PDA

View Full Version : Sabre32 Reference 32-bit 8ch DAC ES9018



Osku
04-02-2009, 00:16
Does anyone have information about coming products based on the "SABRE32 Reference 32-bit 8-Channel Audio DAC ES9018" or the "ES9012" (see the specs PDF):
http://www.esstech.com/index.php?p=products_DAC

Announcement (with pricing):
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS92154+05-Jan-2009+BW20090105

I have found that Russ White (twistedpearaudio) has some DIY board coming soon, but that is all I have found so far. Some stand alone BluRay/SACD/(DVD/CD) player with ES9018 might be lovely though. So please share if you find products based on these DAC chips!

leo
04-02-2009, 10:14
I doubt any commercial products use the 32bit ES9018 Sabre yet, I may try the new Buffalo once released, tbh I'm more than happy with the Paul Hynes regulated Buffalo I currently use

The Mcintosh MCD500 uses the ES9008 http://www.mcintoshlabs.com/products/1219.asp

purite audio
04-02-2009, 10:22
Leo Hi I would very much like to hear your DAC at some point, was the Buffalo an earlier model? Keith.

leo
04-02-2009, 10:33
Hi Keith,

Buffalo is the name of the diy pcb module containing the Sabre chip.
The new one will be called Buffalo too as far as I know, it'll just contain the ES9018 instead of the ES9008, there may be a few upgrades to the onboard regulation for the latest, something I don't need because mines already using upgraded Paul Hynes regulation .

THD, SNR etc is slightly better with the new chip, its also 32bit instead of 24bit, how it compares sonically against the ES9008 is hard to say.

If I do try it once available I'll add details on here

purite audio
04-02-2009, 10:42
Leo Hi, I am always interested to hear your thoughts, whereabouts are you? Keith.

Tony Moore
04-02-2009, 13:37
Hi Leo,

I'd also love to hear your Sabre DAC sometime! At the moment I'm happy with my TDA1541A DAC but who knows if higher res music becomes readily available then there could be a new DIY project on the horizon for me! Someday...

Cheers,
Tony

Osku
04-02-2009, 16:12
Hi Keith,

Buffalo is the name of the diy pcb module containing the Sabre chip.
The new one will be called Buffalo too as far as I know, it'll just contain the ES9018 instead of the ES9008, there may be a few upgrades to the onboard regulation for the latest, something I don't need because mines already using upgraded Paul Hynes regulation .

THD, SNR etc is slightly better with the new chip, its also 32bit instead of 24bit, how it compares sonically against the ES9008 is hard to say.

If I do try it once available I'll add details on here

I am getting more and more interested in the Buffalo (that would then be the new one). How much other costs were involved with your DIY project? Case? The upgraded regulation you mentioned, what did it include? Trying to get some idea will it cost 100, 200 or 500 USD more than the ~350 USD kit before I am happy (and the new kit will cost probably more too).

So if I was going to go that route, what should I get? (And what not, are some of the kit components to be changed anyway?). It seems I would need at least a few separate inputs (toslink), IVY 2, the bipolar PSU...

EDIT: Thanks Leo for fixing the topic, it bothered me more than a little since I was unable to fix the typo myself;-)

leo
04-02-2009, 18:41
Leo Hi, I am always interested to hear your thoughts, whereabouts are you? Keith.

Mansfield Notts

My main thing is now finding a case for it, having it bolted to a chopping board is fine for testing, modding etc but not exactly ideal for everyday use:lol:

leo
04-02-2009, 18:47
Hi Leo,

I'd also love to hear your Sabre DAC sometime! At the moment I'm happy with my TDA1541A DAC but who knows if higher res music becomes readily available then there could be a new DIY project on the horizon for me! Someday...

Cheers,
Tony


If your happy Tony as I was with my own TDA1541S2 dac then my advice is don't listen to this one yet;)

Before posting my opinion on here about how it compares I'd rather try something like Paul Hynes regs in the TDA dac too tbh, you would not believe how much better the Sabre sounds now compared to the standard kit:eyebrows:

leo
04-02-2009, 18:53
I am getting more and more interested in the Buffalo (that would then be the new one). How much other costs were involved with your DIY project? Case? The upgraded regulation you mentioned, what did it include? Trying to get some idea will it cost 100, 200 or 500 USD more than the ~350 USD kit before I am happy (and the new kit will cost probably more too).

So if I was going to go that route, what should I get? (And what not, are some of the kit components to be changed anyway?). It seems I would need at least a few separate inputs (toslink), IVY 2, the bipolar PSU...

EDIT: Thanks Leo for fixing the topic, it bothered me more than a little since I was unable to fix the typo myself;-)


I'm still doing some finetuning which I'll update later, I presume you've seen this http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1152
The info for the regs etc is on there

The costs can be as much as your willing to spend, starting off with the basics and then just tweaking until your happy with the results, some may be perfectly happy with the standard kit which does sound good BTW, I like to take things further

I still need a case, as mentioned above its one of the things which causes me problems, the electronics is no problem, its usually the metal work I'm stumped with:o

Osku
05-02-2009, 00:16
I'm still doing some finetuning which I'll update later, I presume you've seen this http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1152
The info for the regs etc is on there

The costs can be as much as your willing to spend, starting off with the basics and then just tweaking until your happy with the results, some may be perfectly happy with the standard kit which does sound good BTW, I like to take things further

I still need a case, as mentioned above its one of the things which causes me problems, the electronics is no problem, its usually the metal work I'm stumped with:o

I had seen that some time ago and read partially and forgotten where I did read it... thanks for redirecting me. Now that I have read some more, it seems that your Paul Hynes discrete regs mod has been a success. I do not see point in such a DIY unless it has something special to offer. And since those are not easily available (I assume Paul does not stock those since I understood those were left overs...), similar results you are getting are hard to duplicate. But I will continue reading, perhaps I will in the end get a new Buffalo kit and start the project.

For the case, I would be tempted to use thick raw (brushed) aluminum plate and simplistic design (or possibly a more complex design with front panel ordered from http://www.schaeffer-ag.de/index.php?id=97&L=1). Just wondering if I should first get a TC-7520 or DACmagic (or a 740c) and later start experimenting... but for me the DIY would have to be because I could make something that is worth having and not available (at all or because of cost) as a factory made product.

Have you tested a VALAB NOS DAC (preferably 2009 version) with 8 TDA1543 chips? Completely different approach, and I have not yet even had the time to seek/read what are the differences between TDA1543 and TDA1541 chips. What kind of TDA1541 based DAC is the one you have as the reference DAC?

leo
05-02-2009, 01:15
Paul can supply any of those regs, the ES9018 is pin compatible with the ES9008 , those regs should be suitable for the newer Buffalo too, infact they are a suitable for a number of dacs and come highly recommended, they are not on his site yet, he should be updating it as soon as he gets the time.
BTW I think he's working on a more compact version of those heatsinked versions.

I've not tried the actual Valab dac but have tried things using the same implementation , NOS, 8 x TDA1543 in parallel using passive I/V, I also tried 16 in parallel.
It sounds pretty good on the cheap, you do still get some HF roll off due to the NOS and basic output stage
Its all down to personal taste, some say they sound more analogue than most newer designs lacking the usual digital edge, others find them lacking dynamics

TDA1541A is much harder and expensive to implement than the TDA1543, it requires more supplies and a decent active output stage to get the best out of it


The TDA1541A dac I have is based on this http://diy.audialonline.com/ayaII/ mine does not have USB input, all supplies are separate

Lots of choices available , being into diy I try as many variables as possible, for those not into diy theres plenty of cheap ready made alternatives, I tend not to comment too much on a lot of the commercial stuff, until I find something I consider better than what I use I'll stick with diy;)

Mr. C
05-02-2009, 08:40
I believe they will be 3 commercial products using the Sabre dac out shortly.
There is a new version of the chip due in the not too distant future I believe.

Osku
05-02-2009, 09:07
Leo,

I will contact Paul if I end up with the Buffalo DIY project. I presume that the dynamics would count more for me, but have not listened to a TDA1541 DAC, so what do I know. So I think that with DIY the Buffalo is the way to go, or be happy with a commercial solution (most likely TC-7520 or DACmagic) for some time.

The post that Russ W. wrote a few weeks ago at diyaudio.com forums sounded so promising that it must be really something - especially if you already are happy with your modified ES9008 Buffalo. (Btw, have you asked Russ if you could replace the chip on your Buffalo and leave all else intact? He stated that the board has to be changed but I assume your situation is different since you have already upgraded your Buffalo that much).

The problem with those ready made DACs is that I would probably end up changing 50-80% of the parts in 3-24 months... unless I would be happy enough with the default tone. But I see no point buying a cheap ready made that has in real life too close the same sound quality as the DAC of my my ES-series Sony amp has. There has to be obvious gain to make it worth all the trouble. (And how soon would I want to upgrade the amp that I just upgraded?)

It seems to be wiser to first buy a TC-7520 or DACmagic and then if that was a big leap decide what to do next or just be happy. After market prices for those should be near enough to the purchase price, so not much of a loss there if the result is too close in comparison to what I already have got.

Osku
05-02-2009, 09:12
I believe they will be 3 commercial products using the Sabre dac out shortly.
There is a new version of the chip due in the not too distant future I believe.

I think you meant the one in title, the new/coming 32-bit version? It is still stated to be "CONFIDENTIAL ADVANCE INFORMATION":

8ch and 2ch variants:
http://www.esstech.com/PDF/Sabre32%20DAC%20PF%20081217.pdf

Interesting to see the price points of those commercial products. (I would like e.g. Cambridge Audio to make a BluRay/SACD/CD/DVD player with a ES9018 with similar DAC like D/A to external devices that the 740c has).

purite audio
05-02-2009, 10:41
I believe they will be 3 commercial products using the Sabre dac out shortly.
There is a new version of the chip due in the not too distant future I believe.

Give us a clue Mr C!

leo
05-02-2009, 11:40
I believe they will be 3 commercial products using the Sabre dac out shortly.
There is a new version of the chip due in the not too distant future I believe.


