Hello people,
Is anybody have expirience to put pcm63p-k in parralel mode?
Today I've done it with my Rotel 991 .Little bit about previous mods:
1.Switched pcm63 na pcm 63 pk (better bass)
2.Switched opa2132 to opa627 (overall high sound improvement)
So today I've done 3rd step,put pcm63 in parralel piggy-back mode..Result is strange.
Good sites:
1.Overall excellent resolution.
2.Excellent deep bass (in my threephonic I put sub now to -4 db,so high is level of bass right now)
3.Very analog voices ,violine and percussions.
Bad sites:
1.Highs get like lower .
2.On fast music like heavy metal I feel like some loose of dynamic.
When I hear something like Norah Jones or Diana Krall,and especially violine, it plays like HIGH-END sacd player,but heavy metal start to be very boring.
For me will be very interesting if anybody have also delas with pcm63-pk in piggy back configuration.May be master clock can be solution?
Is anybody have expirience to put pcm63p-k in parralel mode?
Today I've done it with my Rotel 991 .Little bit about previous mods:
1.Switched pcm63 na pcm 63 pk (better bass)
2.Switched opa2132 to opa627 (overall high sound improvement)
So today I've done 3rd step,put pcm63 in parralel piggy-back mode..Result is strange.
Good sites:
1.Overall excellent resolution.
2.Excellent deep bass (in my threephonic I put sub now to -4 db,so high is level of bass right now)
3.Very analog voices ,violine and percussions.
Bad sites:
1.Highs get like lower .
2.On fast music like heavy metal I feel like some loose of dynamic.
When I hear something like Norah Jones or Diana Krall,and especially violine, it plays like HIGH-END sacd player,but heavy metal start to be very boring.
For me will be very interesting if anybody have also delas with pcm63-pk in piggy back configuration.May be master clock can be solution?
No more stack no more
Hi,
today I stacked 2 x 4 PCM56, leaving internal op amps and I/V resistors of the three upper chips disconnected.
They were plugged into sockets in a Kenwood player.
I measured with the spectrum analyzer as always, and there has been zero improvement compared to any of the single chips.
I did that before with pairs of TDA1541 and there seemed to be an improvement most of times.
Sometimes two harmonics together behave better and sometimes worse, compared to each single chip.
For example -60 & -58 gives -59 most of time, but also could give -57 or -61.
Statistically the average of second to 9th harmonics of any single chip and the 4-chip-stack was -60 dB +/-1 dB.
Also noise did not improve.
Two chips could be matched to improve all harmonics but it is very difficult with 3 or 4 or 5 or...
Or maybe BB and Philips behave different...
Anyway if you have two chips, one with bad K3 and another with bad K4, you can mix them together and get acceptable K3 and K4 but the sum will be the same.
Hi,
today I stacked 2 x 4 PCM56, leaving internal op amps and I/V resistors of the three upper chips disconnected.
They were plugged into sockets in a Kenwood player.
I measured with the spectrum analyzer as always, and there has been zero improvement compared to any of the single chips.
I did that before with pairs of TDA1541 and there seemed to be an improvement most of times.
Sometimes two harmonics together behave better and sometimes worse, compared to each single chip.
For example -60 & -58 gives -59 most of time, but also could give -57 or -61.
Statistically the average of second to 9th harmonics of any single chip and the 4-chip-stack was -60 dB +/-1 dB.
Also noise did not improve.
Two chips could be matched to improve all harmonics but it is very difficult with 3 or 4 or 5 or...
Or maybe BB and Philips behave different...
Anyway if you have two chips, one with bad K3 and another with bad K4, you can mix them together and get acceptable K3 and K4 but the sum will be the same.
Consider shielding
AnthonyAsh,
You may want to consider using a shield for the PCM63's. Search for a post made by Peter Daniel on this forum where he tried the piggy-back and was disappointed until he used shielding on teh chips. Let us know the result!
AnthonyAsh,
You may want to consider using a shield for the PCM63's. Search for a post made by Peter Daniel on this forum where he tried the piggy-back and was disappointed until he used shielding on teh chips. Let us know the result!
Dr.H san KONNICHIWA
don't connect p1,3,4,9,10,23,24,25 each PCM63
Please make a Capaciter separate each PCM63
if parraleling up there pins
can't take better result.
don't connect p1,3,4,9,10,23,24,25 each PCM63
Please make a Capaciter separate each PCM63
if parraleling up there pins
can't take better result.
AnthonyAsh san KONNICHIWA
I tried paralleling up PCM63
at first, piggy back mode
but, It was a result worse than single use.
I asked BB japan
answer, operating point is mutually different, please do not common connection of the capacitor.
tried again,not common connection of the capacitor.
I take good result
better method is making independent I/V stage parallel.
I tried paralleling up PCM63
at first, piggy back mode
but, It was a result worse than single use.
I asked BB japan
answer, operating point is mutually different, please do not common connection of the capacitor.
tried again,not common connection of the capacitor.
I take good result
better method is making independent I/V stage parallel.
