Probably looking for an older device that accepts 16bit 41/48 with digital in (most likely optical).
Judging by what is said on dutchaudioclassics.nl searching for something with the TDA1541A onboard.
By researching through their device list, most are CD players, with a few exceptions being Marantz Project D-1 (too big) and Cambridge Audio dacmagic DAC3, which is actually available on ebay for £100 starting bid at the moment but unsure whether or not if 4xTDA1541 in parallel is necessary.
Alternative product recommendations welcome.
Thinking source clock in the computer is more important than receiving side.
I have a device that outputs optical via asynchronous USB which probably eliminates this problem.
What's wrong with newer dac's? I hear you say,
Well a D/A conversion chip by the same company which invented rebook, sticking to the original spec in the first place makes sense.
I actually raised this on another forum but I don't think I was understood.
I strongly feel minimal minimal design equaIs better transparency so would like to avoid any 24bit DSPs and such like, which I stressed is being wrongly marketed and should only exist for music production.
I dislike being my generation sometimes.
Philllips' DAC 960 looks stunning too though definately out o reach..
Judging by what is said on dutchaudioclassics.nl searching for something with the TDA1541A onboard.
By researching through their device list, most are CD players, with a few exceptions being Marantz Project D-1 (too big) and Cambridge Audio dacmagic DAC3, which is actually available on ebay for £100 starting bid at the moment but unsure whether or not if 4xTDA1541 in parallel is necessary.
Alternative product recommendations welcome.
Thinking source clock in the computer is more important than receiving side.
I have a device that outputs optical via asynchronous USB which probably eliminates this problem.
What's wrong with newer dac's? I hear you say,
Well a D/A conversion chip by the same company which invented rebook, sticking to the original spec in the first place makes sense.
I actually raised this on another forum but I don't think I was understood.
I strongly feel minimal minimal design equaIs better transparency so would like to avoid any 24bit DSPs and such like, which I stressed is being wrongly marketed and should only exist for music production.
I dislike being my generation sometimes.
Philllips' DAC 960 looks stunning too though definately out o reach..
TDA1541A is a much better sounding chip than newer sigma-delta based designs, but implementation is key - noise from the adjacent SAA7220 filter can be a limiting factor. Quad TDA1541A is unlikely to be for engineering reasons - could be a good source of spare chips though. I noticed a Philips CD460 going for around $140 which also has TDA1541A.
I actually found this too, looks pretty neat!
http://www.ebay.com/itm/High-end-DAC-TDA1543-DIR9001-kit-DIY-WH-1-/190680378411
EDIT, excuse my mishap but ebay wont link for some unknown reason...
http://www.ebay.com/itm/High-end-DAC-TDA1543-DIR9001-kit-DIY-WH-1-/190680378411
EDIT, excuse my mishap but ebay wont link for some unknown reason...
Last edited:
What would be the point in having four, or two?
edit; Also, The link I provided previous I noticed is 4x oversampling, ideally im after 8x.
Though would be a great first time practice kit.
Last edited:
No real point from an engineering or SQ reason if that's the only thing they're doing different. Having two or four of the chips makes the layout that much more difficult to get right. But if they needed more output current - say to drive a passive filter with low impedance - then it could be viable.
TDA1543 is a great DAC to get started with in NOS. Much easier to tinker with than 1541A. I don't recommend going beyond 2X oversampling if you're after the best sound. 2X OS flattens the droop sufficiently and there's then space for some filtering. 8X OS will just increase the noise - due to a greater proportion of the time spent moving between the sample values than with no OS.
TDA1543 is a great DAC to get started with in NOS. Much easier to tinker with than 1541A. I don't recommend going beyond 2X oversampling if you're after the best sound. 2X OS flattens the droop sufficiently and there's then space for some filtering. 8X OS will just increase the noise - due to a greater proportion of the time spent moving between the sample values than with no OS.
Thankyou for your response. Ah I see.
I did fairly extensive reading on sampling, and I came to conclusion that oversampling exists to keep above 22050 free from sonic content which could cause problems in analogue hardware such as amplifiers and that "imaging" never exists in properly converted content on CD until you introduce oversampling.
I could be wrong however.
I did fairly extensive reading on sampling, and I came to conclusion that oversampling exists to keep above 22050 free from sonic content which could cause problems in analogue hardware such as amplifiers and that "imaging" never exists in properly converted content on CD until you introduce oversampling.