ES9018 8 channel and ES9012 2 channel is the newest ones, I don't think they have even been properly released yet, ESS have the chip and evaluation boards, I don't think you can get these anywhere else just yet

Theres a dvd player which uses the much cheaper ES9006 which isn't as good as the ES9008 or ES9018

The Mcintosh MCD500 uses the ES9008

I don't know of anything else commercial using these chips

leo
05-02-2009, 11:50
Leo,

I will contact Paul if I end up with the Buffalo DIY project. I presume that the dynamics would count more for me, but have not listened to a TDA1541 DAC, so what do I know. So I think that with DIY the Buffalo is the way to go, or be happy with a commercial solution (most likely TC-7520 or DACmagic) for some time.

The post that Russ W. wrote a few weeks ago at diyaudio.com forums sounded so promising that it must be really something - especially if you already are happy with your modified ES9008 Buffalo. (Btw, have you asked Russ if you could replace the chip on your Buffalo and leave all else intact? He stated that the board has to be changed but I assume your situation is different since you have already upgraded your Buffalo that much).

The problem with those ready made DACs is that I would probably end up changing 50-80% of the parts in 3-24 months... unless I would be happy enough with the default tone. But I see no point buying a cheap ready made that has in real life too close the same sound quality as the DAC of my my ES-series Sony amp has. There has to be obvious gain to make it worth all the trouble. (And how soon would I want to upgrade the amp that I just upgraded?)

It seems to be wiser to first buy a TC-7520 or DACmagic and then if that was a big leap decide what to do next or just be happy. After market prices for those should be near enough to the purchase price, so not much of a loss there if the result is too close in comparison to what I already have got.


Maybe, diy isn't something you can just jump into expecting to get top performance on the cheap, the reason I do it is because I can build and alter things to suit my needs, its probably best just to buy a ready made unit, you can think about building something later, I wouldn't expect to see the Sabre chips used in budget gear tbh, we'll have to wait and see

Osku
05-02-2009, 18:25
Maybe, diy isn't something you can just jump into expecting to get top performance on the cheap, the reason I do it is because I can build and alter things to suit my needs, its probably best just to buy a ready made unit, you can think about building something later, I wouldn't expect to see the Sabre chips used in budget gear tbh, we'll have to wait and see

If I am not completely mistaken the Sabre chip would also need more expensive supporting components to be really helpful, so real budget products might be not doable with those. But a 1000-1500 eur BRD/DVD/SACD/CD combo player would most likely be doable with it, and might also sell reasonably well.

But the ES9018 is expensive, cheapest 2-core CPUs from Intel are likely already cheaper than what it will cost. OTOH with computers, you can often have a CPU that costs 20-30% of the total (street) cost in many notebooks. Those do have high volumes and pretty lame margins.

loreliv
14-02-2009, 19:42
Hi
me to read the critique of Lukasz of the new sabre32 today... very beautiful

http://www.lampizator.eu/LAMPIZATOR/REFERENCES/Buffalo%20DAC/BuffaloDAC.html

regards :)

mlb
12-04-2009, 21:12
Regardless of how good Sabre32 could be, I feel a bit like a child walking between shelves with candies. All look beautiful. But then... hey :doh:
First Bufalo got a nice review by Lukasz. The price was ca. 230 USD. What happens next? New chip Sabre32 on the market, Lukasz (and only him) giving excellent marks and price for Buffalo32 jumps up almost twice. Hmm... a coincidence?

Well, if you read disclaimer from Twisted Pear Audio, one could even believe it:
"So, if you aren't making money, why are you doing this? Easy, it's fun. Why are you reading this page? Check out the stuff!"

When I asked Russ for reason of such significant increase on their forum, my post was simply removed... :scratch:

leo
12-04-2009, 22:47
Regardless of how good Sabre32 could be, I feel a bit like a child walking between shelves with candies. All look beautiful. But then... hey :doh:
First Bufalo got a nice review by Lukasz. The price was ca. 230 USD. What happens next? New chip Sabre32 on the market, Lukasz (and only him) giving excellent marks and price for Buffalo32 jumps up almost twice. Hmm... a coincidence?

Well, if you read disclaimer from Twisted Pear Audio, one could even believe it:
"So, if you aren't making money, why are you doing this? Easy, it's fun. Why are you reading this page? Check out the stuff!"

When I asked Russ for reason of such significant increase on their forum, my post was simply removed... :scratch:


Yes, the price is a fair bit higher than the previous Buffalo isn't it? the problem is where else can you buy a diy dac using the 32bit Sabre? I think the new Buffalo is still cheaper than ESS evo board

The big question for me at least is how will this new 32bit version with new board compare against my modded old version http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1152&page=4

Mr. C
13-04-2009, 09:21
If you have the resolution in the system Leo, the differences are around 20-25% across the board (the upper frequencies are a lot more open and now start to gain some layering too, bass to has a more tauter and texturious feel to it), supply feeds V/Important, again fully discrete outputs stages a must to truly maximise the potential of this DAC.
Though for a few people this dac is perceived is being too clean and some what lacking emotion* compared to their current units, which by comparison are warmer and more full bodied* I would estimate a *safer* presentation for them. Less real if you like.
I am comparing the older sabre unit to the new version by using the evo boards, with a seperate dedicated psu array, separate supplies for all the important rails, a fully discrete output stage fully interchange able between the two. Being fed via I2s/AES/SPDIF data transfer inputs, word bit clocked linked too.
The Dac's have some great benefits sonic wise over most of the *in the market* available units, and ideal for multi channel/home cinema server arrays.
However, I do find them impressive, great dynamics, big sound,low noise floor, and entertaining however lacking in a natural flowing rhythmic sound. Textural layering and timbre do need some attention though.
On the whole, certainly one of the better chip-sets available without question.

