Hi all,
I found a rare DAC a few years ago made by the british company AVI, and have been using ever since for audio playback in my stereo system...
It's very old (1991) and only accepts redbook CD standard (16 bit 44khz) but technically and sonically it still holds it's own in my opinion. It has a dedicated toroidal PSU, discrete output (no op-amps) and it uses a Philips TDA-1541A S1 DAC chip. Looking into the TDA-1541A it still seems highly regarded and sought after for DIY builds etc in spite of it being a very old design... This seems odd given DAC technology is far more sophisticated and elaborate nearly 20 years on (on paper at least).
I've nothing to complain about sound quality wise, but am fancying a change now Asus have released their new Essence One DAC...
Reckon it's worth a punt or is the TDA-1541A genuinely that good against it's modern counterparts?
I found a rare DAC a few years ago made by the british company AVI, and have been using ever since for audio playback in my stereo system...
It's very old (1991) and only accepts redbook CD standard (16 bit 44khz) but technically and sonically it still holds it's own in my opinion. It has a dedicated toroidal PSU, discrete output (no op-amps) and it uses a Philips TDA-1541A S1 DAC chip. Looking into the TDA-1541A it still seems highly regarded and sought after for DIY builds etc in spite of it being a very old design... This seems odd given DAC technology is far more sophisticated and elaborate nearly 20 years on (on paper at least).
I've nothing to complain about sound quality wise, but am fancying a change now Asus have released their new Essence One DAC...
Reckon it's worth a punt or is the TDA-1541A genuinely that good against it's modern counterparts?
It's fame in DIY comunity is mostly nostalgia (why people buy vintage things anyway?), a hint of non-conformism (similar with hey look at me, I have piercings in my lips!), there are plenty of old and cheap players with this chip ready to be canibalized and the fact that most DIY cannot solder SMD devices 
Joke aside, there where definitely OK sounding devices. If you want to hear some hi-def files you need a different option... you might want to keep both and decide what's best for your hearing.
PS: The Asus device uses the new C-Media CM6631 as USB bridge, Analog Devices ADSP-21261 as upsampler, some LM4562 as OpAmps (great), but I could not find what actual DAC chips uses. In picture I can see two of them - looks like Burr brown PCM1796. That makes sense, because of their claim of "32 bit DAC":
Now... does it worth 560USD? Hard to say, depends of ones income, I guess.
Joke aside, there where definitely OK sounding devices. If you want to hear some hi-def files you need a different option... you might want to keep both and decide what's best for your hearing.
PS: The Asus device uses the new C-Media CM6631 as USB bridge, Analog Devices ADSP-21261 as upsampler, some LM4562 as OpAmps (great), but I could not find what actual DAC chips uses. In picture I can see two of them - looks like Burr brown PCM1796. That makes sense, because of their claim of "32 bit DAC":
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Now... does it worth 560USD? Hard to say, depends of ones income, I guess.
Last edited:
I would predict that your 1541-based dac is going to have more lifelike "weight" and richness in the low bass through the mids, while the Asus(since when are they a high end audio maker?) will sound lightweight by comparison, but probably more spacious and possibly have more very top end smoothness. Looking at the photo dug up by Sonic, the Asus could easily sound downright anemic in the low end compared to the AVI. I'd further predict that you may find the Asus impressive for the first week or month, but ultimately find it unsatisfying, with the AVI always drawing you back to it's more organic nature. This is all based on my own experience with great ladder dacs versus all manner of these essentially bitstream dacs. I love spaciousness, but not at the expense of convincingly real weight.
Don't say that just based on other DAC's that use the internal OS in the PCM cips (that is very minimal). The DSP ADSP-21261 has potential to do a better job at OS/upsampling and reducing the jitter (big RAM buffers). Analog section with LM4562 as I/V and NE5532 as filters:
It might sound interesting. But I don't know if $560 worth of interesting.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
It might sound interesting. But I don't know if $560 worth of interesting.
Last edited:
Looking at pictures of it internally it looks very tasty.
