Change of plans on DACs. I am going to build one...

headrott

Originally, I was going to install a DAC and 12AU7 tube to XLR outputs into my Denon DVD-5910 DVD player, but have since decided to build a stand alone DAC. I need some peoples' advice who have done this before (as I have not). I understand the basic concept of what needs to be done, but I need help with things like wire guage between components. I am planning on using the Buffalo II (twisted pear audio) 32bit/192khz DAC and output it through both the IVY III I/V analog stage, as well as some 12AU7 tube sockets to XLR outputs. The 12AU7 tube sockets would be point to point wiring, the IVY III and all twisted pear audio products would be PCB. I need help with what wire gauge to use for connecting the the DAC, IVY III and DAC and 12AU7 tube sockets and then to the XLR outputs. Also, I need a wire gauge for the IEC socket to the power button please.

I am planning on using Cardas wire from Sonic Craft if it makes a difference, unless someone can recommend a better wire for the project. Thank you for your help. I will post pics as I build the DAC, but it wont be until the beginning of January at the soonest. Thanks again.

Greg

ben62670

Do you have a link to the DAC kit? I am building one very soon also. I have studied a great deal on this. Hopefully I can be of some help.
Ben

headrott

ben62670 wrote: »

Do you have a link to the DAC kit? I am building one very soon also. I have studied a great deal on this. Hopefully I can be of some help.
Ben

Thanks for the offer Ben. The link is below. Not exactly a "kit" but basically everything I need to do it. Here is the link:

http://www.twistedpearaudio.com/news.aspx

Greg

Face

Neotech chassis wire, ask Jeff there which gauge you should use.

ben62670

You would be much better off with a kit like this.
http://cgi.ebay.com/CS8416-PCM1798-24bit-192khz-DAC-KIT-DIY-/250724189575?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3a60538587#ht_3605wt_698
Or ready to fly
http://cgi.ebay.com/Tube-CD-DAC-Kit-PCB-w-Parts-6DJ8-PCM63K-24-96KHz-DAC50-/290495357407?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item43a2df61df#ht_3626wt_710
or this one
http://cgi.ebay.com/Mini1543-DAC-TDA1543-DIR9001-NOS-DAC-Kit-Board-/260609400588?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cad87df0c

ben62670

Very good read
http://lampizator.eu/#_CHRONOLOGICAL_LIST_OF_RECENT_UPDATES

headrott

Yes Ben, I have read the things on his web site and that's what lead me to the Buffalo II DAC. I like the idea of the complete DAC/tube output in one board, but I don';t think it's balanced and it's a lower quality DAC than the Buffalo II. What do you think?

Greg

ben62670

The Two chips that I have linked to are exceptional chips. The reason I showed you those boards is that the OpAmp sockets are an easy place to steal the analog out from the DAC chips. The board you linked me two has a lot of wasted components that are not used when making a true tube DAC. Do you need balanced outs? In either case both of those DAC chip have differential outs(balanced).

Edit: You don't need a high quality PS for the analog stages on the DAC boards I listed because you are not going to use OpAmps. You will however might want to upgrade the 5+vdc PS for the digital and analog 5v circuits.
Ben

headrott

ben62670 wrote: »

The Two chips that I have linked to are exceptional chips. The reason I showed you those boards is that the OpAmp sockets are an easy place to steal the analog out from the DAC chips. The board you linked me two has a lot of wasted components that are not used when making a true tube DAC. Do you need balanced outs? In either case both of those DAC chip have differential outs(balanced).

Edit: You don't need a high quality PS for the analog stages on the DAC boards I listed because you are not going to use OpAmps. You will however might want to upgrade the 5+vdc PS for the digital and analog 5v circuits.
Ben

What if I wanted both "solid state" and tube linked to balanced outputs? That was the plan I was going with. that's why I was going with the IVY III and then the separate point ot point tube sockets to XLR outputs. Thanks again Ben.

Greg

ben62670

OK you can still run both SS and tube, but after you run tube you won't want to run SS. I was planning on having my pre SS/Tube/Passive, but after running the tubes that is all I run. Where were you planning on picking up the audio signal for the tubes?

headrott

ben62670 wrote: »

OK you can still run both SS and tube, but after you run tube you won't want to run SS. I was planning on having my pre SS/Tube/Passive, but after running the tubes that is all I run. Where were you planning on picking up the audio signal for the tubes?

So you think I should skip the SS option? I know I like tubes, but I wanted the flexability of having both. If it degrades the signal or you think tubes is all I'll listen to then maybe I should skip the SS.

IF I did both, could I pull the audio signal from the same spot off the DAC board for SS and tube? Or would this not work. I realize I would need 2 PS's to do it though, but for the the signal itelf wouldn't the same output off the DAC board work?

Greg

ben62670

The SS would just need the OpAmps installed. I would skip SS and just do the tubes. If you want both you could still steal the analog out off the DAC chip.

headrott

Face wrote: »

Neotech chassis wire, ask Jeff there which gauge you should use.

Thanks for the advice Face. I was looking at the Neotech wire. I have used their power cable and found it to be excellent. I will ask Jeff about it.

Greg

headrott

ben62670 wrote: »

The SS would just need the OpAmps installed. I would skip SS and just do the tubes. If you want both you could still steal the analog out off the DAC chip.