leo
13-04-2009, 13:31
Interesting:) I know the sound of the ES9008 improved quite dramatic after fitting the new separate PH regs, AVCC L&R is extremely critical , the regulation there makes or breaks the sound , the circuit in ESS datasheet is not good enough IMHO

The major downside with op-amps is you can't tap into parts of the IC you can with discrete, its hard designing a discrete circuit to better the newer decent op-amps though

Anyway, so how about giving us a clue whats potentionally better than the ES9018 Tony?
Having heard and tried god knows how many commercial CDP's/dacs and played about with more dac chips I care to admit:o whats going to be the thing to have? I'm at the stage now where I don't want to be just trying things and wasting money/time anymore if its no better than what I have

I don't care for artificial warmness nor appreciate the forward brightness I class as HF distortion which a lot of kit has to my ears, , I listen to a wide range of music so having the marmite effect with everything can be a tad wearing :)

Mr. C
13-04-2009, 18:19
Interesting:) I know the sound of the ES9008 improved quite dramatic after fitting the new separate PH regs, AVCC L&R is extremely critical , the regulation there makes or breaks the sound , the circuit in ESS datasheet is not good enough IMHO

Leo I would agree with the above, quality regulation and uber stable/rigid clean supplies are the most critical in ANY circuit. Especially in digital
However the ESS evo boards are just basically average at best.
The only way to truly tap the potential of this unit is design your own dac board from stratch.
The supply voltages to the dac chip/Clock can and do have a significant variant on the sound, without question, however the overall house sabre sound remains.



The major downside with op-amps is you can't tap into parts of the IC you can with discrete, its hard designing a discrete circuit to better the newer decent op-amps though

Leo I would say some of the op-amps available in the last 18 months or so, are a big leap forward over the usual suspects, however again the most critical part of their performance lies in the implimentation in the given circuit, rather than a straight drop in replacement on adapter boards with a 680pf cap placed across the rails! (you get my jist)
Fully dicrete stages (at the moment) are for myself the best method of delivering quality/repeatable/ and surfire performance.
Though to quote a phrase of a good partner of mine 'Sure sounds fine, but man you use the real estate to make it happen'


Anyway, so how about giving us a clue whats potentionally better than the ES9018 Tony?
Having heard and tried god knows how many commercial CDP's/dacs and played about with more dac chips I care to admit:o whats going to be the thing to have? I'm at the stage now where I don't want to be just trying things and wasting money/time anymore if its no better than what I have

Again this is purely a personal thing, the vast majority of the hifi public are not interested in true realism, they wish for something safer and for them easier on the ear. Which is why I find you feel the TDA1541/3 is so good, for me it falls in the bottom paragraph which you have written. However my listening tatses are for as close to sheer realism as I can get (I have recently accquired a recording studio so have been creating my own 24/96 24/192/32/352 recodings, and all that entails.
The Sabre chip is definatlety in the get closer to the real event no quibble, however for me it does it at the expense of a true natural flowing sounds, with all the textural depth and tonal quality, as all these traits go to make up the music we listen too.
What esle have you toyed with leo, and what were some of the '+'s and '-'s for each.
I am currently using another 32 bit chipset, there's a clue for you!



I don't care for artificial warmness nor appreciate the forward brightness I class as HF distortion which a lot of kit has to my ears, , I listen to a wide range of music so having the marmite effect with everything can be a tad wearing :)


Fact here Leo, a great many listeners prefer artificial warmness to truthfulness. I would say lack of design on the digital transmission circuits/ clock too close to critical dsp arrays, wrong choice of psu, psu's rails in boards compromised due to constraints placed by other components, built to a price!. Decoupling wholly incorrect
op-amp configuration wrongly implimented/Partnering equipment not being able to resolve the outgoing data stream the list is endless as you know.
I really do not have a magic answer, the variables are too great.
Though one thing I have found absolutely vital, start from scratch when designing a dac, do not modify some one elses' idea, as it will be compromised.
Cheers Tony

leo
14-04-2009, 18:14
Hi Tony and thanks!

