Go Back   Home > Forums > >
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Blogs Gallery Wiki Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

A NOS 192/24 DAC with the PCM1794 (and WaveIO USB input)
A NOS 192/24 DAC with the PCM1794 (and WaveIO USB input)
Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 1st January 2015, 10:41 AM   #3691
Supersurfer is offline Supersurfer  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Hi,

Lets not start a fight or do a show-off of audio gear

It is apparant that most of the discussed changes in this thread lead to better sound.
For me it is more interesting to discover the beste price/improvement ratio for all these modifications.

I would not go for a high dac stack like Chanh has, that has to do with two reasons: I like my dac to be modestly compact, and my amps do not need all the extra current.
The latter matters for most, as we all use different amps some will benefit by a larger stack and some won't ( and of course; using cables with low capacity helps here)

In order of sound improvement and costs I would choose:
-direct balanced out (without capacitor)
- tantalum IV resistors
- silmic and oscon capacitors on the dac boards
-shunt regulators on the dac boards analog side
- unregulated choke power supply with a large transformer
-I2S connected raspberry pi or bbb
-acko S03 reclocker board ( or to be released botic cape from TP)
- shunt regulators on digital supplies

Pin 20 modification to be put in the above order somewhere, but I have not made this so can't judge the effect.

The explanation from rhlauranna is also not complete; during a meet last year with him and James we found that the 1 dac board from james with the shunts sounded better than the standard 4 dac board.

A happy new year to all!

Kind regards,
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 11:29 AM   #3692
dwjames is offline dwjames  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
dwjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersurfer View Post
Hi,

Lets not start a fight or do a show-off of audio gear
Exactly. Also, we haven't had a direct side by side comparison of a well modified single deck dddac using a jfet buffer vs a well modified multi deck stack yet. But soon we will...
Happy new year all
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 02:56 PM   #3693
dusty128 is offline dusty128  Austria
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Vienna
Default Efficient measurment setup?

Hi,
After finishing the first stage of my DDDAC (see below) and which sounds excellent, I have some thoughts to share.

Click the image to open in full size.

Following recent discussions along with own comparisons it seems to me that the DDDAC project lacks some kind of "common denominator" which everyone can rely and relate to in order to have a base from which people can advance their builds. As this is impossible with audible comparisons alone, as they are first of all very subjective and second can't be compared as we can't hear the builds of each other, I wonder if it would not be the next step in the community to agree on a cost-effective and efficient measurement setup. This way, everyone could test his build against this setup and cross-check that the basic build performs the very same as e.g. the initial build of Doede.

I wonder if it would be possible to carefully choose measurement instruments, e.g. an efficient external USB soundcard along with some PC-based software which costs ~ $150 and is thus affordable for everyone. Paired with selected audio signals (e.g. FLAC of Sinus waves in various resolutions) and test patterns it should be possible to compare builds on a measurement base.

One reason for this are for instance my findings and "improvements" by reclocking the I2S signal of the RPi. I personally could not hear any audible differences between the DIYINKH isolator and the S03 reclocker, although I was personally sure that reclocking means lower jitter and thus better sound, moreover there were many who wrote that the audible improvements were significant. After doing some DSO measurements, I found out that the reclocker actually added ~ 8ns jitter instead of reducing it. So - what does this mean? Do others simply like a more jittered signal? Or was the setup before they implemented the reclocker somehow flawed and e.g. the better isolator on the board improves the sound? Or are there simply no audible differences and people "like what they want to hear"?

Or, take another example: Let's assume one deck in my 4-deck setup has some flaw due to some soldering error. It may well be that I like this better although the signal is in reality quite distorted, however, no one will be able to reproduce this, thus everything stays very subjective.

So, what is your opinion on this? Would a carefully selected measurement setup and test patterns form a common denominator? Do you think this could improve the project? If yes, which hardware and test patterns would you recommend?

Best Regards,
Hermann
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 04:32 PM   #3694
dwjames is offline dwjames  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
dwjames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Sounds like a great idea Hermann. I don't have any suggestions for measuring solutions, but I would be happy to join in the group investigations if someone can identify a good way to do it
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 04:54 PM   #3695
rhlauranna is offline rhlauranna  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersurfer View Post
Hi,
The explanation from rhlauranna is also not complete; during a meet last year with him and James we found that the 1 dac board from james with the shunts sounded better than the standard 4 dac board.
Kind regards,
happy new year first of all ! to all !

yes, you are right, supersurfer, that was indeed spectacular to find out that the 1 dac board from James with shunts sounded better than the standard 4 dac board... simply incredible...

but, one has to keep in mind that the multiplying of the chips with the former 16 bit DDDAC1543 up to 240 chips in parallel and now the multiplying of the decks with the DDDAC1794 starting from 1 deck, to 4 decks and then Doede's own 8 deck - and here is the point - without any DIY tweakings at all - brought a really immense effect in amelioration in sound that way that for us here there is no way back...

