The Most Budget DAC

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Burr-Brown (which, if memory serves, belongs to TI nowadays).

Correct.

Interesting,while the PCM 1716 isn't BB's best converter and there are likely to be some compromises in the analog section and power supply, but it looks good for a mere $100.I bet with some well thought out mod's it's performance could be greatly improved upon.

AES is an XLR correct?

One thing I have learned is I would rather have a mediocre dac chip and a good analog section than a sweet DAC and a weak analog section.
My bud needs a DAC.
Any ideas? We can build it;)

Yeah I am not going from scratch on a DAC, but a board to stick in a pre yes:)

Thanks Fred. I am loving the DAC I have!

WilliamM2 wrote: »

I would think any modern CD player would have a better DAC. That's a really old chip, here's the data sheet, copyright 1997:

http://www.datasheetcatalog.org/datasheet/BurrBrown/mXyzyqwr.pdf

Not nec true in all cases.......it's all about the analog stage. The BB PCM63 is an old chipset by today's standards and is still highly popular and when implemented properly sounds better than many newer chips in poorer designs.

H9

strider wrote: »

Have either of you ever looked at the boards available from Peter Daniels?

I did see something about it, its pretty basic and ancient compared to the current state of digital technology ,both the Philips DAC chip and the Crystal input reciever are rather long in the tooth.

Strider, I believe Peter Daniels DAC boards are based on the old Phillips TDA1543 chips from the early 90's, implimented with non-oversampling (nos).

There are several of these nos TDA1543 designs around, both in kits and finished DACs.

Many use 8 TDA1543's in parallel to inprove linearity and resolution. The other reason the old TDA1543 is popular is that is has a strong current output, which means I/V conversion can be done with a resistor. Therefore, many designs only have a resistor and output coupling cap in the analog stage - no opamps needed.

Many find these simple nos DACs to be the Holy Grail of digital, with a musical, vinyl-like presentation with zero fatigue . Others look at the measurements these DACs can produce and immediately dispense them. Others find them to sound congested and lack detail. I think a lot of it is a personal taste and synergy thing.

I've owned a couple 8 x TDA1543 nos DACs and currently own a VALAB which I modded with upgraded I/V resistors and output caps.

If you're interested in trying an 8 x TDA1543 nos DAC, you could buy one and then mod it with better parts for around $300.

A fairly new crop with a very similar design (with USB input) goes under the names of VALAB, Pacific Valve Fathom, Teredak, Gigalab. They all use the modern DIR9001 receiver chip with 8 x TDA1543 chips. They're all made in Tiawan or China and are around $200. I like the idea of the Pacific Valve Fathom due to the state-side support.
Pacific Valve Fathom

The VALAB has a couple huge threads at Head-Fi, with many posts abouts various modifications.

The "on sale" part of the Fathom is a joke, IMO. Essentially the same DAC sells directly from eBay for $200 as the VALAB, but it's shipped from Taiwan, so a pain if you have issues. I think the extra $30 is worth it for the security of state-side support. The Fathom has just been released, so I would have bought it instead of the VALAB, had it existed at the time.

With the passive output stage of these designs, you can't get much simpler. I would definitely describe them as laid-back and non-fatiguing, but lacking if you are a detail freak. One thing I've experienced is that they make me want to increase the volume again and again, whereas my other (much more expensive) DAC makes me want to turn the volume down at times due to its more aggressive presentation.

I'm NOS all the way. 1545 rules!