Regarding op-amps, totally agree, I also do get your jist;)

Designing and building your stuff from scratch is ok if you have all the resources , for the average hobbyist its not that easy, especially trying to mess about etching smd boards (as I found on lots of occasions) , by the time you paid for several different one off's to try it can prove to be expensive, its nice to start with a proven to work kit to start you off and you can add your own bits and pieces , upgraded regs etc , long as the dacs layout is decent enough of course

The TDA1541 dac I use is a bit different to the norm, I can choose between NOS or OS, obviously NOS gives what some say as more natural sound but at the expense of HF roll off, most dacs based around the TDA are NOS based, I prefer to have the option.
I/V and output stage is discrete zero feedback diamond mirror , loaded with CM's, the classic op-amp I/V circuits are not that good with these dacs , most units don't bother taking care of the DC seen on the dacs output pins which the TDA doesn't like.
I've not posted any pics of the discrete stage yet because its not my design

Heres a list of stuff I've tried which I can remember, some went better than others, most have been passed on now

AD1865 very over hyped IMO, didn't like this no matter what I tried it with.
AD1955 not tried yet, heard good things about it and was going to try it before deciding to try Sabre instead, I've heard a few commercial units using it
AD1853, same as above, not tried it yet but heard it in a mates diy dac, also heard commercial gear using it

PCM56 in NOS and OS
PCM63 home etched board
PCM67 (mainly from scrap cdp's bodged into separate dacs)

PCM1716 from a cdp fudged about with converted into a dac
PCM1794 diy based
PCM1732 , home etched board
PCM1702 and 1704, mainly diy designs on socket converter boards hard wired on matrix, the 1704 was the newer so called better chip, I actually thought the old 1702 was better

TDA1305 (shite)
TDA1543 (most simple and cheapest thing I've tried, performance limited for obvious reasons)
TDA1541A (no need to comment on this one)

CS4397 cheap and cheerful thing , very popular because of those cheap dacs on ebay)
CS4398, thought this one sounded worse than the 97 version, maybe different internal I/V stage used, not sure

WM8740, not that bad, not tried the newer 8741 etc yet

ES9008 last thing I've messed with, probably one of the best

AK4396, had a brief mess about with this in a commercial unit
I presume you like AKM's 4397;) I never tried it, would like to at some point

I'm always on the look out trying to improve over what I have:eyebrows: I'm at the stage though where things can be a backwards step rather than forwards

BTW, the only ones I feel really stood out was the TDA1541A S2, ES9008, PCM1702 (wish I'd never ditched this one) , PCM1794 , TDA1543 (mainly because its cheap and easy to use)

jon1
14-04-2009, 18:33
Leo that is a nice rundown ...saved a lot members wasting there time and money;)..BTW got a pcb coming from hong kong DIY..the full board ...with a TDA1541a to fit...


jon

leo
14-04-2009, 18:41
Leo that is a nice rundown ...saved a lot members wasting there time and money;)..BTW got a pcb coming from hong kong DIY..the full board ...with a TDA1541a to fit...


jon


Thanks, not everybody has same taste though:eyebrows:

Keep us updated with your TDA1541a, hope its a nice design and not a stinker

jon1
14-04-2009, 18:42
This one......http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270261058219&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.co.uk%3A80%2F%3F_from%3D R40%26_trksid%3Dp3907.m38.l1313%26_nkw%3D270261058 219%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1

jon1
14-04-2009, 18:45
Leo is it good or bad...your opinions are welcome?



jon

leo
14-04-2009, 19:10
Leo is it good or bad...your opinions are welcome?



jon

Hi Jon,

Regulation and I/V output stage is pretty bog standard, especially the regulation, it uses classic op-amp I/V with AD797 fitted which are not bad, you have to watch for the AD797, they can go unstable

There seems to be no nulling circuit on the TDA1541A's outputs which is a shame, it is possible to build something on vero board and add later if you want

It uses OS, the only niggle is that the SAA7220 digital filter injects lots of noise on to the supply, what I'd have done is have it totally isolated and certainly not on the same supply as the crystal oscillator
You could sort things like improving this stuff later once your sure the dac as is works ok.

Nice to see theres a pulse trafo on the spdif input, hope its decent quality

PLL filter on CS8412 seems to have been modded to the latest favourite values when used with TDA1541/43

I'd increase C19 on TDA1541A to 680pf, using a decent film cap not too large physically

For the price its not bad, it'll need some work though to get it really singing, as is the bass may be a bit tubby, we'll see:)
Another important thing which we can't see well in the picture is the layout, the grounding for the TDA1541A is a real sod, just hope its had care and attention

Leo

jon1
14-04-2009, 19:21
Thanks the reply leo....my mate who builds a lot of my stuff..he said the same thing as you get it built and up and running ..then start and sort things out your input is must welcome on this little project...Leo something else to get your teeth into:eyebrows:.more dacs:scratch:



jon....

leo
14-04-2009, 19:29
It should be a nice little first project, it'll be a good learning experience and for the price its not such a great loss if it goes bang :)

jon1
14-04-2009, 19:46
Well with a little bit of your input ..I do not think it will go bang..will it?:trust:



jon

leo
14-04-2009, 20:13
If you take your time and double check your work you'll be ok;)
Just post on here somewhere when your ready:)

jon1
14-04-2009, 20:23
Leo...what do think of the opa2134 as used in the arcam?And what difference would the increasing the value of the capacitor on the oscillator pins make?



jon

leo
14-04-2009, 22:07
Leo...what do think of the opa2134 as used in the arcam?And what difference would the increasing the value of the capacitor on the oscillator pins make?



jon

dual OPA2134 and single OPA134 is ok, its easy to use but I find it dark sounding and lacking in detail.
I'm not a big fan of fet input op-amps tbh and only use them in a DC servo circuit

Cap on which oscillator? the one in the TDA dac kit?