I severely wish having already had all the necessary listening experiences with the (best) ameliorations implemented within a multiplied amount of boards... Doede has already described on his site the positive effects in progressively reducing jitter...

and from detailed listening tests with 1, 2, 4 and eight deck DDDAC1794 during December 2013 till march 2014 with all kinds of different power supplies I cannot emphazise enough the gain in amelioration in sound...

it is clear, this all has to be checked out further, if only Doede had more time...
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 05:26 PM   #3696
SimonJ is offline SimonJ  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Southampton
For those of you using a single DAC module what I\V resistor value are you using as 133 ohm seems rare for the higher quality ranges?
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 06:40 PM   #3697
ed linssen is offline ed linssen  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: the Hague
Default resistor

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimonJ View Post
For those of you using a single DAC module what I\V resistor value are you using as 133 ohm seems rare for the higher quality ranges?
Hi Simon,
You could parallel two 271ohm resitors. 271 or 267 are standards in the E96 range.
Basicly it should be 134ohm. So 135,5 or 133,5 I asume is fine...

Last edited by ed linssen; 1st January 2015 at 06:50 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 06:53 PM   #3698
SimonJ is offline SimonJ  United Kingdom
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Southampton
Yes I was thinking that as an option and see 270 is common but interested what others have actually used as well. Makes sense 270 in parallel would be fine.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 07:18 PM   #3699
boldname is offline boldname
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhlauranna View Post
happy new year first of all ! to all !

yes, you are right, supersurfer, that was indeed spectacular to find out that the 1 dac board from James with shunts sounded better than the standard 4 dac board... simply incredible...

but, one has to keep in mind that the multiplying of the chips with the former 16 bit DDDAC1543 up to 240 chips in parallel and now the multiplying of the decks with the DDDAC1794 starting from 1 deck, to 4 decks and then Doede's own 8 deck - and here is the point - without any DIY tweakings at all - brought a really immense effect in amelioration in sound that way that for us here there is no way back...

I severely wish having already had all the necessary listening experiences with the (best) ameliorations implemented within a multiplied amount of boards... Doede has already described on his site the positive effects in progressively reducing jitter...

and from detailed listening tests with 1, 2, 4 and eight deck DDDAC1794 during December 2013 till march 2014 with all kinds of different power supplies I cannot emphazise enough the gain in amelioration in sound...

it is clear, this all has to be checked out further, if only Doede had more time...
You response helps to clarify the increasing DACs issue and Hermanns comments are spot on.

Now has anybody tried the SRPP or any other valve buffer amp directly connnected from the I/V to the first buffer valve grid , with or without decoupling cap and compared the sound, with the i/v transformer Cemag or other transformer.

This should be compared if possible even if the power amp is solid state.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st January 2015, 09:00 PM   #3700
Chanh is offline Chanh  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Perth Western Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by boldname View Post
Good NewYear to you.Why the big difference in SQ with 8 over 4 decks......
In term of technical, I certainly am not qualified and will not pretend to be but rather leaving it to the more competent audiophiles or perhaps Doede is to address that espect.

In term of judging by ears, if that is any credential, I can share with you my practical experience with one board, 4-boards, 8-boards, and now 11-boards over the course of 6-Months, 2-3 hours Listenning session per day. Otherwise, it would have been such a foolish for I with 11-boards all in, include having the Tent Lab Shunts. Fyi, I use Accuphase ADL interconnects @ AUD$500 a pair, Speakers Cable is Cable Reasearch Lab @AUD$3000 a pair, ......., and certainly not the least a delicate 20A audio grade powerline direct from main switchboard to my AUD$7000 power conditioner PS Audio Perfectwave Powerplant P10. The infor give to provide you the setup means and hence my observations with every increment increases in SQ with additional DAC boards. In term of cost vs performance, probably not wise but as audiophile I seek and appreciate any noticable improvement despite a small incremental improvement.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


A NOS 192/24 DAC with the PCM1794 (and WaveIO USB input)Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FS: Audio Widget (modified) Async USB DAC 24/192 ESS 9023 headphone friendly ASIO KS 2A3SET Swap Meet 5 15th August 2012 05:52 AM
Show my PCM1794 DAC TSOLINK + COAX + USB input, Line and headphone AMP output AWaudio Vendor's Bazaar 3 2nd January 2012 01:44 PM
GodDAC - 192/24 USB DAC BizonGod Digital Source 36 30th June 2011 04:16 PM
24 bit/192 kHz via USB? gentlevoice Everything Else 3 22nd December 2008 07:24 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:27 AM.


Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Resources saved on this page: MySQL 15.00%
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2019 diyAudio
Wiki