Author Topic: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192  (Read 166521 times)

Offline zenelectro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 776
  • Liked: 144
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #240 on: August 25, 2014, 10:26:52 PM »

I think DAC chip is only a third of the equation, implementation and quality parts are the rest of that magic formula!  :)
My tweaked DDDAC surely will be powering by raw unregulated chokes input. The EI transformer(s) were from Vitavox! This Man has ears, trained/experience ears those are! 


That certainly mirrors my experience in that in many applications, very good RCLC or CLC or CLCLC choke filtering was superior to any active regulation.

But obviously on something like a high speed DaC like 1974 you need some sort of local regulation near the DAC chip... (maybe you don't?)
Then the question is which regulation sounds the best / most musical and what type of capacitor bypassing works best with it.

Terry

Offline Chanh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Liked: 9
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #241 on: August 25, 2014, 11:31:37 PM »
Terry,

I run unregulated raw PS but having Locally regulated shunts right at the DAC chip. 3.3V Tent Shunt is right at the leg(s) of Vdd. Similarly 8V Tent Shunt is at the Analog side but filter by 0.1uf Wima prior to Vcc. I also use Sanyo OSCon for digital as filter caps, Elna Silmic 2 RFS for analog. Digital and Analog ps line is separately wired. Will post more photos if interest?

Someone reported with great result from Sanyo Oscon caps at analog Vcom. Appreciate your inputs

Cheers,
Chanh
« Last Edit: August 25, 2014, 11:33:08 PM by Chanh »

Offline rhlauranna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Liked: 153
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #242 on: August 26, 2014, 01:33:27 AM »
with all respect and I know you understand me that way that I do not want to tap on anybody's feet (if so, I excuse in advance), I admire everybody's ideas, contributions, skills, and results... and joy...

but I have mine as well (results)...

there are obviously five main columns which define the sound  in everybody's (DD)DAC-system, each varying considerably:

1. the input (WAVEIO, Raspberry pi... and its different programs)

2. the (DD)DAC (with different amount of chips/stacks)

3. the power supply (battery or others...)

4. the output (capacitor or transformer) and

5. the "new" shunt regulators (with all its different kinds and different kinds of implementation and all other different kind of tweaks)

well, to every topic there are different "opinions", of course, personally one cannot have everything, and nobody has experienced everything regarding every single specific topic, and so within this context and the development of all these different kinds of (DD)DAC-constellations everybody has come to his own results and conclusions, and I enjoy reading these very much...

...so, when talking about "results" they on one hand differ (see for example shunts) and on the other hand have become generally agreed (see for example transformers)... the latter results are that decidedly posted, that strong, that it reminds me of the proverb of how good or bad a Grateful Dead-show was judged when telling somebody who missed it: "100.000 Deadheads can't go wrong".... so it has to be like that... and nobody may "dare" to say anything against it...

but I do... "against" transformers... against the transformers that we had here (of course we had not all, but three different versions from TriodeDick (which were quite impressive) and the ones from Doede (which were impressive as well)...

yes, impressive they were, but more or less detracting from the pure signal...

does it "sound" to you ? Does it sound to anybody else ? Or do you still get as a response that what they are generally claimed with as "anemic", "steril", "artifical", "digital".... when final "results" are judged...  ????

well, to be honest - to me - exactly this must not be... it is the transformers and the (insufficient) power supply...

(you might want to read in addition my report from last year regarding that topic here):

http://twogoodears.blogspot.de/2013/09/reinhards-new-essay-about-iso-usb-and.html

...and both in combination... which have such an influence on the sound that it is exactly no longer "analogue" and - I have to agree - with transformers (the ones that I know of) this way inevitably leads to such descriptions...

I know that I am nearly alone with my opinion, as is with "perfect squares", but - be aware - I am talking about results not theory... and yes,  it's my own experiences (and Klaus's, and not only about the DDDACs but other DACs as well...) and one must not be an engineer to drive a car or an oenologist to taste a wine or an acoustic or electronic engineer... to be "qualified" to talk about results...
 
so, I will not focus on the DDDAC here, there is enough said, neither will I focus on the different kinds of power supplies, I talked already a lot about power supplies here and there... see for example post 225 here and on "ADC/DAC losses" post 29... (regarding power supply at the moment Stefan seems to be "leading" the field getting goose bumps while listening to his own - I have yet to hear this) nor on the shunt regulation, which is another "100.000 Deadheads can't go wrong"-phenomenon, but obviously has not yet checked out "scientifically" enough - but they are working on it, and I am waiting for the results...

no, I will focus on the output... there are different ways to approach of course and there are different results, quite naturally. I will just talk about my own results, and Klaus's, we tested together, for six weeks, at the beginning of the year. We kept our results so far away from the public in order not to tap on anyone's feet... we know that there has flown in a lot of know-how and time and work and skills to bring things to the point, and we have deepest respect for that.... so we kept quiet, so far...

...but time has come now to possibly help the one or other out of this "trap" in which some might have fallen (regarding that "clinical", "steril", "anemic" effect), let me tell you (again) about our results. We have tested the following in all kinds of combinations (not only side by side, but combined with everything possible (we even used only parts of Doede's own Sowter-monster-DDDAC in order to be able to experience in detail the effect(s) just from every single exchange), and we did it again and again, and with all time needed to really verify the results for ourselves:

1. DDDAC 1543 with 60 and 120 chips

2. DDDAC1794 with one and four decks, and Doede's personal eight deck DDDAC (standard version) with Sowter transformers and caps

3. normal car battery with some ten kg, heavy lorry batteries with some 40 kg

4. normal uncontrolled power supply, Bernd's controlled power supply, Mundorf controlled power supply, and Doede's own 5 and 12 Volt power supplies

and the quintessence of the results was: one 1794 DDDAC-deck with Bernd's controlled power supply was that much better than Doede's eight deck DAC with Sowters and his own power supplies and everything else switchable on it (or later on Jean's own PSU or the Mundorf PSU and others for that matter), that it must be heard to be believed. It is here where there is "no way back". Why ? Because you get digital that analogue that you hardly any longer care for the source...

... and this result is permanently valid not only to my ears but Klaus's as well, to get that what you are "looking" for, an "analogue" sounding DAC, according to what we have found out you have to get rid of the transformers... probably our caps are ultimately not the best, but for this comparison in this specific case it is not necessary, but it already on this level reveals much more "natural" sound not only that way that the human brain is not only less affected and that you want to hear more and longer but revealing exactly that what is needed for natural (analogue) results... the differences between an original and a reproduction indeed become rather neglectable... and you know we do not have the worst platforms to check this all out...

not to belittle anyone else's performance(s), no, just the contrary, I encourage you to move on with your skills, but personally I definitely do not want to listen to the "sound" of those transformers that I know of... perhaps it is the imperfection of its squares causing pollution, keeping the origianl signal away from sublime purity...

you are the DIYers, "D" it further...

« Last Edit: August 26, 2014, 05:59:28 AM by rhlauranna »

Offline ozmillsy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2163
  • Liked: 245
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #243 on: August 26, 2014, 07:09:41 AM »
:)   contentious position you've taken R,  you are entitled to your opinion.

But I would just like to say (before anyone else does),  that transformers can and do sound different.

It is like selecting 3 different el34 tubes, implementing each in the same spot, and determining that none of them improve the sound and it goes backwards.   And the conclusion drawn is; tubes are no good dont use them.     No, no, no.

For tubes to work well you need;
- well designed circuit (above my head)
- the right selection of tube brand/model to get the sound right.

Transformers are just like that. IMO.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2014, 07:47:33 AM by ozmillsy »
It's all about the music,, not the equipment.