Fumihiko san, Konnichiwa
Thanks for the interesting response! I am not sure which capacitor you refer to.
Pin 1 is the servo decouple
Pin 3 is the reference decouple
Pin 4 is the Offset decouple
Pin 9 is the Rfeedback pin
Pin 10 is connected to pin 9
Pin 23 is the "Upper B2 ADJ" pin
Pin 24 is the "lower B2 ADJ" pin
Pin 25 is "potentiometer voltage" pin
Of these pins, 23, 24, 1, 3 and 4 are decoupled to ground through caps, so I would assume you are refering to these capacitors?
What do you do with pin 9 and 10 which appear to be used by the analog outputs stage op-amps? Do you connect them to your IV stage? If so they are effectively in parallel with the existing DAC.
Thanks for your input, domoarrigoto
Ryan
Thanks for the interesting response! I am not sure which capacitor you refer to.
Pin 1 is the servo decouple
Pin 3 is the reference decouple
Pin 4 is the Offset decouple
Pin 9 is the Rfeedback pin
Pin 10 is connected to pin 9
Pin 23 is the "Upper B2 ADJ" pin
Pin 24 is the "lower B2 ADJ" pin
Pin 25 is "potentiometer voltage" pin
Of these pins, 23, 24, 1, 3 and 4 are decoupled to ground through caps, so I would assume you are refering to these capacitors?
What do you do with pin 9 and 10 which appear to be used by the analog outputs stage op-amps? Do you connect them to your IV stage? If so they are effectively in parallel with the existing DAC.
Thanks for your input, domoarrigoto
Ryan
Dr.H san KONNICHIWA
upper chips capacitors and lower chip capacitors must be independent.
upper chips resistor-network and lower chips resistor-network must be independent.
can connect upper and lower
digital-input , power-supply and signal-out only😉
4paralleling PCM63PK and multiple(independent) IV satage
but now,8paralleling piggy-backing PCM63PK and common IV stage
my DAC too small , can't have multiple IV stage
upper chips capacitors and lower chip capacitors must be independent.
upper chips resistor-network and lower chips resistor-network must be independent.
can connect upper and lower
digital-input , power-supply and signal-out only😉
1st rev
4paralleling PCM63PK and multiple(independent) IV satage
but now,8paralleling piggy-backing PCM63PK and common IV stage
my DAC too small , can't have multiple IV stage
Attachments
AnthonyAsh said:
It is easy, parallel means connect Iout together.
And digital lines.
And grounds.
And supply rails. Or give one extra supply each chip.
But not individual (decoupling) pins.
This is why TDA1541 can not be stacked. Lots of individual decoupling pins. All must be placed on the pcb.
TDA1543 can be stacked. Very simple "tcheap".
Fumihiko san Konnichiwa
Thanks for the pictures. Just a couple of questions:
1. Did you connect Pin 5 of the upper and lower chips together, i.e. are they in parallel like pin 18?
2. Did you connect Pin 1 to the -V supply via its own independant capacitor?
Finally, vs the single chip, what are the sonic benefits of going with the parallel setup?
Thanks
Ryan
Thanks for the pictures. Just a couple of questions:
1. Did you connect Pin 5 of the upper and lower chips together, i.e. are they in parallel like pin 18?
2. Did you connect Pin 1 to the -V supply via its own independant capacitor?
Finally, vs the single chip, what are the sonic benefits of going with the parallel setup?
Thanks
Ryan
Dear Dr.H san
pin1 to -V supply via own independent capacitor.
pin3 and 4, via own independent capacitor 😉
pin5,6,7,11,12,13,18,20,21,28 connected upper and lower.
pin1 to -V supply via own independent capacitor.
pin3 and 4, via own independent capacitor 😉
Fumihiko san,
Thanks! What would you describe as the benefits of using the parallel chips vs just using one chip?
I will try the mod sometime in the near future and post my results here. Thanks for your input!
Ryan
Thanks! What would you describe as the benefits of using the parallel chips vs just using one chip?
I will try the mod sometime in the near future and post my results here. Thanks for your input!
Ryan
Dr.H said:
Dear Mr. Fumihiko,
For me is also very interesting what you gain when you used your pcm63 config?
Dear
what a difference ,single DAC and multiple DAC?
single use , it is thin sound
dual , what a different?
triple , good sound!
quad , I was surprised
8 paralelled , had been moved!
I heard and compared, accuphase DC-91
just a little difference.
I think,best solution is 4 to 8 paralleled DAC
actually, accuphase paralleled 4 to 8.
now I try 4 paralled CS4334🙂
what a difference ,single DAC and multiple DAC?
single use , it is thin sound
dual , what a different?
triple , good sound!
quad , I was surprised
8 paralelled , had been moved!
I heard and compared, accuphase DC-91
just a little difference.
I think,best solution is 4 to 8 paralleled DAC
actually, accuphase paralleled 4 to 8.
now I try 4 paralled CS4334🙂
- Status
- Not open for further replies.