DENON: DACs part number: PCM1804 + PCM1791A versus PCM1804 + PCM1796

Bernal
Bernal Posts: 991
edited October 2009 in Electronics
Hi,
What is the difference between the following DAC?
What is its significance and how it works?

DENON 4308 Ci/4810 Ci:
DACs part number: Burr-Brown PCM-1791A versus PCM1796:confused:
DACs part number: Burr-Brown PCM-1804:confused:

1) http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/pcm1791a.pdf
2) http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/pcm1804.pdf
3) http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/pcm1796.pdf
Post edited by Bernal on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    Researchers found the following comment.
    With Polk's experts can help me understand the Topic:
    According to Jeff from Denon who posts on AVS, the PCM1796 chips used on the 5308, because there are two used per channel, will give the same performance as the PCM1792.

    Although that doesn't explain the usage of the PCM1791A chips on the 4308.

    It has been confirmed that the 805, 875 and 905 are using the PCM1796 chips for several months now, so that shouldn't come as news.

    However I do note that looking through reviews the 4308CI is noted for how quiet it is and that even in analog multi-channel mode there is barely a peep to be heard. For most, this is probably more important than the DAC's.

    http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/rec...-receiver.html
    Denon's AVR-4308CI impressed, with very good power results, and virtually perfect noise and linearity performance. Power with stereo channels driven handily bettered Denon's 140 watts spec, and performance with 5 channels driven was only a scant half-dB shy of that mark, at 126 watts. S/N on PCM signal was spot on the theoretically "perfect" mark on our dithered-silence test, and a couple tenths "better than perfect" with Dolby Digital signals. This is probably a lab-only vestige of a meaninglessly tiny least-significant bit error; nevertheless, linearity at -90 dBFS was effectively perfect, and our "excess noise" results were the best I've measured. (Analog-domain noise at the multichannel input was outstanding as well.)

    Although it should be said that the dynamic range of Blu-ray and Super Audio CD exceeds that of the PCM1791A DAC, but is met by both the PCM1796 and PCM/DSD1792 chips.

    The SC-09TX from Pioneer is using Wolfson WM 8741 DACs (http://www.wolfsonmicro.com/products/WM8741/) which will sit very well with music lovers, but as far as I can tell they're not adding direct DSD>Analog conversion which the Denon 3808, 4308, 4308, Yamaha RX-1800, RX-3800, RX-Z11 and Onkyo 805, 875 and 905 all have.

    The entire Elite line currently will only do DSD>PCM and, whether or not I will be able to hear a difference, I still want the opportunity to do direct DSD>Analog. Full specs aren't out on the SC-09TX yet, but at $7,000 it's not one I'm considering.

    The Denon 3808CI is very similar to the 4308CI and can be had through an authorized refurbished Denon dealer for $999 right now with free shipping through Amazon. I'm so close to pulling the plug, but am also considering getting a pre/pro and amp from Emotiva.

    Decisions, decisions, decisions, they're so hard to make when you don't have a $20,000 budget!
    RIP LeRoi Moore
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Systems
    Systems Posts: 14,873
    edited October 2009
    The 1791 and 1796 are very similar spec wise but the 1791 is a voltage output DAC and 1796 is a current output DAC which requires an external circuit for the current to voltage conversion.

    The 1804 is not a DAC but an ADC (analog-digital converter).
    Testing
    Testing
    Testing
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    GV#27 wrote: »
    The 1791 and 1796 are very similar spec wise but the 1791 is a voltage output DAC and 1796 is a current output DAC which requires an external circuit for the current to voltage conversion.

    The 1804 is not a DAC but an ADC (analog-digital converter).

    Thanks for your reply.

    Q. - The difference in making better audio system?
    Q. - I have a Denon 4308CI with the ADC 1804 and DAC 1791A. ¿It's a good audio setup?.
    Q. - What is the work of Dac?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Systems
    Systems Posts: 14,873
    edited October 2009
    Bernal wrote: »
    Thanks for your reply.
    Your welcome
    Q. - The difference in making better audio system?
    Sorry can you be more specific?
    Q. - I have a Denon 4308CI with the ADC 1804 and DAC 1791A. ¿It's a good audio setup?.
    These are good IC's and not likely to be the limiting factor but there are more factors involved than just the quality of the digital chip set used.Things like the analog stages and power supplies have a big influence on the final outcome.
    Q. - What is the work of Dac?
    The purpose of the dac chip is to convert the digital data(ones and zero's) into an analog waveform.
    Testing
    Testing
    Testing
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dave shepard
    dave shepard Posts: 1,334
    edited October 2009
    If the system is not giving you the sound you are looking for it would be best to sell the unit or speakers and get something that works in your room and sounds best to you.

