It's your stuff and you can do what you meant with it. I was here to suggest you the correct way to achieve what you want and that was it.
I have one suggestion though. Instead of taking one guy as oracle you might want to think a bit on your own, too. It's not really that hard if you skip that usual talk about "listening not measuring". The fact is that if DAC measures bad it usually sounds bad... Believe me, I've been there and I've listened to a lot of things. However, if you believe that it sounds good to you then lets leave it that way. It's not like you need to satisfy anyone else with the sound quality, but yourself.
Also, "measuring" DACs using oscilloscope is just... bad. You need to perform actual FFT analysis since your eye and the oscilloscope cannot show you the details you are looking for.
Hi Guys
Can someone shed some light as why does this copper foil thingy works pls.
I recalled reading this way back. Had some time & thought I give it a try, damn it really does work, everything familiar pc of music that played came out more better defined especially low level details. Why so, is it because of rf or ???.
Im aware that some Japanese hi end cdp sticks copper foil all over caps & ic chips etc.
Thks
Can someone shed some light as why does this copper foil thingy works pls.
I recalled reading this way back. Had some time & thought I give it a try, damn it really does work, everything familiar pc of music that played came out more better defined especially low level details. Why so, is it because of rf or ???.
Im aware that some Japanese hi end cdp sticks copper foil all over caps & ic chips etc.
Thks
Attachments
It was discussed also here:
Copper tape atop IC's?
and here:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/79452-building-ultimate-nos-dac-using-tda1541a-360.html#post2469333
And here:
Pictures of copper heatsink
Copper tape atop IC's?
and here:
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/79452-building-ultimate-nos-dac-using-tda1541a-360.html#post2469333
And here:
Pictures of copper heatsink
Last edited:
Hi 
I listened more tda1541a in sim format. I can say that is huge diference in outcome vs i2s format... I like it much much more. The thing is so fast and clear, with excellent natural tone of voices and instruments. Blah Blah... And not at all, or significantly less digital harshness... I will try to compare with 4 x tda1540 same input format, but 14bits.
.
I will try same SIM format to feed the diskrete dac and report. cheers.
I listened more tda1541a in sim format. I can say that is huge diference in outcome vs i2s format... I like it much much more. The thing is so fast and clear, with excellent natural tone of voices and instruments. Blah Blah... And not at all, or significantly less digital harshness... I will try to compare with 4 x tda1540 same input format, but 14bits..
I will try same SIM format to feed the diskrete dac and report. cheers.
Hi
.
I will try same SIM format to feed the diskrete dac and report. cheers.
I know jealousy is a sin, but man, you are making us jealous with those comments.
We, TDA1541 virgins, must wait until our digital guru comes with a complete working DAC.
Meanwhile, I am perfecting my TDA1543 DACs, the "scrambler-interpolator" and the "dual-mono" DACs, that may be less detailed and noisy but that surely have dinamics and impact to spare...
I confirmed what guru anticipated, that sometimes the digital chain of the dual-mono DAC refuses to ride more than a certain number of DAC chips- In my case I have only a couple of successful 8 chip towered DACs. The rest seem comfortable with only 4 chips tower DACs, so I am building a two module DAC each with 4 chip towers, in parallel.
If that goes OK, I think I will expand the idea, but, will I get more bit depth???Cheers,
M.
Allow me to pile on! the jump resulting from sim format is similar to the additional jump then attained by using John's 100uF DEM cap recommendation..I know jealousy is a sin, but man, you are making us jealous with those comments.
I suspect you have little to worry about as you build some amazing DACs.
Correct.
I've redesigned my dual balanced dac using IanCanada's I2S interface, to allow for using Nichicon ultra low leakage electrolytics- the UKL series.
Not yet had the pcbs made so can't comment on the sound just yet.
But I can, as I have made just that and it is the best so far. Preceding that was: TDA 1541 directly I2S in, TDA 1541A with Ians FIFO and Dual clock, TDA 1543 with FIFO and Dual clock, TDA 1541 simultaneous mode and now balanced TDA1541a with 50 Hz DEM and simultaneous mode stopped clock. It is crystal clear and now have the dynamics as (well maybe almost) TDA1543. The little bit synthetic sound of the TDA1541A (IMHO) is gone, just very luxurious sounding top end compared to TDA1543 and dead quiet.
Now I need to try Ecdesigns I2S to simultaneous in the same balanced mode. I guess an inverter on the L and R data stream would be the trick, to use Ecdesigns circuit in balanced mode , right?
That's good news. I've just ordered my pcbs from Pcbway for $4.60 each (exc shipping, customs etc so will actually cost me $10 each.)
If you just invert the data, you will get a 1LSB error although it should be inaudible. Hence IanCanada's claim that his design produces bit perfect conversion - ie no LSB errors.
Yes. That's what my pcb does. +ve to pin 16 I think.
Have you fitted the 100uf dem caps? +ve to gnd.
The 100uf caps are mentioned in that post - called decoupling capacitors and you need them if you are running the dem clock at a low frequency using the 1uf capacitor.
See the schematic - they are shown on it.
They will cause a delay (several minutes potentially) when you power up the dac as they need time to charge up. I am going to be using Nichicon low leakage UKL series in the hope that this delay is minimal.
Last edited:
Something was nagging me in my back-head, that this was not as simple as just inverting the data stream ;-(. Thanks batteryman. Do you have any links to discussion of this topic?
Forgot to mention, that the TDA1543 with FIFO and Dual clock was all battery powered...
I actually used this method for a year or so with my first attempt at a balanced 1541 dac.
(it was an Ebay dac with the 1541s in parallel, so I used a spare inverter in the data to one chip but still using I2S mode, so one 1541 received L & R true data & the other, L & R inverted data. I was pleased when IanC released his design so I could implement it correctly.)
I couldn't hear any side effects as such, but had nothing to compare with, so I'd just give it a go and see what you think.
IF it's for the decoupling usage
Maybe shunt to ground from PIN15 VDD- (-15V) ?
So
There's a DEM oscillator about 50Hz inherent from 1541?
It's confusing as I refer to this
https://bgaudioclub.org/gallery/albums/userpics/11619/HtP_Dem_Description.pdf
It seems need external oscillator to do the DEM.......
Last edited: