by this logic, I now realise you don't even need an Oppo, all you need is an $49 Blu-ray player, it's audio output is good enough, and human hearing is so limited, that any differences you hear are pure quackery.
Coris should post results of his modded OPPO with an audio precision (not an audio card for pc) and we will see...
To measure in details one or another device it is a tremendous task in itself. Lot of working hours, and quite expensive. Not to talk about the enough top equipment necessary to do this job...
Methods have to be elaborated on paper, analysed and optimised before proceeding to the measurements. The results have to be then analysed and correlated. This is in few words the approach of such procedure, to get the right as possible and safe results.
There is not just like to put the scope probe at some measurement points and publish the results. This simple procedure relate to the quite isolated measured stages, and it hardly reflect the whole device performances, capabilities, or so.
I asked previously the same questions in the same subject: who can invest in such measurement approach, who can use lot of working time for such, and what for the results? To prove to some sceptics that they take wrong and it works in fact?
Here is not about a mass production of a moded device, which it may in a part justify the expensive measurements. Here is not about to prove to a large amount of customers/users, that they will buy a top product which it measure and perform so and so.
I do not reject the concept of well done and extended measurements in this case, but in my opinion, this is just unrealistic both for the task itself and for the purpose.
And one more thing. There is not just the first time, and it is proved again and again, that what one see/read in measurements results, it not always correlate, or it not fit just well with what one hear with own ears. And there is not only about to hear the sounds with the ears, it is also about to perceive that sound(s). And this is very personal. Blind tests it can in a way prove or not some common perceptions characteristics for more or less individuals, but it can not be revealed/stated as the best/surest method in general, just because so many subjective factors involved.
In this particular case of modding/improving this device, it was in time presented some malfunctions, some design errors, some ways for improvements, and some simple results or measurements done on quite isolated stages of the player, and mainly based on self experienced facts. This it mean a bunch of informations (presented in this thread for all other interested in the same subject). This it may help enough one or another individuals to appreciate and take some conclusions/decisions. As an overall appreciation: better or not, to try it, or not.
Some of the people who got these informations decided (based on own appreciations) to proceed to try and experience the same, about what is stated. These people got confirmed their appreciations, and speak it out. Some other peoples, based on different own way of thinking/dogma, and based on other kind of informations, appreciate all these things as "just fuckerdypuckerdy", "bloody amateurs", and so on.
About this last "ways of thinking" I may resume that in principle it is like this: I judge about something as true, just because I read about it, I fully trust it, and I do not want ever to try something about other ways of doing. I`m obvious about my own right way to think about in this area. I (myself) have fully right in my statements.
One should not forget the real concept of this DIY activity: one individual or very few, experience and find out about a thing. It make it know to others. From these many others who get the informations, one or few, proceed to verify or confirm the findings. Some goes even more and improve further the approach. Make know about. And so on, and so on. Little by little it grows all this and the initial informations and findings it become proven facts. Then it can rally be stated that it is like it is confirmed and experienced by so many... So it works, and it works well so far.
It is useful a complex and professional measurement approach in this respect? For who, for what?
For they who already knows and experienced that it works, or for those (few) who are sceptic by nature, and may have a quite limited appreciation mechanism/logic/approach?
Methods have to be elaborated on paper, analysed and optimised before proceeding to the measurements. The results have to be then analysed and correlated. This is in few words the approach of such procedure, to get the right as possible and safe results.
There is not just like to put the scope probe at some measurement points and publish the results. This simple procedure relate to the quite isolated measured stages, and it hardly reflect the whole device performances, capabilities, or so.
I asked previously the same questions in the same subject: who can invest in such measurement approach, who can use lot of working time for such, and what for the results? To prove to some sceptics that they take wrong and it works in fact?
Here is not about a mass production of a moded device, which it may in a part justify the expensive measurements. Here is not about to prove to a large amount of customers/users, that they will buy a top product which it measure and perform so and so.
I do not reject the concept of well done and extended measurements in this case, but in my opinion, this is just unrealistic both for the task itself and for the purpose.
And one more thing. There is not just the first time, and it is proved again and again, that what one see/read in measurements results, it not always correlate, or it not fit just well with what one hear with own ears. And there is not only about to hear the sounds with the ears, it is also about to perceive that sound(s). And this is very personal. Blind tests it can in a way prove or not some common perceptions characteristics for more or less individuals, but it can not be revealed/stated as the best/surest method in general, just because so many subjective factors involved.
In this particular case of modding/improving this device, it was in time presented some malfunctions, some design errors, some ways for improvements, and some simple results or measurements done on quite isolated stages of the player, and mainly based on self experienced facts. This it mean a bunch of informations (presented in this thread for all other interested in the same subject). This it may help enough one or another individuals to appreciate and take some conclusions/decisions. As an overall appreciation: better or not, to try it, or not.
Some of the people who got these informations decided (based on own appreciations) to proceed to try and experience the same, about what is stated. These people got confirmed their appreciations, and speak it out. Some other peoples, based on different own way of thinking/dogma, and based on other kind of informations, appreciate all these things as "just fuckerdypuckerdy", "bloody amateurs", and so on.
About this last "ways of thinking" I may resume that in principle it is like this: I judge about something as true, just because I read about it, I fully trust it, and I do not want ever to try something about other ways of doing. I`m obvious about my own right way to think about in this area. I (myself) have fully right in my statements.
One should not forget the real concept of this DIY activity: one individual or very few, experience and find out about a thing. It make it know to others. From these many others who get the informations, one or few, proceed to verify or confirm the findings. Some goes even more and improve further the approach. Make know about. And so on, and so on. Little by little it grows all this and the initial informations and findings it become proven facts. Then it can rally be stated that it is like it is confirmed and experienced by so many... So it works, and it works well so far.
It is useful a complex and professional measurement approach in this respect? For who, for what?
For they who already knows and experienced that it works, or for those (few) who are sceptic by nature, and may have a quite limited appreciation mechanism/logic/approach?
Last edited:
For about 10 days, I've read all of the 1416 posts (now I'm tired).
I learned a lot and thanks to all of you but especially to Corin and Joe R. for the big efforts. May I post a link to somebody who is experimenting with the ES9018 ?
I love his output stage .......ES9018 USB DAC - Hi-Resolution System
I learned a lot and thanks to all of you but especially to Corin and Joe R. for the big efforts. May I post a link to somebody who is experimenting with the ES9018 ?
I love his output stage .......ES9018 USB DAC - Hi-Resolution System
Well, I have to admit that it is quite a work to read all these posts here...
The solution for a possible output stage for ES9018 (your link) is not bad, and I`m sure it could be better than other. In case of this Oppo player mods, it may not fit very well... A such board or circuit is too big for the player`s enclosure, and it generate enough heat... But it could be a good solution for a dedicated device as that one.
The solution for a possible output stage for ES9018 (your link) is not bad, and I`m sure it could be better than other. In case of this Oppo player mods, it may not fit very well... A such board or circuit is too big for the player`s enclosure, and it generate enough heat... But it could be a good solution for a dedicated device as that one.
Last edited:
You should ask the Oppo designers, but they will never answer you... They had for sure something in their minds doing so, but in my opinion this is wrong. Even the datasheet of ES9018 do not recommend a such design...
This is one of the (many other) reasons this device it need to be corrected/modified to have the full quality out of it.
However, I`m interested too, to read about another opinions for this specific (I/V) design here...
This is one of the (many other) reasons this device it need to be corrected/modified to have the full quality out of it.
However, I`m interested too, to read about another opinions for this specific (I/V) design here...
Last edited: