OK, yes, it's more expensive.
But from what I see the parts quality is variable. I'm not sure they sell it as a kit too, so you can improve on the passive parts.
I found another one, more reduced in size, but more expensive too:
LT3045-A Ultralow-noise (<0.8mVrms) LDO linear regulator 0V-15V - 1A Fixed out | eBay
And this one too:
Low Noise LT3042 Linear Regulator Power Supply Board 3.3V 5V 12V DC Converter 699939616101 | eBay
Neither of them is complete, as they need input diodes and capacitor. But the first one can even be used to replace a three pin regulator on an existing supply.
LT3045-78xx Ultralow-noise (0.8mVrms) linear regulator 0V-15V, 0.5A, 78xx Layout | eBay
But from what I see the parts quality is variable. I'm not sure they sell it as a kit too, so you can improve on the passive parts.
I found another one, more reduced in size, but more expensive too:
LT3045-A Ultralow-noise (<0.8mVrms) LDO linear regulator 0V-15V - 1A Fixed out | eBay
And this one too:
Low Noise LT3042 Linear Regulator Power Supply Board 3.3V 5V 12V DC Converter 699939616101 | eBay
Neither of them is complete, as they need input diodes and capacitor. But the first one can even be used to replace a three pin regulator on an existing supply.
LT3045-78xx Ultralow-noise (0.8mVrms) linear regulator 0V-15V, 0.5A, 78xx Layout | eBay
Some new boards have come up:
LT3045 Ultra Low Noise Regulator Module 3.3V/5V Current 500MA | eBay
Anyone tried/measured yet?
LT3045 Ultra Low Noise Regulator Module 3.3V/5V Current 500MA | eBay
Anyone tried/measured yet?
Hi carlmart, I am a newbie at power supplied, have just bought the 2nd board you showed, as it was easy to adjust the output voltage, I need 9 VDC. What do you mean by "as they need input diodes and capacitor" & how to implement it?
You bought the small red pcb LT3042 board?
Doesn't it come with some schematic on how to wire it?
You certainly need to feed it with a rectified DC voltage, which should be around 2-3 volts higher than the output. It can't be more than that because the difference voltage between input and output will be dissipated as heat, and there's no space to add a heatsink on that board.
So to rectify the transformer's AC voltage you will need diodes (2 or 4) and a capacitor to filter that, then you will feed that to your board.
This power supply comes complete:
Low Noise LT3042 Linear Regulator Power Supply Board DC Converter Overvoltage | eBay
The large capacitor may not be like that on the photos though.
My DAC picks up power off the raspberry pi header. Could one of these be used inbetween or doesn't the header provide enough power?
The DAC I'm using:
Audiophonics DAC Sabre Es9023 I2s Vers Analogique 24bit/192khz | eBay
The DAC I'm using:
Audiophonics DAC Sabre Es9023 I2s Vers Analogique 24bit/192khz | eBay
I'm afraid it might not be so easy, and you should read the LT3042 datasheet.
Pay attention to this manufacturer's text:
"Stability and Input Capacitance
The LT3042 is stable with a minimum 4.7μF IN pin capacitor. LTC recommends using low ESR ceramic capacitors. In cases where long wires connect the power supply to the LT3042’s input and ground terminals, the use of low value input capacitors combined with a large load current can result in instability. The resonant LC tank circuit formed by the wire inductance and the input capacitor is the cause and not because of LT3042’s instability.
The self-inductance, or isolated inductance, of a wire is directly proportional to its length. The wire diameter, however, has less influence on its self-inductance. For example, the self-inductance of a 2-AWG isolated wire
with a diameter of 0.26" is about half the inductance of a 30-AWG wire with a diameter of 0.01". One foot of 30-AWG wire has 465nH of self-inductance.
Several methods exist to reduce a wire’s self-inductance. One method divides the current flowing towards the LT3042 between two parallel conductors. In this case, placing the wires further apart reduces the inductance; up to a 50% reduction when placed only a few inches apart. Splitting the wires connect two equal inductors in parallel. However, when placed in close proximity to each other, their mutual inductance adds to the overall self inductance of the wires — therefore a 50% reduction is not possible in such cases. The second and more effective technique to reduce the overall inductance is to place the forward and return current conductors (the input and ground wires) in close proximity. Two 30-AWG wires separated by 0.02" reduce the overall inductance to about one-fifth of a single wire.
If a battery mounted in close proximity powers the LT3042, a 4.7μF input capacitor suffices for stability. However, if a distantly located supply powers the LT3042, use a larger value input capacitor. Use a rough guideline of 1μF (in addition to the 4.7μF minimum) per 8" of wire length."
If I am right, you would have to add capacitance at the input. Let's say your wall wart has a 40" long cable, then your would have to use at least 10uF close to the input. Using 22uF would probably cover that.
Look what cap value the board has at the input.
The board seems designed to use pins to plug it into an existing regulator, perhaps using a 7805. Do not solder the wall wart directly without adding the input capacitor, or changing the one you have one on the board.
The Ldovr boards seem very good. They are a bit expensive too.
LT3045-78xx Ultralow-noise (0.8mVrms) linear regulator 0V-15V, 0.5A, 78xx Layout | eBay
They are a drop-in replacement for 78XX regulators, certainly with great improvement. Though it can get expensive if you have several regulators to upgrade.
Last edited:
How are you using this DAC? The way they show it on Audiophonics site?
AUDIOPHONICS DAC Sabre ES9023 V2.2 I2S to Analogue 24bit / 192kHz - Audiophonics
The four I2S wires should be much shorter and with a flat cable, or jitter will increase.
Yes, you could use any LT3042 to power the DAC, and another to power the Raspberry.
Have you tried other DACs on your setup? The ES9023 does not seem to sound too good.
Sabre ES9023: Why does it sound so bad? : DACs - Volumio
I do not like the fact that the output opamps are inside the DAC chip.
I would not write off the OP's choice of ES9023 and in general other DACs based on ES9023. The implementation is the important bit...
The OP's DAC is quite keenly priced and there are several hints of mods in this older thread MamboBerry LS - my new PI-HAT
Collybia's Mamboberry LS ES9023 DAC had quite a fan follow-up; the LS+ was even better and the current replacement HD+ is supposed to be even better... All ES9023 DACs...
I have no association with Collybia, by the way.
LDO my eye...
I got one of the Chinese boards as per that last link provided in the first post; apparently not as ldo as I would have thought.
No (3.3v) output with a 6v input, other threads have been explained how much more is required for these, or at least with the circuit as provided.
Unfortunately for me, I had already moved ahead with another solution and had even raided some of the passive parts from my board.
I have thought about fishing it out of the big coffee can and resurrecting it, but haven’t had a need.
I got one of the Chinese boards as per that last link provided in the first post; apparently not as ldo as I would have thought.
No (3.3v) output with a 6v input, other threads have been explained how much more is required for these, or at least with the circuit as provided.
Unfortunately for me, I had already moved ahead with another solution and had even raided some of the passive parts from my board.
I have thought about fishing it out of the big coffee can and resurrecting it, but haven’t had a need.
If you moved on to other projects, then maybe this can't be checked. But the resistor value from pin 7 to ground should be 33K2 1% for 3.3v.
If what Jean Paul says it's true, the resistor for Vin to pin 1 should be 10R 1%, according to the datasheet, not 4.7R.
Some people have found they don't like the sound of LT304x regulators and have stopped using them for dacs, particularly for critical reference voltages. Some people do try increasing Cset which helps reduce low frequency noise, but it increases start up time to minutes unless the PG terminal is used to program fast charging of Cset at power on. Modifying small boards to increase Cset and setup fast start up may involve difficult micro-soldering. For those who have the skills it might be doable, maybe not for most people.
Last edited:
I actually installed the 33k ohm to adjust it from 5v first thing, so I know that was there anyways.
So I just spent some time looking in the popular places for dead boards, and I couldn’t seem to find it. Kind of embarrassing actually. I even checked the bin with surpluses of electrolytic capacitors, and didn’t see any large Nover caps in there, as I would have stripped those if I’d happened to toss the board.
Thanks for the tips, will hopefully find the board and can look back at this and verify the r values.
I was going to use it for powering an SD card player that feeds 12s to a dac, was the dual output version. It works fine with the onboard supply, so I haven’t felt any real need to upgrade, other than the 3042 having great specs. , and my player having typical discount kit components.
