Re: Re: Lm317/337
Right! And that's why I won't use the LM317 as a preregulator, even if it is in a Wenzel Finesse circuit. Once the noise gets in your sytem it is very difficult to get rid off. Same for the follower.
Werner Ogiers made some very interesting measurements:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/regulators_noise1_e.html
BTW, who was it claiming that LEDS are too noisy.....?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=336199#post336199
See also Post# 14 in this thread
Even more confusing: I did not find a direct correlation between noise of the regulator for a clockcircuit and soundquality.... The same applies for a preamp.......😕
Guido Tent said:
Right! And that's why I won't use the LM317 as a preregulator, even if it is in a Wenzel Finesse circuit. Once the noise gets in your sytem it is very difficult to get rid off. Same for the follower.
Werner Ogiers made some very interesting measurements:
http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/regulators_noise1_e.html
BTW, who was it claiming that LEDS are too noisy.....?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=336199#post336199
See also Post# 14 in this thread
Even more confusing: I did not find a direct correlation between noise of the regulator for a clockcircuit and soundquality.... The same applies for a preamp.......😕
Borges
The convention is that every time the resistor value is halved the capacitor value is quadrupled.
The eqautions to match cap and resistor values follow this rule, with the datasheet value of 1000R and 47nF as a starting point. Just a back of an envelope thing, so it might be cobblers 🙂
till
The values change the jitter attenuation of the CS8412, which I'm told is almost zero with the dataheet values.
What I want to know is if more is always better. Does the cap value eventually become too high, or the resistor value too low, and cause more jitter?
I've ben fiddling about and the 220uF Rubycon ZA is better than a 4.7uF X7R 1206. It's not night and day, but
pirch definition and timing seems superior and the music more relaxed.
The convention is that every time the resistor value is halved the capacitor value is quadrupled.
The eqautions to match cap and resistor values follow this rule, with the datasheet value of 1000R and 47nF as a starting point. Just a back of an envelope thing, so it might be cobblers 🙂
till
The values change the jitter attenuation of the CS8412, which I'm told is almost zero with the dataheet values.
What I want to know is if more is always better. Does the cap value eventually become too high, or the resistor value too low, and cause more jitter?
I've ben fiddling about and the 220uF Rubycon ZA is better than a 4.7uF X7R 1206. It's not night and day, but
pirch definition and timing seems superior and the music more relaxed.
kittaylor said:
Hi
Lower PLL crossover = better as it reduces incomming jitter from the drive.
At a certain moment you run into limitations of sub LF supply noise en LF jitter properties of the Crystal receiver clock: Time for a secondary PLL using a crystal...............
look here for a practical example:
http://www.tentlabs.com/Products/DIYDAC/DIYDAC.html
cheers
To my surprise, the DAC works and works well with a 330u 16v SEP cap. It does take a couple of seconds to lock on and you get a blast of white noise first.
The tone seems silkier, but the sound overall is chunky and dynamic, with an alarming amount of energy in the low end.
The lock on delay is longer than with the ZA 220u, and that cap didn't make a burst of noise just a click, so I asume the bigger cap is providing more filtering.
The tone seems silkier, but the sound overall is chunky and dynamic, with an alarming amount of energy in the low end.
The lock on delay is longer than with the ZA 220u, and that cap didn't make a burst of noise just a click, so I asume the bigger cap is providing more filtering.
One thing that no one has mentioned......
Changing RC values on these PLLS may lower the corner frequency, but usually do at the expense of peaking in the response. They do not lower the actual jitter any, just shift the frequency repsonse around a little.
Jocko
Changing RC values on these PLLS may lower the corner frequency, but usually do at the expense of peaking in the response. They do not lower the actual jitter any, just shift the frequency repsonse around a little.
Jocko
There's probably some truth in that.
I've upped the resistor value to 330R, and the sound is drier, cleaner and less massive. Different, not better.
I've upped the resistor value to 330R, and the sound is drier, cleaner and less massive. Different, not better.
My preferred choice is 0.47 BG N and 330R Caddock. I also tried 4.7 BG N with appropriate resistor value but it sounded too "thick" and not "fast" enough.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.