Mr. C
15-04-2009, 09:22
Hi Tony and thanks!

Regarding op-amps, totally agree, I also do get your jist;)

Designing and building your stuff from scratch is ok if you have all the resources , for the average hobbyist its not that easy, especially trying to mess about etching smd boards (as I found on lots of occasions) , by the time you paid for several different one off's to try it can prove to be expensive, its nice to start with a proven to work kit to start you off and you can add your own bits and pieces , upgraded regs etc , long as the dacs layout is decent enough of course

Hi Leo,
I am lucky in the fact I can 'tinker' from scratch if you like,and I am fully aware I am able to cover the costs via a business.
However I am not in habit of throwing funds away on half baked projects (though it does happen from time to time)
You may be surprised about cost if you have 10 boards manufactured for you, these days a lot of business are looking for work.
The bonus being you can design the super regulators/trick psu's into the circuit board itself, no need for 'placing thing' ontop to the side, extra inductance from flying leads, positioning issues, compromise components because of space etc, etc.



The TDA1541 dac I use is a bit different to the norm, I can choose between NOS or OS, obviously NOS gives what some say as more natural sound but at the expense of HF roll off, most dacs based around the TDA are NOS based, I prefer to have the option.
I/V and output stage is discrete zero feedback diamond mirror , loaded with CM's, the classic op-amp I/V circuits are not that good with these dacs , most units don't bother taking care of the DC seen on the dacs output pins which the TDA doesn't like.
I've not posted any pics of the discrete stage yet because its not my design

I believe you are using 8 individual (dual, dual differential) 1541's to achieve the resolution.
I would agree with the lack of top end openness and detail in most of the commercial offerings that have offered this dac chip.
It also has the trait (when *upgraded*) to produce a very solid thick *slug* of a sound in the mid band very reminiscent of the early 90's Wadia's which used the PMC 63K (which I remembered you also like). It came to after hearing one at a recent show!. Again no real upper frequency extension or layering.
I have played with a bespoke dac made by a very well respected far eastern manufacturer that uses the very chipset.
We designed a word clock to lock the dac and transport together, changed the receiver implementation, power supplies and a few other small issues.
That was a very pleasing sound, yet still not the 'whole picture'.



Heres a list of stuff I've tried which I can remember, some went better than others, most have been passed on now

AD1865 very over hyped IMO, didn't like this no matter what I tried it with.
AD1955 not tried yet, heard good things about it and was going to try it before deciding to try Sabre instead, I've heard a few commercial units using it
AD1853, same as above, not tried it yet but heard it in a mates diy dac, also heard commercial gear using it


The 1865, one word describes it passable. 1853 needs a bit of work, but can give some good results, not out standing though.

The 1955 is very good dac, most people mis understand it, pay care attention to the 3.3v rail. This can sound :) receiver chip selection critical here.




PCM1716 from a cdp fudged about with converted into a dac
PCM1794 diy based
PCM1732 , home etched board
PCM1702 and 1704, mainly diy designs on socket converter boards hard wired on matrix, the 1704 was the newer so called better chip, I actually thought the old 1702 was better


BB 1794, does have a lot of potential, to really make the best you do need to scratch design this, can be very musical and engaging.
The 1702 I can see why you like it, for me it is one of the most musical dac sets about, I built a dual/daul diff dac with these (soldering these buggers on top of one another was fun in the original design) a good one.
the 1704 is much maligned, the key to getting these to really sing is 2 fold, uber quiet rail supplies, very little local decouple and a top quality output stage



TDA1305 (shite)
TDA1543 (most simple and cheapest thing I've tried, performance limited for obvious reasons)
TDA1541A (no need to comment on this one)

Never tried the 1305, not keen on the 43's, the 41a can make you smile *IF* it has the right supporting cast



CS4397 cheap and cheerful thing , very popular because of those cheap dacs on ebay)
CS4398, thought this one sounded worse than the 97 version, maybe different internal I/V stage used, not sure

Average dacs hyped up by certain inter sites and ebay



WM8740, not that bad, not tried the newer 8741 etc yet

You might find this odd, however the 8741 is actually a damn fine dac, a touch warm for me, however it has serious potential.



ES9008 last thing I've messed with, probably one of the best


AK4396, had a brief mess about with this in a commercial unit
I presume you like AKM's 4397;) I never tried it, would like to at some point

I'm always on the look out trying to improve over what I have:eyebrows: I'm at the stage though where things can be a backwards step rather than forwards

BTW, the only ones I feel really stood out was the TDA1541A S2, ES9008, PCM1702 (wish I'd never ditched this one) , PCM1794 , TDA1543 (mainly because its cheap and easy to use)

Leo,

The 9008 is good without question, a bit sensitive to certain voltages it should not be sensitive too, however big, bold, dynamic sound, low noise floor impressive sound, really only comes alive when you feed 24/96 raw and above imho.

The 4397 is bit good, all the real naturalness and texture, superb dynamics, beautiful rich flowing sound with out any trace of artifacts.

The new 9018, more of the same for Sabre, yet more dynamics, lower noise floor, bass is actually a fair bit better than the previous version too.
It does start to layer too.

