Actually they have bare copper ends but I found that not all the enamel had been scraped off properly. I suggest you give the wire ends a little rub with sandpaper and then they will solder nicely.Quote:
Originally Posted by apmusson
Printable View
Actually they have bare copper ends but I found that not all the enamel had been scraped off properly. I suggest you give the wire ends a little rub with sandpaper and then they will solder nicely.Quote:
Originally Posted by apmusson
Thanks MartinQuote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
I will certainly do that. To tell you the truth I have been putting off messing with the caiman circuit board and the fact that I can do this soldering separately (where the only damage I could do is limited to the claritycaps) is giving me the confidence to attempt it.
Ade
Hi Ade,Quote:
Originally Posted by apmusson
I've one of those Maplin CBR supply's, and are looking into improving the components in it...
Wouldn't mind some info on what you did to it, and a comment on the improvments?
Our Dacs seem to be at the same stage..
You are highly unlikely to get any difference in audible bass level from changing a 1uf cap to 1.6uf ;) All you'll be doing is shifting the -3Db frequency lower & it'll already be sub 10Hz.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazjam
There is a very good reason for possibly doing this though & not a lot of people tend to think about it. The phase of the waveform will still be shifted slightly at audible frequencies (20Hz & higher) & this along with phase shifts caused by loudspeakers can be heard :doh:
What's even worse is that nearly every (if not all) bit/s of kit in the audio chain will also likely have a high pass filter due to capacitors at about the same frequency. The consequencies of this will definately be heard in the audio band :eek: In reality if all these DC blocking filters were at 0.1Hz or lower, there would be a definate increase in fidelity in the lower bass range due to vastly less equipment induced phase shift :)
Moral is to keep the -3Db frequency as low as possible except on a warp filter for a record deck :eyebrows:
Anyone tried 10uf caps in the Caiman (my amp is 20k ohm impedance)? Interested in the type of cap tried and benefits/disadvantages.
I think Leo tried some 10uf MKP2000 but not sure if he thought they bettered the good old "benchmark" 47uf non polar Rubycons.
Regards
Chris
I think he's still running them in,but I'd say any half decent film cap should better an electrolytic.
OMartin,how are you getting on with the CC's? Any further improvements?
Gaz,
Sorry if I misled you - the mod I did was adjusting the output voltage as stan indicated in his post. I would love to be able to claim otherwise - but it just aint true. :doh:
I will definitely give an update on the ClarityCaps once I've soldered and installed them and given them 24 hours (?) burnin time.
Ade
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazjam
Ah, ok. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by apmusson
Good luck with the soldering!
They're improving nicely, Ali, but I don't quite have the subterranean bass of the Rubycons. My preamp's single-ended input impedance is 47k ohms. I'm going to order a couple of 1.6uF Clarity ESAs (the MRs are too big). I'll properly wrap them in foam to prevent vibration against the PCB rather than just use the foam pads I've stuck to the current ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali Tait
<later>
Damn, Hi-Fi Collective only have a single 1.6uF ESA in stock and won't let you backorder.
Has anyone tried AuriCaps? Their 2.2uF 200V is sized 23 x 20mm and cost £12.43 each.
I personally DO NOT MIND small or HUGE capacitors. I DO NOT mind if I have to place them out of case as long as I am able to find perfect Sound Quality (for my ears and my system).Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
So any suggestions are welcome as long as the cost of caps is not silly.
Since I got my 7520 from repair I have not been closing case of my lovely Mr Beresford :lolsign: as well as burning in all those caps.
@MartinT
I love the way your Beresford is looking especially the passive Caps. What is your model of Beresford DAC? With what caps you have replaced the biggest power supply cap and is the SQ any better?
My present state of DAC :stalks:(just some random home found caps)
It's a Caiman. I replaced the big electrolytic with a pair of 2.2uF Panasonic film caps, which fit nicely. My power supply is a SuperTeddy set for exactly 16V. SQ with the ST and film caps is really excellent, very low noise floor and fine detail with no harshness.Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboCopper
(for completion, the regulators are Dexa and all electrolytics are Elna Silmic II).