So you think if I did just tubes, the Buffalo II DAC would be a waste of resources? There is more than I need for just tubes on the board? But, if I ended up doing both SS and tubes it would be a good DAC board to use? Or, do you think the other one(s) you linked to on ebay were better?

Also, for point to point connections from the DAC board to the tube sockets, is there anything else I would need to do it besides the DAC board, tube sockets, wire and power supply (including transformer)? Also, what PS board would you recommend for some 12AU7 tubes?

Greg

ben62670

What do you want for outputs? RCA or XLR?
Yes the buffalo DAC would be a waste seeing you wouldn't be using the analog stage.

headrott

ben62670 wrote: »

What do you want for outputs? RCA or XLR?

XLR outs, but both would be ideal. I know I want too much from my DAC.

Greg

ben62670

Just chew on things for a little and read up on the lampizator site. I did a lot of research on DIYaudio also and people have a lot of respect for his work. The XLR's would be easy. The Tube PS isn't very hard to do. I bought an adjustable voltage PS for my Phono Pre that was easy to build and you can dial in the voltages you need with a nice hum free design and DC on the tube heaters.

ben62670

BTW the PCM1798 DAC would be easier to do balanced than unbalanced.

headrott

ben62670 wrote: »

Just chew on things for a little and read up on the lampizator site. I did a lot of research on DIYaudio also and people have a lot of respect for his work. The XLR's would be easy. The Tube PS isn't very hard to do. I bought an adjustable voltage PS for my Phono Pre that was easy to build and you can dial in the voltages you need with a nice hum free design and DC on the tube heaters.

Where did you get this PS from Ben? Also, I don't remember, can you use the same PS for both the plate current and the tube heaters? Or, do you need separate PS's for both?

The reason I was looking into the Buffalo II was because it has one of the best DAC chips out there in it, also it would give me the flexablility of both SS and tube in a balanced output.

I believe the 12AU7 uses a 12.3V plate current if I am not mistaken. What was this adjustable PS you are talking about?

Greg

ben62670

http://www.analogmetric.com/goods.php?id=1362
Worth every penny

headrott

ben62670 wrote: »

http://www.analogmetric.com/goods.php?id=1362
Worth every penny

Cool thanks for the link Ben.

Greg

But, would I be able to use this for both the plate current and tube heaters? Or do I need 2 PS's for each one?

Greg

bikerboy

The Buffalo II is a modular design. If you want to use a tube output stage dont buy the legato or ivy output stage. The Placid PS are a nice upgrade from the linear ps. I use the legato ivy because it sounds better to me. Good luck buying a BuffaloII as they sell out every time. Brian and Russ do a great job, but its only the two of them. The ESS 9018 dac is the hot setup right now! I want the soon to be available usb to i2s converter they are working on. Good luck!

bikerboy

http://www.twistedpearaudio.com/digital/buffalo.aspx
Saturday night's the night! Hope you were good this year! Good luck. I love mine. Just got the trident regs for mine. I did say I love mine!

headrott

Yep, I'm on it!!:biggrin:

Greg

heiney9

anonymouse wrote: »

The CS8416 I believe is used in the Maverick D1. My experience is that its entry level, nowhere in the class of even a 10 year old Parasound DAC2000 which I compared it against.

That's the digital receiver chip for optical and S/PDIF inputs which supports bit depths up to 24bit and sampling rates up to 192KHz when connected via an optical or coaxial digital cable. Are you sure it's that chip which is the weak link? What digital receiver chipset should one be looking for?

H9

ben62670

The reason I chose those boards is the DAC chips are the most popular with modders to get great results. The analog/PS stages is where most DACs fall short.
Ben

heiney9

My Adcom GDA 600 uses the CS8412 which I assume is even older and more entry level than the CS8416, the thing is amazing. It sounded damn good before I modded the analog section and now sounds even better.

I would guess the Maverick has more serious entry level weak area's that are far more detrimental to its sound than the CS8416

heiney9

The Parasound DAC 2000 uses an Ultra Analog AES21 digital receiver simply because it uses the Pacific Mirconics PMD-100 digital filter to decode HDCD and the Burr Brown PCM-1702 dac chipset. The exact same circuit is used in the Adcom GDA700 because it also decodes HDCD.

H9

heiney9

Just to be clear I'm not debating there are newer and probably better receiver chips, but I doubt it's really a big part of why the Maverick sounded more entry level vs the Parasound. There are lots of other more important area's to be concerned with.

Just .02c

H9

MillerLiteScott

The chip in my Maverick has the info scratched off. It is definitely an entry level DAC but is fine for me in a computer/office rig set up. I am using the Maverick in my main rig now while I am waiting for an affordable DAC for my main rig. The Maverick is not cutting it for me right now.

I am trying to decide between a DIY DAC and buying a complete product. The buffalo unit looks like a great product.

Scott

heiney9

I just bought a Pop Pulse 1796 MKII DAC for my office rig. Going to compare it to the AMC DAC8 I already have.

http://www.cryo-parts.com/index.php/pop-pulse/1796-mkii-dac

The main rig has a heavily modded Adcom GDA600 and it's actually quite a stunner. Brought it to Polkfest and had it out briefly in the back bedroom Anthem rig.

Scott - Ricardo and another friend of mine have April Music Stello Dac's in their main rigs and they sound excellent.

http://www.aprilmusic.com/main/sub02_02_02.html

H9