It also looks as if you could mod the hell out of it and take it sonically to well beyond your expectations and even beyond the capabilities of the dacs you are looking at or even discussing.
It's got only one transformer powering the whole thing and the caps look wide open for an upgrade or at very least a change.
So much potential it's eye watering particularly in the power supply dept.
and not an NE5532 to be seen...hahaha ( what a load of cr.. )
If you do manage to sell it on PFM for the asking price I think your going to take one large step backwards and regret it.
Get your soldering iron out, spend a little and gain a lot
Oh...and Sonic...don't tell us what we can't say - we are all entitled to opinions....just like you
I've just given mine.
It also looks as if you could mod the hell out of it and take it sonically to well beyond your expectations and even beyond the capabilities of the dacs you are looking at or even discussing.
It's got only one transformer powering the whole thing and the caps look wide open for an upgrade or at very least a change.
So much potential it's eye watering particularly in the power supply dept.
and not an NE5532 to be seen...hahaha ( what a load of cr.. )
If you do manage to sell it on PFM for the asking price I think your going to take one large step backwards and regret it.
Get your soldering iron out, spend a little and gain a lot
Oh...and Sonic...don't tell us what we can't say - we are all entitled to opinions....just like you
I've just given mine.
Attachments
Thanks for the input guys - I don't need any of the extra bells and whistles the Asus has to offer (headphone amp, upsampling, 24/96 etc...) but have always been impressed by the Essence STX card I have in computer. If that's anything to go by, it's bound to good. I'm usually a strict 2nd hand buyer when it comes to hifi, but I've oppurtunity to buy an open box Essence One for 20% off the going rate... Not much, but tempting enough!
^^ Just read your post - well spotted there Andrew and nice find on the pics! Yes it's quite a beauty internally, all credit due to Martin Grindrod who is an excellent designer in my opinion.
I've never taken a soldering iron to anything before but no doubt it would be quite easy to mod given some practice - everything is well spaced out and easy to work with. I've often thought it's due for some kind of recap considering it's got to be 21 years old now.
Will keep your comments in mind and will think carefully before parting with it - I've only ever seen one other for sale so they're seriously rare indeed! Thanks again everyone.
I've never taken a soldering iron to anything before but no doubt it would be quite easy to mod given some practice - everything is well spaced out and easy to work with. I've often thought it's due for some kind of recap considering it's got to be 21 years old now.
Will keep your comments in mind and will think carefully before parting with it - I've only ever seen one other for sale so they're seriously rare indeed! Thanks again everyone.
Last edited:
It's one of the nicest ones I've seen in a long time and I also think you are very fortunate to have it.
Just lovely...
Just lovely...
I have an Asus Essence ST soundcard - its tonally nowhere near as true to life as my multibit DACs (which don't include a working TDA1541A) but are TDA1543 and TDA1387. I agree with stephensank's impressions of multibit vs delta-sigma parts. Nowadays I just won't do any serious listening with PCM179X.
Suggest for your change you set about upgrading your TDA with I2S attenuators and DEM reclocking rather than buying a whole new 'modern' DAC 🙂
<edit> Oh and do away with that dreadful toroid 😛
Last edited:
That dac looks awesome! I'd love to have a go at it!! I can see decent caps, regs and a clock right now. Beautiful layout and looks really easy to work on 😉
Oh good....it's not just me then 😀
Never seen a better one so well prepared and ready.
...and to abraxalito...what would you suggest to replace the dreadful toroid - a screened and potted type ?
That answer could be a good tip for me too - hope your still reading this😉
Never seen a better one so well prepared and ready.
...and to abraxalito...what would you suggest to replace the dreadful toroid - a screened and potted type ?
That answer could be a good tip for me too - hope your still reading this😉
Screening on a transformer is a mixed blessing so I reckon it might not be worth the money. Depends if you have a nice clean earth, in which case its a good idea. Trouble is - these days most people's earths (I imagine they're just like mine) are polluted with the plethora of SMPSUs they have around the place. Potting is optional - if it were me, I'd not put my money there.