When comparing the the two, the Sabre is immediately more *wow*, like listening to a dac 64 for the first time, I would say more upper freq. extension and a bigger stage. Impressive is a good word to describe this dac.
The AKM, has a far greater invite into the music, superb layering and texture, great depth, no artificial sound stage enlarging, far more natural free flowing sound, dynamics are very very close, yet the S/N is a good 12/15db on quoted figs.
Comparisons made using identical analogue stages, p/s rails feed via our own N/C and s/r technology, etc.
In the end it all boils down to the personal factor Leo.
The problem is for us, the way forward is high resolution formats, their truly bring out the 'real sense' of being there, to do that you will need need input sample rates higher than 48khz (YMMV)

jon1
15-04-2009, 17:06
dual OPA2134 and single OPA134 is ok, its easy to use but I find it dark sounding and lacking in detail.
I'm not a big fan of fet input op-amps tbh and only use them in a DC servo circuit

Cap on which oscillator? the one in the TDA dac kit?



Leo ...yes the one on the dac kit..you pointed out that it needed a higher value......



jon

leo
15-04-2009, 19:58
Hi Leo,
I am lucky in the fact I can 'tinker' from scratch if you like,and I am fully aware I am able to cover the costs via a business.
However I am not in habit of throwing funds away on half baked projects (though it does happen from time to time)
You may be surprised about cost if you have 10 boards manufactured for you, these days a lot of business are looking for work.
The bonus being you can design the super regulators/trick psu's into the circuit board itself, no need for 'placing thing' ontop to the side, extra inductance from flying leads, positioning issues, compromise components because of space etc, etc.



I believe you are using 8 individual (dual, dual differential) 1541's to achieve the resolution.
I would agree with the lack of top end openness and detail in most of the commercial offerings that have offered this dac chip.
It also has the trait (when *upgraded*) to produce a very solid thick *slug* of a sound in the mid band very reminiscent of the early 90's Wadia's which used the PMC 63K (which I remembered you also like). It came to after hearing one at a recent show!. Again no real upper frequency extension or layering.
I have played with a bespoke dac made by a very well respected far eastern manufacturer that uses the very chipset.
We designed a word clock to lock the dac and transport together, changed the receiver implementation, power supplies and a few other small issues.
That was a very pleasing sound, yet still not the 'whole picture'.



The 1865, one word describes it passable. 1853 needs a bit of work, but can give some good results, not out standing though.

The 1955 is very good dac, most people mis understand it, pay care attention to the 3.3v rail. This can sound :) receiver chip selection critical here.





BB 1794, does have a lot of potential, to really make the best you do need to scratch design this, can be very musical and engaging.
The 1702 I can see why you like it, for me it is one of the most musical dac sets about, I built a dual/daul diff dac with these (soldering these buggers on top of one another was fun in the original design) a good one.
the 1704 is much maligned, the key to getting these to really sing is 2 fold, uber quiet rail supplies, very little local decouple and a top quality output stage



Never tried the 1305, not keen on the 43's, the 41a can make you smile *IF* it has the right supporting cast



Average dacs hyped up by certain inter sites and ebay



You might find this odd, however the 8741 is actually a damn fine dac, a touch warm for me, however it has serious potential.



Leo,

The 9008 is good without question, a bit sensitive to certain voltages it should not be sensitive too, however big, bold, dynamic sound, low noise floor impressive sound, really only comes alive when you feed 24/96 raw and above imho.

The 4397 is bit good, all the real naturalness and texture, superb dynamics, beautiful rich flowing sound with out any trace of artifacts.

The new 9018, more of the same for Sabre, yet more dynamics, lower noise floor, bass is actually a fair bit better than the previous version too.
It does start to layer too.

When comparing the the two, the Sabre is immediately more *wow*, like listening to a dac 64 for the first time, I would say more upper freq. extension and a bigger stage. Impressive is a good word to describe this dac.
The AKM, has a far greater invite into the music, superb layering and texture, great depth, no artificial sound stage enlarging, far more natural free flowing sound, dynamics are very very close, yet the S/N is a good 12/15db on quoted figs.
Comparisons made using identical analogue stages, p/s rails feed via our own N/C and s/r technology, etc.
In the end it all boils down to the personal factor Leo.
The problem is for us, the way forward is high resolution formats, their truly bring out the 'real sense' of being there, to do that you will need need input sample rates higher than 48khz (YMMV)


Thanks again Tony, you got me thinking now you swine:lol:
Agree its down to personal tastes but its nice to try and cover as much as possible, as you know it can take some searching to find that thing which really makes you go WOW!

