If I were made of it I would spend more bucks and get another one
We really don't know how good one is compared to the other. Theoretically, 1121 should be at least as good. Main advantages that I know of: 1. better power circuitry - lower noise and impedance to the 4v op amps if you feed it with a good shunt supply directly. The 5v ldo on 1021 is maybe 20mR, and the bridge rectifier more (though we don't know how much current fluctuation there is at the rectifier). 2. good for multichannel syncing, but maybe the improvement is probably more theoretical than practical in dual-mono. 3. reclocking. 4. no op-amp buffer noise.
BUT: 1. we don't know how much ripple we can hear. plus 1121 is harder to put vref caps on, and that's probably just as important ripple wise. 2. shift registers and flip-flops are not perfect switches. propagation delays have tolerances in the ns. We can't fix that. 3. can we really hear the op-amp noise?
Benefits of 1021: isolated I2S onboard (really non-trivial to implement separately with 1121 with off-the-shelf components, but a must if you want x8 sampling rates), op-amp buffers to drive headphones probably as good as any headamp for high impedance cans theoretically, harder to damage, wider voltage input, cheaper, easier to stack.
Until we get ABX tests between these boards and different advanced power mods on dam1021, we really don't know. But it's fine since both are quite capable. If you want perfection within current technical constraints, you probably have to do quite a bit of engineering development yourself. 1941 would be closer to perfection I guess. The wiring from the clocks to the ladders is more balanced, but still you need to test vref caps and then you'll start thinking about correcting resistors. And idk if I want to power USB interface with USB 5V, don't get a choice with dam1941. All the while shift registers probably causing ns level delays between some bits, less only if we're lucky.
Don't want to get too involved but maybe this can help clarify things.
Last edited:
Hi Søren,
I have done a DIY piece of LT3045 LDO with 12v 2a and 5v 2a for the DAC 1541.
It was measuring at 12v and 5v without any load. When I connected them to the 1541 board it turns out to be 10.8v.
Would you think it was too low for the board? Thanks.
I have done a DIY piece of LT3045 LDO with 12v 2a and 5v 2a for the DAC 1541.
It was measuring at 12v and 5v without any load. When I connected them to the 1541 board it turns out to be 10.8v.
Would you think it was too low for the board? Thanks.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Audible benefits of replacing 1541 SMPS with DIY LT3025 LDO
Please report the SQ differences you’re hearing after replacing the 1541 SMPS with DIY LT3045.
Have you also replaced the output low pass ceramic filter caps with equivalent value polystyrenes?
Please report the SQ differences you’re hearing after replacing the 1541 SMPS with DIY LT3045.
Have you also replaced the output low pass ceramic filter caps with equivalent value polystyrenes?
Thanks androa76, would try that out.
Definitely, let's see for the differences would reached to...
lwr, could you please point me to the location of the filter caps? Thanks heaps!
I found the music became too soft for 10.8v. I was also aware of the voltage drop which shouldn't be happening.
Hi Soren,
I just PM you. Thanks.
Can’t say I agree with the first part of the statement. To me, it’s no less important for the benefit of the community to have a better understanding of what it means when we say something sounds great and leave it at that, than to apparently agree that it does sound great, even though in this case I believe the statement is true.
But I also think that it would be of great benefit to the community if someone can contribute further ABX data on the mods we’ve been discussing...
Last edited:
Haha! Nice one. I added the second part just to affirm part of livingsound’s view on what this thread ought to be. But it doesn’t say what anyone should be contributing. We have other identities than members of diyAudio
And I was also thinking about my last post. But I thought I said something further that I really did not - without ABX data, our expectation of gains from mods are at best highly uncertain. That to me seems good reason to think much less about doing them. Hence my point above: this doesn’t make the knowledge of the value of each mod any less useful. I refrained from urging anyone to go for it since it really depends on individual circumstances of which I know nothing about, but perhaps I was still misleading
And I was also thinking about my last post. But I thought I said something further that I really did not - without ABX data, our expectation of gains from mods are at best highly uncertain. That to me seems good reason to think much less about doing them. Hence my point above: this doesn’t make the knowledge of the value of each mod any less useful. I refrained from urging anyone to go for it since it really depends on individual circumstances of which I know nothing about, but perhaps I was still misleading
Last edited:
Hi Søren,
I have sent you a private message in diyaudio, support@soekris.eu and info@soekris.dk a week ago. Not sure if this is the way to contact you...
Messages for community help on diy products should be posted on diyaudio, and diyaudio only.
Individual technical support should be emailed to info@soekris.dk and only to that. As it says on the website, if answers take time, email again.
Sending/posting everywhere will just making if hard and confusing for me and delays things, even when it's tempting to do so to get attention....
Individual technical support should be emailed to info@soekris.dk and only to that. As it says on the website, if answers take time, email again.
Sending/posting everywhere will just making if hard and confusing for me and delays things, even when it's tempting to do so to get attention....