Martin,look here.AFAIK these are rebranded CC's.Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
Oops! Forgot link-
http://world-designs.co.uk/sax.htm
The legs on my Rubycon 47uF 50V seems to thin. is it a problem?
MartinQuote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
Do you think the electrolytics sound bigger in the bass as it's less controlled and a bit boomy whereas the ESA's are a lot tighter and controlled so they sound smaller, you have the best bass extension to really tell. I think this to be the case though.
Cheers Andy
I do find the ClarityCaps very tight and tuneful in the bass, it's true, but the Rubycons were no slouches and also had good quality, but fuller bass.
I sense a slight increase in value may do it, so I'm looking out for 1.6uF or 2.2uF that will fit.
Thanks, Ali. Meanwhile, I have ordered a pair of 2.2uF AuriCaps as they will fit and I can compare them with the ClarityCaps. I would still like, ultimately, to desolder the 5-way op-amp board socket and solder the caps permanently in place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali Tait
Martin, have you compared the same 16 bit CD via the Caiman to the SACD disc playing via your Ayre to gauge the differences in detail etc? I'd be interested to know what up scaling and interpolation really does to the sound.
Cheers
As I just started to enjoy my passive mod and already ordered some caps for it, I think I will leave my Beresford in passive mode for good.
Now I want to upgrade regs for MuRata regs and need info which ones I should order?
I also understand that I only need one to upgrade if I do want to keep the passive mod in place.
So which one should be upgraded?
I know that this mod is somewhere on the forum, but I just want confirmation as which one to upgrade if I want only passive mod without opamp boards.
Or it is best to upgrade both MuRata regs if not too expensive?
Thank you
If you fancy trying something a bit different then Mundorf RXF are worth a try. I ran a pair of 22uF for a couple of weeks and found them quite good. Nice big sound stage and somehow made big stadium rock music sound especially good. They're rather big and difficult to use due to their shape and connection type, so that makes them a challenge. :eyebrows:Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboCopper
There's always V-Caps, most teflon caps will be great, but with very extended burn-in.
AN Silver should be great, quite large but HUGE price
Another Supplier?
http://sidekick-audio.com/gatoshop_u...601b&mode=list
fiver delivery up to a kg in weight though...
maybe another group buy chaps?
Bear in mind that the Caiman sounds very close to the Ayre (not quite the soundstage or fine detail but close) for CD replay. This in itself is a very good result as my Ayre has the latest MP (Minimum Phase) filter upgrade.Quote:
Originally Posted by OLED
SACDs and DVD-As sound different. Hi-res DVD-As sound exactly as you would imagine a hi-res CD to sound: more extension in the treble, lack of harshness, incredible dynamic clout, better spatial acoustic.
SACDs sound more like analogue. They also have the sweet, extended treble and great dynamics but their strength is in spatial positioning and a heightened sense of reality.
There is no upscaling or interpolation going on with hi-res discs.
SACD does sound better than redbook, for exactly the reasons Martin has mentioned here.Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
Interesting aside here, I got reading about upscaling 16/44 to 24/96 and got curious about it. Cant hurt to try right? :scratch:
I could tell a difference quite easily. An improvement.
Again, for the reasons Martin has stated.
Theres no night and day, "veils being lifted" and all that hifi nonsense going on, but the soundstage is bigger and more focussed, and it sounds more "solid" sounding?
I'm not sure if I want to convert all my Flacs (waay to many and besides, life's too short - just enjoy the music! :)), but of the odd wet Sunday, I might do a few of my favourite albums.
Martin, regarding Upscaling and Interpolation of 16/44 material, whats your take on the benefits/other of it?
Of course a SACD or DVD-A is better, but maybe using something like Foobar(*) or a commercial product to convert 16/44 to 24/96 could be a good thing?
(*) For those curious to try, I scoured various computeraudio and music production forums getting opinions on this, and and the best method of upsampling based on general opinion that I could see(subjectively to my ears of course..:)) was using Foobar with the SOX plug-in at default settings.