So I just spent some time looking in the popular places for dead boards, and I couldn’t seem to find it. Kind of embarrassing actually. I even checked the bin with surpluses of electrolytic capacitors, and didn’t see any large Nover caps in there, as I would have stripped those if I’d happened to toss the board.
Thanks for the tips, will hopefully find the board and can look back at this and verify the r values.
I was going to use it for powering an SD card player that feeds 12s to a dac, was the dual output version. It works fine with the onboard supply, so I haven’t felt any real need to upgrade, other than the 3042 having great specs. , and my player having typical discount kit components.
Ha ha we are living in crazy times. It becomes even worse, a negative version has been introduced. Where are the days of those good sounding LM317 and LM337?
As @Markw4 pointed out the LF noise of the LT3045 isn't stellar without a large Cset which in turn leads to some circuit changes for fast startup.
IME, a regulator like this needs to be applied directly at the point of load, that is, on the target PCB, with only one single output capacitor (or a cap bank with equal valued caps spread around the point of load, low inductance style routing of course).
Using it off-board will hardly exploit its performance but the real problem is load current change induced output ringing. You have a high Q low ESR cap at the reg and another at the board/load and a length of wire in between, prefect tank circuit, wrecked load transient response.
IME, a regulator like this needs to be applied directly at the point of load, that is, on the target PCB, with only one single output capacitor (or a cap bank with equal valued caps spread around the point of load, low inductance style routing of course).
Using it off-board will hardly exploit its performance but the real problem is load current change induced output ringing. You have a high Q low ESR cap at the reg and another at the board/load and a length of wire in between, prefect tank circuit, wrecked load transient response.
OK, that's interesting information. What regulators work better on DACs? LT1963s?
And I agree that working on these boards, with tiny parts may damage components and pcb tracks. Not recommended to test different values until you get the right combination.
As KSTR points out, the distance between regulator output and DAC should be as short as possible, probably less than 20mm, not to ruin transient response.
That doesn't seem to be completely settled. Depends in part on how much current is needed. Also depends on if it is for a critical reference voltage, e.g. AVCC in Sabre DACs, or if for a multi-use general purpose power rail.
Some of the people who are willing to go to great lengths to get sound they like are turning to arrays of super caps.
Also, there was an interesting article in Linear Audio at some point comparing sound quality associated with some of the historically popular regulator typologies. Seems to me the old Jung super regulator fared pretty well in that review, again IIRC.
EDIT: In addition, in general a lot depends on the particular implementation. Having power planes on a PCB is probably helpful in many cases, aside from simply relying on a regulator part number.
Last edited:
How much current does a DAC need, the chip I mean?
I guess the higher current demands are on the output stage, which is usually powered separately by +/- 12v or 15v regs.
Another guess is that if a regulator is good for ref voltage, it should be good for powering too, isn't it?
I don't know (and would like to) of any recent regulators comparison made by LA. Is there one?
The one I know, very useful, is the one made by Walt Jung in TAA/Audio Electronics when he introduced his first super regulator.
Another thing which seems to be directly related to audio quality is the regulator's output impedance, which no regulators datasheet show. Only the 3X7 and 1083 did.
Only noise and CMRR, which I'm not sure is good enough.
Output caps are critical on most regulators, and here is where subjective results are important. That you will not find on datasheets.
New researches with last 4 years released regulators should be in order, and the Jung regulator should be the reference.
There was someone, I don't remember who, that was using Jung regulators on an ES9038 DAC. But I couldn't get an answer on the results.
I guess the higher current demands are on the output stage, which is usually powered separately by +/- 12v or 15v regs.
Another guess is that if a regulator is good for ref voltage, it should be good for powering too, isn't it?
I don't know (and would like to) of any recent regulators comparison made by LA. Is there one?
The one I know, very useful, is the one made by Walt Jung in TAA/Audio Electronics when he introduced his first super regulator.
Another thing which seems to be directly related to audio quality is the regulator's output impedance, which no regulators datasheet show. Only the 3X7 and 1083 did.
Only noise and CMRR, which I'm not sure is good enough.
Output caps are critical on most regulators, and here is where subjective results are important. That you will not find on datasheets.
New researches with last 4 years released regulators should be in order, and the Jung regulator should be the reference.
There was someone, I don't remember who, that was using Jung regulators on an ES9038 DAC. But I couldn't get an answer on the results.