No what I was thinking was a transformer that gives better isolation from mains-borne crud, by dint of lower interwinding capacitance. So R-core or traditional E-I core would work fine. Add on a wide-band mains filter to improve matters further 🙂
No what I was thinking was a transformer that gives better isolation from mains-borne crud, by dint of lower interwinding capacitance. So R-core or traditional E-I core would work fine. Add on a wide-band mains filter to improve matters further 🙂
several music lovers tell me, that under certainly conditions the vintage DAC IC TDA1541 outperform each currently available modern DAC ic.
Unfortunately nobody can exact verify this claim.
OTOH, there are companies, that uses the TDA1541 in their currently CD player devices - go to
The AMR CD 77...A Multi-Bit TDA 1541 comparison - The Art of Sound Forum and the attached jpg file
Unfortunately nobody can exact verify this claim.
OTOH, there are companies, that uses the TDA1541 in their currently CD player devices - go to
The AMR CD 77...A Multi-Bit TDA 1541 comparison - The Art of Sound Forum and the attached jpg file
Attachments
Most of them are not using the dreadfull SAA7220, but either some kind of DSP or plain NOS. That's one the key aspects of using an older DAC - what filter have in front of it. NOS in my experience sounds like c**p because is always followed by no filtering.
OT: Don't forget, some is just pure marketing, apealing to a crowd of older, nostalgic buyers, but with lots of disposable income. Usually, in the '90's they where salivating in front the same TDA1541, but in shops, could not afford it. Now is a mental fixation to that past. With hearing at 50% of what they had, at retiring age, now they give "reviews" of superexpensive toys.
Everthing was better "back then" and nothing "new" is good. Isn't that plainly because "back then" they where younger, in a better shape and further away from their lifes end? Deep in their mind they bame the "new" technology for that. They hole that time stops if they dwell in those old technologies (tubes is the best example).
OT: Don't forget, some is just pure marketing, apealing to a crowd of older, nostalgic buyers, but with lots of disposable income. Usually, in the '90's they where salivating in front the same TDA1541, but in shops, could not afford it. Now is a mental fixation to that past. With hearing at 50% of what they had, at retiring age, now they give "reviews" of superexpensive toys.
Everthing was better "back then" and nothing "new" is good. Isn't that plainly because "back then" they where younger, in a better shape and further away from their lifes end? Deep in their mind they bame the "new" technology for that. They hole that time stops if they dwell in those old technologies (tubes is the best example).
Last edited:
1541 vs. ???
Well the TDA-1541 was/is used in the Yamamoto YDA-01 DAC , the Naim CDX player, etc. No one has suggested that these sound anything but excellent. If it sounded good it still sounds good, as long as the chip and all of the supporting circuiyrt is in good condition. Your reference may have shifted.
In a lot of cases newer DAC chips allow for various sampling frequencies and word length. I have 4 Burr-Brown PCM63 DACs sitting in a drawer..and nobody has ever suggested that those are crap. And those are capable of upto 24-bit length words. It's just that newer chips may support USB outputs, etc. And just because a chip is newer does not mean it is better. For example, several of the BB/TI PCM17XX chips have been identified as the bottleneck for performance in several newer digital products.
And don't forget about the infamous Sony "greystations" used as a cd player....
Unless you have experienced a good implementation of any of the "old" or obsolete chips, it's pretty hard to make a general , open ended statement.
Well the TDA-1541 was/is used in the Yamamoto YDA-01 DAC , the Naim CDX player, etc. No one has suggested that these sound anything but excellent. If it sounded good it still sounds good, as long as the chip and all of the supporting circuiyrt is in good condition. Your reference may have shifted.
In a lot of cases newer DAC chips allow for various sampling frequencies and word length. I have 4 Burr-Brown PCM63 DACs sitting in a drawer..and nobody has ever suggested that those are crap. And those are capable of upto 24-bit length words. It's just that newer chips may support USB outputs, etc. And just because a chip is newer does not mean it is better. For example, several of the BB/TI PCM17XX chips have been identified as the bottleneck for performance in several newer digital products.