Cant hurt to try, its free and you might even like it?
What are the benefits of upupscaling? Is there any additional information in an audio file that cannot be decoded by the DAC in the original playback, but would be decoded in the upscaled version:scratch:?
Good question Stan, I wonder if the benefits of some things though aren't always measurable?Quote:
Originally Posted by StanleyB
I know how it looks on paper...
Maybe its just a subjective thing?
From what I can gather though (and its maybe a case of a little knowledge being a dagerous thing!) is that interpolation of the digital waveform smooths it out and brings it closer to the analogue one?
Its worth a try...is all I'm saying.
At the end of the day numbers dont matter, other folks opinions dont matter..its all about how it sounds to YOU with your ears.
Would it be interesting enough Topic to set up a Poll on AOS about this?
A lot of us like to improve our Dacs, roll opamps etc, so we're all looking to improve our hardware.
What if we could improve the SOFTware too...?
Would this be a valid contribution to the "big picture" of what makes our stereo's sound good?
Maybe its bollocks, I can accept that :), but maybe like other potential work/dont work tweaks, its worth at least trying?
What about even proposing an experiment: :)
...the same tracks, one in 16/44 the other upsampled to 24/96.
perhaps 2 or 3 tracks, different genres I dunno....just some well recorded tracks.
We download the tracks, test them in our own system and report back our findings.
Get some opinions from the AOS guys?
Of course, the only thing that matters is how it works in the real world, in practical terms...I mean the numbers dont make up what makes the music.
I'd much rather be listening to the music and not watching waveforms..:)
I cetainly find the well recorded 24/96 stuff I have betters red book.
I find upscaling sounds unnatural, especially when it's to 192. Multiples of 44.1 seems so much more logical and sounds better. 88.2 or 176.4 please.....why do extra mathematical estimating for 192.
That's a different ball game though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali Tait
Based on my own experiments, an upscaled 44.1KHz version of the album "Hotel California" sounded worse then the original 44.1KHz version.
But the official 24/96KHz release sounded better than the 16/44.1KHz and 16/96KHz upscaled version.
Please note that upscalng appears to affect only the frequency, not the bit depth according to my findings. If anyone else got the bits to also upscale from 16 to 24, I'll be interested to know what the equipment was that you used.
Foobar lets you up the bitrate to 24bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by StanleyB
..at least the setting SAYS you can.
cant you?
Yes indeed Stan.I haven't yet heard an upsampling dac,but most of what I have read concurs with your findingsQuote:
Originally Posted by StanleyB
Agree about the Hotel California 24/96 also.I have it,and it's definately superior to the red book IMO.
The only benefit to upscaling is that it pushes the brickwall filtering further up the frequency spectrum and reduces high frequency hash close to the theoretical 22.05kHz maximum. As Stan says, it cannot add information that was not there in the first place.
Thanks for that Martin,Quote:
Originally Posted by MartinT
If it moves the digital hash towards being outwith the range of hearing...its a good thing I guess...
maybe akin to making the best of the 16/44 information you already have then?
Can you hear it though? :)
The files are actually 24/192.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali Tait
The red book CD is very poor in comparison.
As I am new to the world of DIY HiFi electronics I wonder what would be a difference in bass or overall sound quality when compared 1uF cap with 47uF capacitor?Quote:
Originally Posted by Reid Malenfant
I want to compare it higher values as the sound difference from 1uF and 1.6uF is minor (from this post http://theartofsound.net/forum/showp...&postcount=692)
I know I can insert the caps and hear it for myself, but want to know about theory too.
Thanks
Ah yes,had forgotten Chris.The Touch won't play192 though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratmangler
That's because you're running it from the tinySC (internal server).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali Tait
If you're running it from a computer or intelligent NAS you should be able to get the serving machine to downsample on the fly.
Actually, the NAS thing may not necessarily work.
