Oh..Wolfson is now owned by Cirrus Logic, but you'll see the WM DAC codes.
WM#### I did see quite several times
WM8805
Interesting
So Cirrus Logic has both the CS#### models an the WM#### models,
and they are different..
BTW, I forgot to write XMOS..
I should also add them to my list
Cool
Looks like as nice PCB project for whoever is into one..
Do you maybe know the specific Cirrus Logic model?
BTW
Some people go beyond Mark with their DAC:
My Quest for a New DAC, Part 3 - Denafrips Terminator - Reviews - Computer Audiophile
This guy should add a bit more capacitors tho
Some people go beyond Mark with their DAC:
My Quest for a New DAC, Part 3 - Denafrips Terminator - Reviews - Computer Audiophile
This guy should add a bit more capacitors tho
hehehe
an hour after being disconnected from power..
He copied a circuit from a PC UPS..
I wonder what was behind the so-many-capacitors decision..
Is it "I Really wanted the DC to be as straight as possible",
or "I wanted the basses to be really strong"..
Last edited:
Last edited:
Yes, and that makes it easy to implement well so if you want to buy a cheap DAC that sounds good, it's a good starting point. No doubt there are some bad ones out there and the signature may not be what you want, but it is so cheap it's worth a listen. Did you try one before?
Specs are important but they don't tell the whole story so listening to as many different DACs as possible is a way to appreciate their relative strengths and weaknesses. The problem with that is the cost and that the end result is perhaps that you get fussier and start spending too much time tinkering and not enough time listening. Then you find yourself on diyaudio too much and.... oh.
At DC a cap's open circuit so none would be needed. Cap multipliers are great for reducing mains ripple however they don't have as low an output impedance as a cap bank.
Don't forget to try some of the vintage DAC's also. One of my favorites is a Parasound D/AC-1000 with Burr Brown PCM63P DAC chips. Uses ancient R2R technology that is so outdated that it, oh wait, yea, it's the new rage these days! Listen to one, it provides a very musical and natural presentation unlike a lot of the analytical DAC's on the market today.
The new R2R DAC's start at around 2K and go way up from there. They need very, very close matched resistors making them very expensive. The original R2R DAC chips used laser trimmed resistors built into the chip itself.
BillWojo
The new R2R DAC's start at around 2K and go way up from there. They need very, very close matched resistors making them very expensive. The original R2R DAC chips used laser trimmed resistors built into the chip itself.
BillWojo
Last edited:
Mostly Spencer's design philosophy I believe. The DAC does not have great THD figures (which would be almost certainly lower using an opamp solution) but he describes it as being very musical with great resolving power. So it met his needs from a subjective standpoint.
Subjectively I think it sounds great
edit: this is a quote from the documentation:
Tony.
Last edited:
PCM63 is quite a decent starting point for a DAC which won't require phenomenal power supply heroics - its stated PSRR is 86dB (though it gives no frequency plot). Compare that to an ESS chip which might have 6dB PSRR and you'll see why power supply design and layout becomes a whole lot simpler.
That's a good pair of ESS to compare, because the ES9023 is voltage out and IIRC the 9018K2M must be current out. The latter is harder to implement so is more tweakable if you want to get into that.
Another pair of cheap DACs to compare is a TDA1543 or similar non-oversampling (NOS) current out DAC (often using 4x or 8x chips for more current) with a CS4398 voltage out DAC.
These four DACS should give a sense of the differences in sound a DAC can produce. They are all capable of very enjoyable music reproduction if implemented well. Of course, people here will likely disagree but that's a feature of the "digital line level" forum, not a bug ;-)
Thank you for the suggestions.
but a ready-made PCB with it..
So the slightly harder implementation of the 9018K2M was already done
both are Stereo 192KHz 24bit.
Should one be preferred over the other?
I should mention that the DACs I bought are not just the chip,
but a ready-made PCB with it..
So the slightly harder implementation of the 9018K2M was already done
Regarding Cirrus Logic, 2 models that I frequently see, are CS4344 and CS4398,
both are Stereo 192KHz 24bit.
Should one be preferred over the other?
Last edited:
I used to buy separate chips and PCBs and build them up but I'm more short of time so now I look for "ready to rock" solutions too. The issue is whether the builder/designer have done the implementation well so I don't have to do semi-destructive hacks to fix it. Been there, done that, kinda thing. There is a huge number of bad implementations out there and they can suck up huge amounts of time. If you have the time for that tho, it can be fun, and a great way to develop skills.
I don't know CS4344 - not heard it, so I can't comment, only to say it looks like it was designed with minimal cost in mind so I'd expect some engineering compromises that would make it an uninteresting DAC to listen to. To quote the datasheet, "These features are ideal for DVD players & recorders, digital televisions, home theater and set top box products, and automotive audio systems." = cheap low grade simple boring.
I don't know CS4344 - not heard it, so I can't comment, only to say it looks like it was designed with minimal cost in mind so I'd expect some engineering compromises that would make it an uninteresting DAC to listen to. To quote the datasheet, "These features are ideal for DVD players & recorders, digital televisions, home theater and set top box products, and automotive audio systems." = cheap low grade simple boring.
Last edited:
I believe it is simply because the consumer product manufacturers like to use as few components as possible in their designs so one chip that not only does it all, AND just needs a single power supply ofr 5volts is what they will buy.
The chip manufacturers then compete with each other to fulfil these requirements.
Sound quality is not the top priority. In fact the reason why the old dacs from last century sound better is, I think, because:
A) they weren't designed with these constraints
B) I can't see how so much technology squeezed into a 4mm square TSSOP package can be good at avoiding crosstalk between the analogue and the digital sections.
Progress as far as DACs go is not one that means a better sound, its more features in a smaller package for the lowest price.
This is why my three dacs currently under construction use the TDA1541, AD1862 and AD1865 and bulky, expensive transformer I/V.
The chip manufacturers then compete with each other to fulfil these requirements.
Sound quality is not the top priority. In fact the reason why the old dacs from last century sound better is, I think, because:
A) they weren't designed with these constraints
B) I can't see how so much technology squeezed into a 4mm square TSSOP package can be good at avoiding crosstalk between the analogue and the digital sections.
Progress as far as DACs go is not one that means a better sound, its more features in a smaller package for the lowest price.
This is why my three dacs currently under construction use the TDA1541, AD1862 and AD1865 and bulky, expensive transformer I/V.
Last edited:
hehehe
BTW, by briefly comparing the 2 product pages:
CS4344: CS4344/45/48 | Cirrus Logic
CS4398: CS4398 | Cirrus Logic
it seems that the main differences are:
The CS4398 supports DSD and the CS4344 doesn't,
and 3 more regarding their parameters:
Dynamic Range (dB): CS4344=105, CS4398=120
THD+N (dB): CS4344=-90, CS4398=-107
Output Level (Vrms): CS4344=0.65*VA Vpp, CS4398=2.3
Do the last 3 parameters also support the fact that the CS4398 should be better?
These are really great points.
The trend in ICs is toward having a main IC "absorb" all surrounding ICs and components that it needs..
We see it a lot in computers, and in SoCs..
And what you say regarding its effect on sound, definitely makes sense..
In that case, I guess that after I finish with the current set of DACs that I ordered,
I should focus on finding the older ones.. ones with a big circuit around them
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.