Offline zenelectro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 776
  • Liked: 144
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #244 on: August 26, 2014, 09:40:55 AM »

but I do... "against" transformers... against the transformers that we had here (of course we had not all, but three different versions from TriodeDick (which were quite impressive) and the ones from Doede (which were impressive as well)...

yes, impressive they were, but more or less detracting from the pure signal...

does it "sound" to you ? Does it sound to anybody else ? Or do you still get as a response that what they are generally claimed with as "anemic", "steril", "artifical", "digital".... when final "results" are judged...  ????

well, to be honest - to me - exactly this must not be... it is the transformers and the (insufficient) power supply...

(you might want to read in addition my report from last year regarding that topic here):

http://twogoodears.blogspot.de/2013/09/reinhards-new-essay-about-iso-usb-and.html

...and both in combination... which have such an influence on the sound that it is exactly no longer "analogue" and - I have to agree - with transformers (the ones that I know of) this way inevitably leads to such descriptions...

I know that I am nearly alone with my opinion, as is with "perfect squares", but - be aware - I am talking about results not theory... and yes,  it's my own experiences (and Klaus's, and not only about the DDDACs but other DACs as well...) and one must not be an engineer to drive a car or an oenologist to taste a wine or an acoustic or electronic engineer... to be "qualified" to talk about results...


R,

WRT transformers, you can not really make a gross judgement on them until you know a/ how to properly set them up b/ which type to use.

There are many brands of transformers Lundahl, Jensen, Cinemag, etc, and many types of design such as Input, Output, multi filar etc etc.
To get the proper performance you need to know how to set them up. There is the age old story of a famous Neve recording console where
a well known recording engineer picked a few channels as not sounding right. As it transpired these channels did not have the correct snubbing
network on their OP and were ringing. This is well above 20kHz.

Ironically, looking at the plots of DDDACs 'perfect squares' you have not correctly implemented the transformers because they do exactly that -
they have ringing on square wave response.

Further to this a big part of the sound that you hear is actually the driving impedance, ie; DAC OP impedance driving transformer. Because the DAC
has a high OP impedance this causes the transformer to have increased low frequency distortion and this is part of what you hear.

We haven't even got to core materials, winding design etc. So probably a good idea to get someone to help you a/ implement the transformer
correctly, b/ show you how to measure it c/ choose the right transformer and then make that judgement again.

You might consider that most of the best recordings ever made were done through multiple transformers.

Personally I love them. In pro audio these days there is very much a transformer resurgence, often with switcheable features
like core material (steel / nickel) to achieve a more / less analog sound. A lot of the old recordings we love have a warmth the can be
attributed in part to the steel transformer core material. 

I would suggest with DDAC for a start, run a 10kHz square wave through the transformer OP. If the transformer is set up correctly
there should be -no- overshoot or ringing at all. The square wave should be perfect but with some rounding of initial edge.

This is where where 'perfect squares' -are- important.

Quote

so, I will not focus on the DDDAC here, there is enough said, neither will I focus on the different kinds of power supplies, I talked already a lot about power supplies here and there... see for example post 225 here and on "ADC/DAC losses" post 29... (regarding power supply at the moment Stefan seems to be "leading" the field getting goose bumps while listening to his own - I have yet to hear this) nor on the shunt regulation, which is another "100.000 Deadheads can't go wrong"-phenomenon, but obviously has not yet checked out "scientifically" enough - but they are working on it, and I am waiting for the results...


It is tricky just to categorize 'shunt regs' all together and make a whole sale judgement on them - it's much more complex than that and somewhat beyond
what I think you understand. A big part of the 'sound' of a regulator has to do with it's transient response and how much feedback is used in the reg itself.
So just for shunt regs we can have many variations from high OP impedance to very low. Generally the higher OP Z ones will have wider bandwidth and better
transient response and the low OP Z ones can have poorer transient response. So here is another instance where your 'perfect squares' are important - the regs
ability to handle 'squares' with low overshoot or ringing. Of course you can't measure this on DAC OP, you generally just hear it.   