    Do not start to reengineer the unit to try to make it what you want because it will be (for the most part) a waste of your time and money. What about the system do you feel is lacking. My guess would be the sound but you will have to clearify just what it needs and from there we can have a better understanding which direction you need to take.


    Dave
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    GV#27 wrote: »
    Your welcome

    Sorry can you be more specific?
    These are good IC's and not likely to be the limiting factor but there are more factors involved than just the quality of the digital chip set used.Things like the analog stages and power supplies have a big influence on the final outcome.
    The purpose of the dac chip is to convert the digital data(ones and zero's) into an analog waveform.

    Thanks for your reply.
    I understand. :)
    My question was prompted by several comments in forums.
    It is said that the DAC is synonymous with quality. Now I understand, are only part of the whole. We must assess the integrity of the system    .
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    dave shepard wrote: »
    If the system is not giving you the sound you are looking for it would be best to sell the unit or speakers and get something that works in your room and sounds best to you.

    Do not start to reengineer the unit to try to make it what you want because it will be (for the most part) a waste of your time and money. What about the system do you feel is lacking. My guess would be the sound but you will have to clearify just what it needs and from there we can have a better understanding which direction you need to take.


    Dave
    GV#27 wrote: »
    Your welcome

    Sorry can you be more specific?
    These are good IC's and not likely to be the limiting factor but there are more factors involved than just the quality of the digital chip set used.Things like the analog stages and power supplies have a big influence on the final outcome.
    The purpose of the dac chip is to convert the digital data(ones and zero's) into an analog waveform.

    Thanks for your reply.
    I understand. :)
    My question was prompted by several comments in forums.
    It is said that the DAC is synonymous with quality. Now I understand, are only part of the whole. We must assess the integrity of the system
    I'm not going reengineering of the unit.
    Thanks    .
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    ....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    GV#27 wrote: »
    The 1791 and 1796 are very similar spec wise but the 1791 is a voltage output DAC and 1796 is a current output DAC which requires an external circuit for the current to voltage conversion.

    The 1804 is not a DAC but an ADC (analog-digital converter).

    Q.- What is the work of ADC?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Systems
    Systems Posts: 14,873
    edited October 2009
    As the name implies it converts an analog waveform into digital data.It's function in the DENON would be to convert the signal from an analog source such as a CD, so that it can be modified /manipulated further by DSP(digital signal processing).
    Testing
    Testing
    Testing
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    GV#27 wrote: »
    As the name implies it converts an analog waveform into digital data.It's function in the DENON would be to convert the signal from an analog source such as a CD, so that it can be modified /manipulated further by DSP(digital signal processing).

    Thanks for the information.
    I now understand better the terms.
    :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    ....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • megasat16
    megasat16 Posts: 3,521
    edited October 2009
    Bernal wrote: »
    ....

    ????
    Trying out Different Audio Cables is a Religious Affair. You don't discuss it with anyone. :redface::biggrin:
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Systems
    Systems Posts: 14,873
    edited October 2009
    Why the empty post?
    Bernal wrote: »
    Thanks for the information.
    Your welcome.
    Testing
    Testing
    Testing
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Gaara
    Gaara Posts: 2,415
    edited October 2009
    GV#27 wrote: »
    Why the empty post?

    Your welcome.

    I think its his form of bumping. I noticed him bumping his OPPO thread as well, lots of emoticons. Reminds me of how CL used to talk to himself.
    The Basement HT
    PC Rig
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Systems
    Systems Posts: 14,873
    edited October 2009
    Gaara wrote: »
    Reminds me of how CL used to talk to himself.
    :eek: lets hope not!
    Testing
    Testing
    Testing
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Bernal
    Bernal Posts: 991
    edited October 2009
    GV#27 wrote: »
    :eek: lets hope not!
    :confused:
    NO!.
    ;)
    Thanks for the information.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter