Just a quick question guys as I am not able to locate a copy of the datasheet for the TDA1541A R1 chip.
Is the R1 chip the same as any TDA1541A chips?
I am planning to replace a TDA1541A in a cdp with that of the R1 version.
Thanks
Is the R1 chip the same as any TDA1541A chips?
I am planning to replace a TDA1541A in a cdp with that of the R1 version.
Thanks
It has always been assumed that "R1" stood for relaxed specs/performance. Of course, remember this comes from someone who hates all of them.
Jocko
Jocko
hmmmm...
according to Philips' datasheet, the R1 version has slightly better distortion figures at -60dB (-43dB instead of -42dB), all other parameters being equal.
Cheers,
Bruno
according to Philips' datasheet, the R1 version has slightly better distortion figures at -60dB (-43dB instead of -42dB), all other parameters being equal.
Cheers,
Bruno
Thanks guys for your comments.
I got the chip number wrong.
It is TDA1541 R1 , date coded 87
The dac in my Arcam cdp is a TDA1541A, date coded 95, made in Taiwan.
Will the R1 sound better than the MIT (made in Taiwan) version?
I am inching my diying interest in the direction of the TDA1541 and there is so much stuff so learn.
I got the chip number wrong.
It is TDA1541 R1 , date coded 87
The dac in my Arcam cdp is a TDA1541A, date coded 95, made in Taiwan.
Will the R1 sound better than the MIT (made in Taiwan) version?
I am inching my diying interest in the direction of the TDA1541 and there is so much stuff so learn.
Interesting............don't recall having seen a "non-A" chip with an R1 as a suffix. Date sounds about right, though.
Jocko
Jocko
The non-A version of the TDA1541 is right in front of my desk right now.
I am not able to find any info on it though.
I am not able to find any info on it though.
>Jocko
What direction do you think should go someone who is tired of TDA1541A sound, doesn't like non-os but don't want anything sounding inferior to it?😕
Part of the problem with the '1541 is that they run hot, and go kaput-ski too much for my taste. When I was making CD players, it was rare for any chip other than the '1541 to fail. Not more than 1 of any of the other chips failed (which impies that some had 0 failures), but the '1541.............!
I liked the AD1862. Too bad that AD didn't make a lot of money on them, and it is a tough process, so they are gone. The low-level linearity was much better than any of the B-B parts that I had to convert to as I changed over. Some felt that the bass had more impact on the B-B, but I can not confirm that.
The other thing about the '1541 that bugged me was the -1.8 mA (?) current at idle. Made for a nice offset on the typical op-amp I/V. Actually, it was part of the reason that I came up with my discrete I/V stage, as I could adjust one of the CCS one way for the '1541, and another setting for a B-B or AD DAC.
The B-Bs in general are ok..........but the later ones more resemble a mini-DSP/delta-sigma convertor with some extra gimmicks stuck onto the end to make current out. They use tricks like multiple DACs firing in a staggered sequence to prevent nasty current glitches. If you look at the data sheet, and wonder why so much current on the -12 V rail............now you know.
Yep, I miss the '1862. Probably the last true R-2R DAC there will ever be.
Jocko
I liked the AD1862. Too bad that AD didn't make a lot of money on them, and it is a tough process, so they are gone. The low-level linearity was much better than any of the B-B parts that I had to convert to as I changed over. Some felt that the bass had more impact on the B-B, but I can not confirm that.
The other thing about the '1541 that bugged me was the -1.8 mA (?) current at idle. Made for a nice offset on the typical op-amp I/V. Actually, it was part of the reason that I came up with my discrete I/V stage, as I could adjust one of the CCS one way for the '1541, and another setting for a B-B or AD DAC.
The B-Bs in general are ok..........but the later ones more resemble a mini-DSP/delta-sigma convertor with some extra gimmicks stuck onto the end to make current out. They use tricks like multiple DACs firing in a staggered sequence to prevent nasty current glitches. If you look at the data sheet, and wonder why so much current on the -12 V rail............now you know.
Yep, I miss the '1862. Probably the last true R-2R DAC there will ever be.
Jocko
Did not say that I disliked them, did I?
Just never used any. Probably have some in my stash, but just never needed them.
Jocko
Just never used any. Probably have some in my stash, but just never needed them.
Jocko
I had a TDA1541 for 17 !! years. Till a opamp failed. With checking the PS voltages i slipped with measure probe.
Now i can say: the 1541 doesn't like 15V on its output. But before that the 1541 kept playing.... and now i keep a sharp point on the probes also.....
They all sound different, even if from the same batch with the same data codes. The cleaners must’ve forgotten to dust-off the production line area that day....
Get at least 5 or 6 and select the best sounding one. Don't worry too much about R1 (or R or A or whatever...)
Extreme_Boky
Get at least 5 or 6 and select the best sounding one. Don't worry too much about R1 (or R or A or whatever...)
Extreme_Boky
Have seven, six are A version 1541's to choose from now. But want to put 4 parallel also as the time is there.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.