Quote
   

...but time has come now to possibly help the one or other out of this "trap" in which some might have fallen (regarding that "clinical", "steril", "anemic" effect), let me tell you (again) about our results. We have tested the following in all kinds of combinations (not only side by side, but combined with everything possible (we even used only parts of Doede's own Sowter-monster-DDDAC in order to be able to experience in detail the effect(s) just from every single exchange), and we did it again and again, and with all time needed to really verify the results for ourselves:

and the quintessence of the results was: one 1794 DDDAC-deck with Bernd's controlled power supply was that much better than Doede's eight deck DAC with Sowters and his own power supplies and everything else switchable on it (or later on Jean's own PSU or the Mundorf PSU and others for that matter), that it must be heard to be believed. It is here where there is "no way back". Why ? Because you get digital that analogue that you hardly any longer care for the source...


This is exactly what I was referring to before.

Not much point going to heroic attempts stacking 8 DAC's when just 1 done right can be as good or better. So the question is what is Bernd's power supply?

Quote

not to belittle anyone else's performance(s), no, just the contrary, I encourage you to move on with your skills, but personally I definitely do not want to listen to the "sound" of those transformers that I know of... perhaps it is the imperfection of its squares causing pollution, keeping the origianl signal away from sublime purity...


So in -your- case the transformers were inferior. However in the case where the right transformer was used and it was implemented correctly the results may well be
opposite.

OK enough long posts.

cheers

Terry





Offline Chanh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Liked: 9
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #245 on: August 26, 2014, 01:27:55 PM »
with all respect and I ......
Hi R,

Thanks for sharing with us your observations! There is no doubt you are right at your own perspective. Each setup has its own natural synergy, hence would respond somewhat varies confining to that specific synergy, I think.

Btw, were you using a preamp, if so what made (tube or SS, if SS was it Class A or B or D)??
Similarly with the poweramps? Without visibility of the rest of your setup downstream, is difficult to align to your feedback w.r.t output transformer!?! I said this because I, Myself, also carried out extensive experiments with output stage from DDDAC, with transformers, varies Caps (Including Duelunds all types, Alex, VSF, Cast copper), and of-course direct between neg and pos. at the end of the day, that pair of Sowter worth very penny to my ears! Having say that, I do not agree my observations are correct neither! :D

Cheers,
Chanh

Offline rhlauranna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Liked: 153
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #246 on: August 26, 2014, 07:22:19 PM »
well, thanks for all your contributions...  this seems the right way to move things further - together... the one and/or the other way... it can only become better...

if I take "only" the DDDAC there are quite some people who have come to really superb results and with such an amount of knowledge and skills and ambition that I become really envious on them...

... as it is like that I can do nothing but invite them... and I did it in april this year to visit and share their results with us ...

and they gladly did... if you are interested you might want to see the report from Stefan from The Netherlands regarding that matter

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/224108-nos-192-24-dac-pcm1794-waveio-usb-input-147.html

post 1468

(I have to admit that I would not be able to report on that level of knowledge that he is capable writing of...)... in addition we had dwjames with us, Cees Pel and others... (all very advanced DIYers...)

if you might want to have a further look, then go to:

http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/224108-nos-192-24-dac-pcm1794-waveio-usb-input-148.html

post 1472

post 1474

post 1911 dwjames experiences

post 1766 Stefan's (Supersurfer) new power supply

post 1569 a guy from the US preferring no output transformers as well with eight decks and shunts...

post 1499 regarding Bernd's power supply

to me it is utmost fun to experience and share all our results for those who are able to try out and probably may take advantage of...

the thing with the development of Bernd's controlled power supply is that one does not always "reach" the best sound if strictly following physical laws (making it for example quickest way possible)... as can be heard in direct comparison with Jean's and Doede's own power supplies...

pardon me for being that "open", but it is the result that counts, either getting  - with more or less one and the same DDDAC - critics as "anemic", "steril", "digital" and so on or getting "wet panties from copious, multiple ejaculations " (Stefano) when listening (already three years ago and rather far away from the actual level:)

http://twogoodears.blogspot.de/2010/11/gotorama-leau-de-cologne-part-2.html#uds-search-results

« Last Edit: August 27, 2014, 03:28:49 AM by rhlauranna »

Offline Chanh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Liked: 9
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #247 on: August 26, 2014, 08:26:53 PM »
Great stuff R! I will surely have another go with direct against transformer and report back. Perhaps some of you here can join?