One thing for sure though, those that claim that all this stuff sounds the same are :mental:

Regarding the high resolution formats, thats something I really do need to look into, its moving fast yet theres still not a huge amount of info/choice about

leo
15-04-2009, 20:07
Leo ...yes the one on the dac kit..you pointed out that it needed a higher value......



jon

TDA1541A oscillator pin 16,17? you don't have to increase it, it sounds better imo with 680pf, as long as its not physically huge.
DEM reclocking works nice there too, a circuit I tried sounded very good but I had some slight HF noise so scrapped it

NRG
15-04-2009, 20:16
This one......http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270261058219&ru=http%3A%2F%2Fshop.ebay.co.uk%3A80%2F%3F_from%3D R40%26_trksid%3Dp3907.m38.l1313%26_nkw%3D270261058 219%26_sacat%3DSee-All-Categories%26_fvi%3D1&_rdc=1


That's the same one I've been looking at, its had some positive reports over on DIYAudio. I've just about taken my 1541a Arcam project as far as is feasible although I'm still tinkering with the filter and may implement a different I/V and o/p stage...so will be looking at something new soon...the Buffalo is also tempting but the price is a bit off-putting...

...there's another TDA development again over on DIYAudio by ECDesigns that looks promising so I may hold back a while to see how it works out....too many choices and I don't want to waste money on a dead end project! ;)

leo
15-04-2009, 20:32
That's the same one I've been looking at, its had some positive reports over on DIYAudio. I've just about taken my 1541a Arcam project as far as is feasible although I'm still tinkering with the filter and may implement a different I/V and o/p stage...so will be looking at something new soon...the Buffalo is also tempting but the price is a bit off-putting...

...there's another TDA development again over on DIYAudio by ECDesigns that looks promising so I may hold back a while to see how it works out....too many choices and I don't want to waste money on a dead end project! ;)

I'd only recommend Buffalo if you upgrade the regs tbh, I remember how mine sounded stock

A choice of TDA kits now of unknown quality
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Hi-END-DIR9001-TDA1541A-4-NOS-DAC-Kit-TDA1541_W0QQitemZ220393565387QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH _DefaultDomain_0?hash=item220393565387&_trksid=p3286.m63.l1177

jon1
15-04-2009, 21:23
That's the same one I've been looking at, its had some positive reports over on DIYAudio. I've just about taken my 1541a Arcam project as far as is feasible although I'm still tinkering with the filter and may implement a different I/V and o/p stage...so will be looking at something new soon...the Buffalo is also tempting but the price is a bit off-putting...

...there's another TDA development again over on DIYAudio by ECDesigns that looks promising so I may hold back a while to see how it works out....too many choices and I don't want to waste money on a dead end project! ;)



Well i will let you all know how this one works out;)My be a good kit ..My not be as well:eyebrows:



jon

jon1
15-04-2009, 21:26
TDA1541A oscillator pin 16,17? you don't have to increase it, it sounds better imo with 680pf, as long as its not physically huge.
DEM reclocking works nice there too, a circuit I tried sounded very good but I had some slight HF noise so scrapped it


Leo.... i will get it up and running first..and see how we go from there..still waiting for to be delivered .....




jon

NRG
15-04-2009, 21:52
What about the AYA Dac Leo, I know you have one of these...

http://diy.audialonline.com/ayaII/

leo
15-04-2009, 21:56
What about the AYA Dac Leo, I know you have one of these...

http://diy.audialonline.com/ayaII/


I got a real soft spot for that one:) next time we have a get together at Richards I'll have to bring it along

leo
15-04-2009, 22:04
Totally off subject Neal but you ever tried those SHINKOH resistors?

NRG
15-04-2009, 22:10
Can't say I have Leo sorry. What type are they, I've tried many and can sort of tell from the type what they will sound like! Carbons, metal film, tants all have characteristic sounds...

The AYA looks more interesting by the minute! ;) BTW have you spoken to Rich recently? I don't hang out at the WD board much these days....

NRG
15-04-2009, 22:14
Tell a lie, yes I have tried them, still have a few. Used them in my KiT88, same spec as Richards...

They are not in the amp anymore! Added a brightness and edge to the sound that I did not get on with...so out they came...

leo
15-04-2009, 22:19
I think the SHINKOH are tants, basically need a pair of good quality resistors for an I/V stage.

There may be a manual for the AYA you can download, just to give you an idea how its done, mines obviously had some tweaking

Its been a few weeks since I heard from Rich, he's probably busy like the rest of us:) I'll have to send him a mail

Mr. C
16-04-2009, 08:21
Thanks again Tony, you got me thinking now you swine:lol:

One thing for sure though, those that claim that all this stuff sounds the same are :mental:

Morning Leo,

Absolutely agree 100% with this sentiment :)



Regarding the high resolution formats, thats something I really do need to look into, its moving fast yet theres still not a huge amount of info/choice about

There is, but you need to look a deeper than normal, you can always PM me if you wish.

Tony

Ian Walker
18-04-2009, 12:36
I'd only recommend Buffalo if you upgrade the regs tbh, I remember how mine sounded stock

A choice of TDA kits now of unknown quality
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Hi-END-DIR9001-TDA1541A-4-NOS-DAC-Kit-TDA1541_W0QQitemZ220393565387QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH _DefaultDomain_0?hash=item220393565387&_trksid=p3286.m63.l1177

I've just had some dealings with this seller and can confidently recommend him.

Ian.

aquapiranha
18-04-2009, 18:14
I've just had some dealings with this seller and can confidently recommend him.

Ian.

Very nice looking DAC, I wonder where he manged to find so many 1541's? they are as rare as hens teeth round here.

Edited to add I have had a look around his site and there are some lovely bits of kit on there.