I could be wrong however.
You're right - but there's more to the equation if we want to chase after the best possible sound. Originally Philips used 4X oversampling because their first chip was only 14bits - it gained them some extra resolution below 22kHz by running faster.
Yes - 'sonic' content above 20kHz most definitely does cause problems for downstream hardware. It increases IMD without a doubt - the subjective result is reduced dynamics. NOS DACs do generate images - that's why I filter my NOS DACs aggressively. However if you use active filters based on opamps to do this (as Philips did in my first CD player, CD160) they're no better (quite probably worse) for IMD than amplifiers (which are generally made from discrete transistors, or at worst, chipamps). The DAC chip also behaves much worse when run at the higher frequency - the result then is subjective loss of dynamics when oversampling's introduced. That's assuming the oversampling filter's totally benign noise-wise, which the SAA7220 most definitely is not.
Yes - 'sonic' content above 20kHz most definitely does cause problems for downstream hardware. It increases IMD without a doubt - the subjective result is reduced dynamics. NOS DACs do generate images - that's why I filter my NOS DACs aggressively. However if you use active filters based on opamps to do this (as Philips did in my first CD player, CD160) they're no better (quite probably worse) for IMD than amplifiers (which are generally made from discrete transistors, or at worst, chipamps). The DAC chip also behaves much worse when run at the higher frequency - the result then is subjective loss of dynamics when oversampling's introduced. That's assuming the oversampling filter's totally benign noise-wise, which the SAA7220 most definitely is not.
I don't know what the 'Green DAC' is. What in particular are you looking for in a DAC, apart from it having a multibit chip in?
I started out in multibit DACs with a very cheap single TDA1543 NOS, DIR9001 with passive I/V. Price about $30. Even this can be modded - star grounding would be top of the list for me.
I started out in multibit DACs with a very cheap single TDA1543 NOS, DIR9001 with passive I/V. Price about $30. Even this can be modded - star grounding would be top of the list for me.
The AnalogMetric DAC has a problem when using the SAA7220 - it doesn't use the received clock out of the CS8412. So I wouldn't recommend that. But perhaps there's a way to make it work without the SAA7220 in which case it could be fine.
Or if you want something simpler and smaller, I've had a lot of fun playing with the Muse 4 * TDA1543. There's a long Head-fi thread with mods you can try out too.
Or if you want something simpler and smaller, I've had a lot of fun playing with the Muse 4 * TDA1543. There's a long Head-fi thread with mods you can try out too.
Will check that out,
Again, thanks for your time.
Edit: Found this also Another DIY kit if anyone else is interested.
Again, thanks for your time.
Edit: Found this also Another DIY kit if anyone else is interested.
Last edited:
The blurb on that page says you can build the DAC using the AnalogMetric PCB but not their complete design. Missing out the SAA7220 seems like a good idea in that case, also not using the opamps for I/V. But I would recommend some kind of passive filtering in place of the opamps. I have some passive filter designs on my blog if you're interested to try.
I can't stop thinking about DACs. Its frustrating.
Am I right in thinking the main difference here with TDA based designs and modern stuff is PCM and PWM?
Before I continue are there drawbacks I should know about with PCM?
I actually really like the look of this design (see below) because it already comes with asynchronous USB unlike the Anologmetrics design
and it costs less too.
Can anyone comment on this layout other than exluding SAA/Opamps as aforementioned?
Thanks
Am I right in thinking the main difference here with TDA based designs and modern stuff is PCM and PWM?
Before I continue are there drawbacks I should know about with PCM?
I actually really like the look of this design (see below) because it already comes with asynchronous USB unlike the Anologmetrics design
and it costs less too.
Can anyone comment on this layout other than exluding SAA/Opamps as aforementioned?
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Thanks
Actually no - PCM just stands for 'pulse code modulation' - referring to taking successive samples at a constant rate and turning them into numbers. PWM is a form of D/A conversion but not used in DAC chips - the modern ones tend to use PDM (pulse density modulation). Digital and switching analog poweramps use PWM to reduce the number of transitions.
Layout is a matter of detail about where the tracks on the PCB go - can't be seen from those pics. There are threads on here about how to arrange the best layout with TDA1541A - I recall Thorsten's an expert at that.
Layout is a matter of detail about where the tracks on the PCB go - can't be seen from those pics. There are threads on here about how to arrange the best layout with TDA1541A - I recall Thorsten's an expert at that.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.