Offline rhlauranna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Liked: 153
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #248 on: August 26, 2014, 08:31:07 PM »
Great stuff R! I will surely have another go with direct against transformer and report back. Perhaps some of you here can join?

we are sitting in the same boat...

and I very much appreciate your absolute pioneering...

Offline ozmillsy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2163
  • Liked: 245
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #249 on: August 27, 2014, 07:46:03 AM »
Quote
getting "wet panties from copious, multiple ejaculations " (Stefano)

 ;D   lol.   I am not sure this adds any credibility to the work done or the results achieved,  but it sure is entertaining.   Haha      :P

I can honestly say I have never experienced that level of hifi gratification.  8)

:)


It's all about the music,, not the equipment.

Offline zenelectro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 776
  • Liked: 144
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #250 on: August 27, 2014, 09:09:35 AM »
Great stuff R! I will surely have another go with direct against transformer and report back. Perhaps some of you here can join?

Chanh,

What is your current setup WRT number of DACs, OP stage and IV resistor?

Also do you have any info on the Sowter transformer, it appears shrouded in mystery.

cheers

Terry

Offline Chanh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Liked: 9
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #251 on: August 27, 2014, 10:54:32 AM »
Chanh,

What is your current setup WRT number of DACs, OP stage and IV resistor?

Also do you have any info on the Sowter transformer, it appears shrouded in mystery.
Hi Terry,

I have previously had Tuyen's 4 decks DDDAC here in exceed 3 or more Months. Along with KDAC, and few others including the top of the range Accuphase SACD player. The whole duration of DAC experimenting on my personal setup, which were Conrad Johson CT6 mod with Duelunds and AN Tantulum resisters, Bob Carver Cherries with similar components swapped, and found the 4-Decks DDDAC was best compromise. There were no doubt each DAC, has its own specialities where I could appreciated the beautiful analog mid and overall IMO of the KDAC but I thought I hears more from DDDAC. This is beside the point though I thought it gives better understand of my DDDAC direction.

W.r.t your queries, currently am doing a mod with my 11-Decks post experimenting and have had a gtg here at my shed between 8 vs 11. I was surprised to learn 11-Decks yet improved again with micro-dynamic, imaging and certainly more depth and width to the sound. The rest were subtle. Note this is based on standard stock kits without DAC board modification.
W.r.t  I/V resisters, based on my experience with my setup for my poweramps and preamp mod(s), I learnt AN Tantulum give much better clarity, better transparency, and certainly 3D sound imaging, where I appreciate these attributes greatly. Hence I am using AN Tantulum non-magnetic as I/V.
I use Sowter transformer as output, I think mine are 1:1 ratio ones. This give me the smoothness of an analog sounding without compromise too much on dynamic, and overall sound quality. Some might find it is otherwise and I respect that too.
Note - I have not experiment with other output trannies other than the recommended from the designer himself. All infor can be found http://www.dddac.com/dddac1794_output.html]

Quote
Ratio: 2.000
Turns: Prim 240 / Sec 480
Core: Gapped Mumetal, Package: Mumetal Can, Termination: Color coded leads
GENLOAD @20 Hz Sec. SC: 10 ohms Max
GENLOAD @20 Hz Sec. OC: 429 ohms Min
LEVEL for THD=0.5% @ 20 Hz: 10.2 dBu Min
Primary inductance (H): 3.4 H Min
Primary resistance: 1.6 ohms Max
Secondary resistance: 35 ohms Max