And don't forget about the infamous Sony "greystations" used as a cd player....
Unless you have experienced a good implementation of any of the "old" or obsolete chips, it's pretty hard to make a general , open ended statement.
Last edited:
You can feed 32bit words to the TDA (most implementations do..) but the dac will only convert 16bit, as for the PCM63 it will only convert 20bits.
When it comes to sample rate it's mostly the reciever / digital filters that impose limits. There is no trouble in making the TDA (or for that matter a PCM63) accept 192Khz data as long as it is properly formatted and preferably dithered down to the right resolution.
DAC's
Hi guys, I realize this is an older thread. To my ears and those who have heard my TDA1541A DAC.... I think for pure 16 Bit 44.1 KHZ playback it's pretty hard to beat a well implemented TDA1541A DAC. I really enjoy mine. I use the digital part of an Analogmetric DAC with some tweaks. Gone is the SAA7220, I'm using a NPC filter and glue logic. The DAC has a DEM clock mod. The I/V is an OPA603, 7th order GIC Bessel filter, output buffer is OPA627. And yes the reclocking on that board is a little simple and seems to work fine with a Hagclock. The thing is hard to beat especially in the delicate treble playback, it just sounds right. I have a 192 Khz SRC to CS4398 DAC with Lundahl transformers, its very lush in the mids with super bass. I like it very much... just don't hear that awesome treble that I get with the 1541A. It will do some higher sample rates so I'm happy to keep it around. I think it's possible that a CS4397 could be better than the 98... Eventually I plan to see what can be done with it. I have a cheap Chinese 4397 DAC to mess with that I think may sound closer to the 1541A with proper implementation. I guess what I'm saying is it's old (1541A). It was a well designed DAC that for the most part was poorly implemented by most manufactures. There are gains to be had doing DEM mods. If pressed and could only have one DAC I'd keep the 1541 DAC. I even gave that project a name. 1541DACASARUS REX.... OK That's a silly name.... I'm working on a second version using a different output stage topology. Interesting to see how that one turns out. Dave
Hi guys, I realize this is an older thread. To my ears and those who have heard my TDA1541A DAC.... I think for pure 16 Bit 44.1 KHZ playback it's pretty hard to beat a well implemented TDA1541A DAC. I really enjoy mine. I use the digital part of an Analogmetric DAC with some tweaks. Gone is the SAA7220, I'm using a NPC filter and glue logic. The DAC has a DEM clock mod. The I/V is an OPA603, 7th order GIC Bessel filter, output buffer is OPA627. And yes the reclocking on that board is a little simple and seems to work fine with a Hagclock. The thing is hard to beat especially in the delicate treble playback, it just sounds right. I have a 192 Khz SRC to CS4398 DAC with Lundahl transformers, its very lush in the mids with super bass. I like it very much... just don't hear that awesome treble that I get with the 1541A. It will do some higher sample rates so I'm happy to keep it around. I think it's possible that a CS4397 could be better than the 98... Eventually I plan to see what can be done with it. I have a cheap Chinese 4397 DAC to mess with that I think may sound closer to the 1541A with proper implementation. I guess what I'm saying is it's old (1541A). It was a well designed DAC that for the most part was poorly implemented by most manufactures. There are gains to be had doing DEM mods. If pressed and could only have one DAC I'd keep the 1541 DAC. I even gave that project a name. 1541DACASARUS REX.... OK That's a silly name.... I'm working on a second version using a different output stage topology. Interesting to see how that one turns out. Dave
Not only by the reproduction side the sonic diversity and character is to observe between the individual DACs and I/U topologies, both at vintage and currently available ones.
The same diversity there is present by the production side of the compact disc (recording, mastering, at whole a long way), both between different time periods and different technologies (e. g. like only one masterclock generator for all or the use of different masterclocks upon just one example to name).
Consequently, there will always be so, that at certain CDs one and sometimes another DAC and/or circuit topology is preferably
Thus all user's need various DACs and DAC topologies, If the CD collection is very large. The Selecting between various transfer functions of the low pass character by the digital filter is definitely not enough here.
Until now I was of the opinion, that only one DAC and IU/IV conversion (e. g. PCM1704 and the Pass I/U) together with the selecting between eight times - and non (zero) oversampling was enough.
After various listening tests I think rather more and more, that the selecting between various DAC-ICs is also important. I have heard in the meantime in very good sound quality the types MN6471M (Technics Mash, used by NAD and Acurus), CS4328 (Cirrus Logic, used in Linn Karik) TDA1541 (Micromega "SOLO", first edition so as various models from Naim Audio) AD1856 (Monrio CD Player) after tweaking resp. modification of various things, mostly refitting of LC master clocks.
It is always to observe, that certain CDs in ideal harmony with certain DACs particularly well.
Thus a well-planned/well-designed DAC-Unit must also have the possibility to select between Multibit (both oversampling and NOS), "bitstream continuous calibration" and ΔΣ / ΣΔ mode.
Always impressive, is this DAC topology about
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/convertus3_e.html
and the Shigaraki DAC "4715" from Sakura Systems/47lab about
http://www.sakurasystems.com/products/shigadac.html
and
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/61064-shigaraki-drive-dac-images.html
Not to beat by certain old classic recordings.
The commonly made statement, that only one modern DAC is still necessary, I do not take seriously in cases, where a lot of old CDs are present to be played from the 80s and 90s.
The same diversity there is present by the production side of the compact disc (recording, mastering, at whole a long way), both between different time periods and different technologies (e. g. like only one masterclock generator for all or the use of different masterclocks upon just one example to name).
Consequently, there will always be so, that at certain CDs one and sometimes another DAC and/or circuit topology is preferably
Thus all user's need various DACs and DAC topologies, If the CD collection is very large. The Selecting between various transfer functions of the low pass character by the digital filter is definitely not enough here.
Until now I was of the opinion, that only one DAC and IU/IV conversion (e. g. PCM1704 and the Pass I/U) together with the selecting between eight times - and non (zero) oversampling was enough.
After various listening tests I think rather more and more, that the selecting between various DAC-ICs is also important. I have heard in the meantime in very good sound quality the types MN6471M (Technics Mash, used by NAD and Acurus), CS4328 (Cirrus Logic, used in Linn Karik) TDA1541 (Micromega "SOLO", first edition so as various models from Naim Audio) AD1856 (Monrio CD Player) after tweaking resp. modification of various things, mostly refitting of LC master clocks.
It is always to observe, that certain CDs in ideal harmony with certain DACs particularly well.
Thus a well-planned/well-designed DAC-Unit must also have the possibility to select between Multibit (both oversampling and NOS), "bitstream continuous calibration" and ΔΣ / ΣΔ mode.
Always impressive, is this DAC topology about
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/convertus3_e.html
and the Shigaraki DAC "4715" from Sakura Systems/47lab about
http://www.sakurasystems.com/products/shigadac.html
and
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-source/61064-shigaraki-drive-dac-images.html
Not to beat by certain old classic recordings.
The commonly made statement, that only one modern DAC is still necessary, I do not take seriously in cases, where a lot of old CDs are present to be played from the 80s and 90s.
Last edited:
The YDA-01 utilizes the PCM1794A, and to my knowledge always has. See the following link to Yamamoto's own website. Featuring no-feedback single output circuit with a single transistor
Given that, I'm curious to know in which digital products you believe the PCM179x chips have been identified as the performance bottleneck?
Last edited:
PCM179x might have some issues (compared with the "old" PCM1704) , but is definitely not a bottleneck... It's a benchmark that "others" try to pass 😀
In my limited experience, TDA1541 is good, but not even close of above cips SQ.
In my limited experience, TDA1541 is good, but not even close of above cips SQ.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.