It all depends on how you are serving the music files, and whether the device carrying the server client is up to the job in hand - downsampling is quite processor intensive
Just got the Guruplug,finally! Will be fiddling this weekend to see if I can get it running. Don't have a clue about linux though,so should be fun!
I am using a Behringer SRC 2496 for upsampling the signal to 24/96 before sending it to my Caiman. The differences I heard with upsampling were greater separation between instruments, greater depth and a more focused image. In some recordings the differences are much more obvious than others. I would say that it is worth trying. I also did upsampling via foobar but the results were worse than the original 16/44 track...
I also have a question regarding the passive mod. If I remove the opamp board and put the capacitors in, does this make both variable and fixed output passive or just only the variable one??
Thanks!
Hi,Quote:
Originally Posted by gr0001
in Foobar, which resampler did you use?
I tried a few and found SOX (linear phase) to give the best results.
I also tried R8Brain Pro, and external resampler, gave good results as well.
I wish you the very best of luck - you might need it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ali Tait
OTOH if you're following a step by step instal guide from the Slim forum then it might just work.
I'm keeping my fingers and all idle apendages crossed for you mate.:eyebrows:
Ok, let me first refer you to this post i made here :)Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboCopper
Depending on the input impedance of the amplifier you are driving with the passive mod output will determine the -3Db frequency that the bass response of the DAC/Amp combination rolls off. This is due to what is known as capacitive reactance.
This can be calculated with the following formula:-
Xc = 1/2 x pi x f x C in plain english that's Xc (the reactance) = 1 divided by 2 x pi (3.1415926545) x f (frequency) x C (capacitance).
The reactance would be it's resistance at the frequency (f).
You can also calculate the given capacitor you'd need to have a certain reactance at frequency (f) of your choice:-
C = 1/2 x pi x f x Xc
Now all these capacitors on a 50Kohm input impedance will have a turnover frequency (-3Db frequency) of well below 20Hz, so in theory you'd hardly expect them to make much difference. But capacitors & the combined input impedance of the following amp create this low pass filter & it's not just the signal getting attenuated below the cutoff. Way before it gets to -3Db the phase of the waveform (if it's pretty close to the cutoff point) will start to shift in phase with regards to other higher frequencies. If i remember correctly this become noticeable a whole decade above the cutoff point (10 x the cutoff frequency).
Assuming you have a -3Db point of say 5Hz it means that the musical signal will start shifting in phase at 50Hz & it'll be gradually be going more out of phase the lower the reproduced frequency is.
It might not be much of a big deal with a single stage, but in an audio chain there are quite a few stages. If each adds it's own phase shift then things can soon add up & bass can sound rather disjointed because it's well out of phase with the stuff being produced in the midrange which isn't subjected to anywhere near as much phase shifting.
I'm sure there is loads more that could be said, right now it's eluding me though :eyebrows:
Hope this helps a tad :)
It's explained here: http://www.v-cap.com/coupling-capacitor-calculator.php
Ha! cheers mate.Yes I have the wiki downloaded.Some of it might as well be in Swahili though! Still,nothing ventured,nothing gained...Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratmangler
I can always ask Nick to sort out the mess afterwards. :lol:
Anyone live near me with linux knowledge?
That's handy, however i'd hardly call it an explanation ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive
I think it's the best way to get to understand the issue, reading the text and playing with the calculators is illuminating. I think it helps understanding for those of us with little technical knowledge (but at least a little too)....at least for those who learn by doing, rather than reading a long technical paper with equations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reid Malenfant
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboCopper
Ok & yes :) Please note that it was mentioned by RoboCopper that he wanted to know about the "theory". This is why i put up those rather simple equations, not to make things difficult, but to show the theory rather than just the results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clive
Yes the calculator is a very useful tool indeed, but it doesn't show the equations, it does it all for you. Thus no theory...
Anyway, back to the topic in question :)
To some people theory is equations, to others it's the conceptual theory. Some people will want equations and some won't so a combination of the v-cap page and your post covers it all!Quote:
Originally Posted by Reid Malenfant