Note the current mod are;
1. Digital;
bypass caps are Vishay 68nf
Resisters are AN Tantulum and Shinkoh where applicable
Sanyo OSCon SP and SEPC as filter caps where applicable
3.3 Tent Shunt regulater right at Vdd
DAC ps filter reister is Kiwame 2W 1% 10R

2. Analog;
All caps are Elna Silmic 2
8V Tent Shunt Regulater right at Vcc but filter by 0.1uf Wima
DAC ps filter reister is Kiwame 2W 1% 10R

Your technical inputs are greatful! ;)

Best,
Chanh

« Last Edit: August 27, 2014, 11:24:14 AM by Chanh »

Offline vitavoxdude

  • Beauty is in the ear of the beholder
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1137
  • Liked: 60
  • Caring and sharing
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #252 on: August 27, 2014, 12:16:58 PM »
No mystery for Sowter transformers Zen, they have been in business for many years since 1941 I beleive.  A web search will find them near Ipswich back in the old country.  I believe the Son has taken over in the last decade so a lot more involvement in Audio products.  They offer good products and yet avoid the tiffany price tags.

I use an 11k primary output transformer in one of my SE 211 amps and its good.

V

http://www.sowter.co.uk/contact.php

sales@sowter.co.uk
Tel: +44 (0) 1473 252794
Fax: +44 (0) 1473 236188

E A Sowter Ltd. The Boatyard, Cullingham Road, IPSWICH IP1 2EG ENGLAND
We all like different things so lets all agree to disagree and if any common ground is found then worship it.  Mine is the KD hence being present on this forum.

Offline Chanh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Liked: 9
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #253 on: August 27, 2014, 06:46:48 PM »
A closer look at two 8V Tent Shunt on DAC board. Installing these are pain in the a$$! :D
Each board has in total 4 shunt regs, one digital and one analog on each channel.


Offline rhlauranna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Liked: 153
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #254 on: August 27, 2014, 07:15:41 PM »
as I could not exactly remember what kind of different transformers had been used in detail in our tests within the last year or so I surfed the net and I wasn't aware that TriodeDick had already reported about his results regarding the following transformers with measurement specs (and he says: "meten is weten", which means "to measure is to know"...)

because of the dutch language: there are five parts with different amount of pages, the start is here:

http://www.audio-creative.nl/hifi/dddac-1794-nos-diy-dac-deel-1/

1. Cinemag 15/15B

2. Lundahl LL1690

3. Magnequest B7-10K:10K

4. Sowter

and yes, within this context the Sowters within our tests here were the clear "winners"...(you might want to have a look at the different pictures regarding the implementation and measurement results...)

http://www.audio-creative.nl/hifi/dddac-1794-nos-diy-dac-deel-5/

(pages 1, 2 and three for the different types...)

I am just wondering: there are people who prefer caps or not, and there are people who prefer transformers or not...

in both cases this appears to me as "curing the symptom"...

so, should/could/would it be possible to "erase the cause" in avoiding the necessity to alter anything "afterwards", creating a circuit in which both are not necessary at all ?

if this question is stupid then don't care...

as you may have read, TriodeDick is on the transformer-side: " Ja, een trafo is in deze applicatie beter op zijn plek dan een uitgangscondensator, dat hoef niemand me meer te vertellen…" which is translated something like that: "Yes, a trafo within this application is better implemented than an output cap, nobody needs to tell me about that..."

well, to be fair, neither Doede nor Triodedick have listened to Klaus's and my results so far to be able to think different...

anyway: quintessence (as was for example with the bass horns): we have to try everything out by ourselves...
« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 08:30:53 PM by rhlauranna »

Offline vitavoxdude

  • Beauty is in the ear of the beholder
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1137
  • Liked: 60
  • Caring and sharing
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #255 on: August 28, 2014, 08:13:14 PM »
Here you go Chanh, a useful calculator for working out many parameters for power supplies, I like the LC calc, easy to use  :)

http://www.ampbooks.com/home/amplifier-calculators/LC-ripple-filter/
V
We all like different things so lets all agree to disagree and if any common ground is found then worship it.  Mine is the KD hence being present on this forum.

