I tried PGA2310 using a PC parallel port to control it as a test... to me it sounded great 🙂 They are easy enough to try out, although the 2310 has now been discontinued in favour of PGA2320 which is SOIC16 only.
WM8816 is now unavailable, which is a pity
WM8816 is now unavailable, which is a pity
there is pin compatible finnish mas6116 instead of the scottish wm8816, said to be upgraded version and you can buy it at profusionplc, groupbuy would be cool because of pricebreak
Will likely be using PGA2310 in an active crossover/preamp unit soon. I suspect it'll make little difference to the sound since the crossover already features several OPA2134 opamps 😉
I get the feeling that with a bit of care in layout, power supplies etc, the PGA2320 is capable of surperb results.
I am laying out two PCB;s now - a flull feature preamp and then a separate minimalist board. I'll buy a Goldpoint pot
http://www.goldpt.com/
and buffer it with an LME49710 op amp (my power amp needs a solid drive signal since Rin is c. 22k at low frequencies). I doing the minimalist board first.
I am laying out two PCB;s now - a flull feature preamp and then a separate minimalist board. I'll buy a Goldpoint pot
http://www.goldpt.com/
and buffer it with an LME49710 op amp (my power amp needs a solid drive signal since Rin is c. 22k at low frequencies). I doing the minimalist board first.
PGA2320 is good, but better (i tried it) was CMOS DAC ( DAC8143 with OP275-5 years ago..) in multiplying mode. Control is not so simply as WM... or PGA.., and it costs more, but sound is better..
Nordic said:
Fair enough, however you usually only get a limited number of em.. I think it's 2 on most Atmels... so if youve got one for detecting your encoder and the other for detecting IR.. it means you have to poll your buttons (which I usually connect up with a resistor ladder to one of the ADC ports).
The PGA will accept communication at a pretty low speed, so I think the RC filtering could work. I have actually seen a similar thing used for EMI control in a home computer whose bus ran at 7MHz.
Most of them have two external interrupts, and a bunch of internal lines for the peripherals and PCINTs. You don't get a separate interrupt for each I/O pin, they're grouped into a pin change interrupt per port.gbyleveldt said:
But it makes no difference, just use the interrupt to wake up the uC and then check the state. It's not like the encoder or button state is going to change in the 0.5us it takes to wake up.
You're only going to have trouble if you're trying to use analog control, like jaycee's resistor ladder, or using an analog pot instead of an encoder.
Bonsai said:
Not only the pots... Also the rotary switches as well the passive controllers. Amazing stuff!
If your amplifier has sufficient gain, so as can be driven in full output level directly from a CD player output (which is probably a reality) then i thing it is the better solution.
Also i believe that the last generation of SACDS must be free from the sampling noise in their outputs, then any input filtering for rejecting it in preamps it is uselless anymore.
Go ahead. I make the same.
Fotios
How about the volume control modules in this,
http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/326S_interior_lo.jpg
http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/32AB_lo.jpg
They look rather neat for a solid state volume control.
http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/326S_interior_lo.jpg
http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/32AB_lo.jpg
They look rather neat for a solid state volume control.
Those chips look like analog switches, in some sort of resistive attenuator with all those SMD resistors.
I cannot quite read it - looks like DS213DY (?) with some kind of Texas logo.
Mark Levinson. Op-amps everywhere. I just love it!
So much for bad sounding IC's!
Mark Levinson. Op-amps everywhere. I just love it!
So much for bad sounding IC's!
For a long time I thought it was DS213DY, but then you mentioned Siliconix, so I checked out the website, and their prefix is DG. DG213 is a quad analog switch, as we suspected, so I'd concur with Giaime that there's some sort of resistor network being created with these switches.
16 chips gives 64 switches, so I would guess that it's designed such that the signal only passes through one or at most two switches. But look at all the opamps?!
16 chips gives 64 switches, so I would guess that it's designed such that the signal only passes through one or at most two switches. But look at all the opamps?!
Nothing wrong with op-amps (nothing wrong with discretes either) - if it floats your boat, use it.
This is another pre-amp that got (very good) ood reviews. I see AD749's in there - Scott must be pleased!
This is another pre-amp that got (very good) ood reviews. I see AD749's in there - Scott must be pleased!
i hear you bonsai,
that makes me laugh too.
i need to go check my old mark levinson brochures where they talk about how they would wouldn't use op amps in their products.
nice to see they recognize that technology marches on, sometimes even towards improvements, not just lower cost.
that makes me laugh too.
i need to go check my old mark levinson brochures where they talk about how they would wouldn't use op amps in their products.
nice to see they recognize that technology marches on, sometimes even towards improvements, not just lower cost.
Bonsai said:
Bonsai said:
Don't think that these preamps actually sound good. I have listened extensively to the 38 (iirc) and the sound is exactly what one would expect from cheap caps and 2604 opamps. Output buffer may be good but there are just too many compromises along the line. The average ML buyer probably won't care anyway. Pretty case though.
This may be slightly off-topic, but does anyone know whether the pga2310 can be used to control DC voltages? I can imagine that there might be some glitches on volume changes, but has anyone actually tried it to see how bad they are?
My idea would be to use it to control a VCCS.
My idea would be to use it to control a VCCS.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.