Offline rhlauranna

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1197
  • Liked: 153
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #256 on: August 28, 2014, 08:46:32 PM »
Quote

"...but time has come now to possibly help the one or other out of this "trap" in which some might have fallen (regarding that "clinical", "steril", "anemic" effect), let me tell you (again) about our results. We have tested the following in all kinds of combinations (not only side by side, but combined with everything possible (we even used only parts of Doede's own Sowter-monster-DDDAC in order to be able to experience in detail the effect(s) just from every single exchange), and we did it again and again, and with all time needed to really verify the results for ourselves:

    and the quintessence of the results was: one 1794 DDDAC-deck with Bernd's controlled power supply was that much better than Doede's eight deck DAC with Sowters and his own power supplies and everything else switchable on it (or later on Jean's own PSU or the Mundorf PSU and others for that matter), that it must be heard to be believed. It is here where there is "no way back". Why ? Because you get digital that analogue that you hardly any longer care for the source... "

End of quote

Quote:

"This is exactly what I was referring to before.

Not much point going to heroic attempts stacking 8 DAC's when just 1 done right can be as good or better. So the question is what is Bernd's power supply?

End of Quote

not to cause any misunderstandings because of the insufficiency of my descriptions regarding our results: all the posivitve advantages regarding the multiplying of the decks (as with the chips with the DDDAC1543) occured nevertheless and were identical in every constellation, they definitely remained the same... they ameliorated the sound in a way - to my ears - never ever been heard...

the constellation in getting the "best" result just with one deck was the platform to get into HiFi heaven, and with four and eight decks still got much better, and as Chanh already pointed out, the positive effects do not stop at eight decks, with his 11 decks he gets even more "better results"....

thanks a lot Chanh, for having tested and still testing this all out, I hardly can stand in my shoes to listen to this the other day...

I like those hints, but regarding possible "faults" or "sub-optimal" implementations of transformers or anything else we personally have no chance to make it "better", regarding this topic, we can only trust and rely on the results of our electronic engineers Doede and TriodeDick who were collegues at university of Utrecht... and we are very very glad about that...

« Last Edit: August 30, 2014, 12:20:51 AM by rhlauranna »

Offline Chanh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 49
  • Liked: 9
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #257 on: August 28, 2014, 10:07:33 PM »
Here you go Chanh, a useful calculator for working out many parameters for power supplies, I like the LC calc, easy to use  :)

http://www.ampbooks.com/home/amplifier-calculators/LC-ripple-filter/
V
Cheers Steve! I have 2 x 50mH choke, there seems no value smaller than 1H.
Are you keen for another visit once the DDDAC is up?
« Last Edit: August 28, 2014, 10:34:04 PM by Chanh »

Offline Jehuty

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1385
  • Liked: 110
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #258 on: August 28, 2014, 10:12:05 PM »
Here you go Chanh, a useful calculator for working out many parameters for power supplies, I like the LC calc, easy to use  :)

http://www.ampbooks.com/home/amplifier-calculators/LC-ripple-filter/
V

That's very handy. Thanks for sharing V.
Not all that matters can be measured, not all that can be measured matters.

Offline vitavoxdude

  • Beauty is in the ear of the beholder
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1137
  • Liked: 60
  • Caring and sharing
Re: DDDAC 1794-NOS 24-192
« Reply #259 on: August 28, 2014, 11:54:12 PM »
 :) Are you keen for another visit once the DDDAC is up?

Yup sure am.
V
We all like different things so lets all agree to disagree and if any common ground is found then worship it.  Mine is the KD hence being present on this forum.