mikelm said:
Hello Mike, all,
I'd be happy to see a thread like this. I've done a fair bit to mine, and always enjoy reading about other people's adventures.
I agree that the Sabre seems to like really clean power rails. I hope to do a few more experiments over the next few days, and wil report in if anyone is interested.
Dan
Use Panasonic Lead LC-R064R5P batteries you will be surprised !
One for the digital supply and one for the analog supply.
The best possible power supply is key for every DAC the SABRE is not different. It does cost less than soldering a lot of different supplies and it takes the DAC to another level.
Don't get me wrong, i do not say that batteries are always the way to go ...
just my two cents
One for the digital supply and one for the analog supply.
The best possible power supply is key for every DAC the SABRE is not different. It does cost less than soldering a lot of different supplies and it takes the DAC to another level.
Don't get me wrong, i do not say that batteries are always the way to go ...
just my two cents
Spartacus said:
I don't think this is true I thought it had a very good PSRR but that will be quoted at a fairly low frequency - mostly 1KHz.
The noise that can cause a roughening of the sound can be at any frequency from 1khz to 1MHz plus - very few regulators have much capacity to deal with very high frequencies so it is necessary to prevent these high frequences from getting there in the first place.
Also this DAC manages to reveal so much more detail than I have ever heard before I think it is necessary to take even more measures to make sure all those extra fine details also come out crystal clean & clear.
that's my take on it
mikelm said:
I don't think this is true I thought it had a very good PSRR but that will be quoted at a fairly low frequency - mostly 1KHz.
The noise that can cause a roughening of the sound can be at any frequency from 1khz to 1MHz plus - very few regulators have much capacity to deal with very high frequencies so it is necessary to prevent these high frequences from getting there in the first place.
Also this DAC manages to reveal so much more detail than I have ever heard before I think it is necessary to take even more measures to make sure all those extra fine details also come out crystal clean & clear.
that's my take on it
This was discussed a while back, but I couldn't find a link. The analog supply of the Sabre is also a reference - any noise here gets straight through to the output of the DAC, hence why it seems to benefit so much from really clean supplies.
i posted it on audioasylum but it might be intresting in this thread
the problem of comparing batteries with PSUs is that most of the DYIs use one batterie ( dull and slow transientrs) and thats the end of the story.
The brand of the batteries is not as important as the number of the batteries. There is a difference in the inner resistance of certain batteries ( Low ESR Optoma or northstar long life expectance, but 200€ for one) but if you take four cheap ones you get 1/8 of inner resistance of one
You will hear the difference.The biggest effect is in combination with Class-D Amps.My new combo blows away my old 20.000€ tube amp.But also the buffalo, the Juli@ my zap-outputstage and the pc are on much higher level than with conventional PSUs.
If You decide to do it for the Juli@ take four 6 Volts parallel to a regulator ( thel or like hanssatink did it) and do the charging when you stop playing with a constant voltage source at 6,9 Volt , so there is no problem of overcharging and the charger can be connected all the time.Full charging is at 7,2 Volt.
bye
alfred
PS: i compared NiMH ,Lithium and normal alkalines and the paralleled sealed acid are the winner.
the problem of comparing batteries with PSUs is that most of the DYIs use one batterie ( dull and slow transientrs) and thats the end of the story.
The brand of the batteries is not as important as the number of the batteries. There is a difference in the inner resistance of certain batteries ( Low ESR Optoma or northstar long life expectance, but 200€ for one) but if you take four cheap ones you get 1/8 of inner resistance of one
You will hear the difference.The biggest effect is in combination with Class-D Amps.My new combo blows away my old 20.000€ tube amp.But also the buffalo, the Juli@ my zap-outputstage and the pc are on much higher level than with conventional PSUs.
If You decide to do it for the Juli@ take four 6 Volts parallel to a regulator ( thel or like hanssatink did it) and do the charging when you stop playing with a constant voltage source at 6,9 Volt , so there is no problem of overcharging and the charger can be connected all the time.Full charging is at 7,2 Volt.
bye
alfred
PS: i compared NiMH ,Lithium and normal alkalines and the paralleled sealed acid are the winner.
The original price of the Buffalo24 may to a certain degree be irrelevant as its not for sale anymore (fortunately I'm a happy owner of one). I'm building the Counterpoint in this moment and a real pain is that I will not be able to try it with the Buffalo32 in its current design... The temptation is big, but so is the price......
I guess the price is fine for people who does not have Buffalo24 and don't want to experiment. As an upgrade to a Buffalo24 I have my doubts....
I guess the price is fine for people who does not have Buffalo24 and don't want to experiment. As an upgrade to a Buffalo24 I have my doubts....
Oscillation on CounterPoint
I don't know if you've check the TwistedPear support postings today. I put in a problem I'm having with a 2.5 MHz oscillation on my CounterPoint boards and I'm not clear on how to connect the RG 1 & 2 resistors. It's posted under Analog/Counterpoint/Connecting RG1/RG2.
Thanks.
RossG
I don't know if you've check the TwistedPear support postings today. I put in a problem I'm having with a 2.5 MHz oscillation on my CounterPoint boards and I'm not clear on how to connect the RG 1 & 2 resistors. It's posted under Analog/Counterpoint/Connecting RG1/RG2.
Thanks.
RossG
Re: Oscillation on CounterPoint
Hi Ross. Sorry I missed that post.
RG1 and RG2 should be connected as follows. One leg goes in the pad which is connected to output. The other leg is connected to GND.
Originally I intended to do the symmetrical feedback (thus the dual pads for that leg) but found that the compensation required made it not sound great to me.
Cheers!
Russ
krgaunt said:
Hi Ross. Sorry I missed that post.
RG1 and RG2 should be connected as follows. One leg goes in the pad which is connected to output. The other leg is connected to GND.
Originally I intended to do the symmetrical feedback (thus the dual pads for that leg) but found that the compensation required made it not sound great to me.
Cheers!
Russ
alboran said:good morning
also me to be interested to know whether to be possible to settle new es9018 in substitution of the es9008 on the "old" buffalo dac..
new es9018 in "old" buffalo dac to perfectly work?
graces and regards
Absolutely you can put an ES9018 on the old Buffalo board and it will work fine.
Cheers!
Russ
Re: Re: Re: Oscillation on CounterPoint
I am not sure what you mean. There should be no RG connection to the inputs at all. Just each Output and GND. No jumpers involved.
Note that RG there are two pads at the shunt end, one that goes to GND and one that goes to anti-phase input. Use the pad that goes to GND. That's all there is to it. RG1 & RG2 are the I/V resistors.
krgaunt said:
I am not sure what you mean. There should be no RG connection to the inputs at all. Just each Output and GND. No jumpers involved.
Note that RG there are two pads at the shunt end, one that goes to GND and one that goes to anti-phase input. Use the pad that goes to GND. That's all there is to it.
RG1 & RG2 are the I/V resistors.Re: Re: Re: Re: Oscillation on CounterPoint
I understand what you are saying about connecting RG1&2 to the output pins.
But what I mean about jumpers is connecting the IN+ and IN- to the circuit. Sorry about pestering you on this but I want to get it right, naturally.
According to the CounterPoint schematic it shows the IN+ and IN-going through RG2 and RG1 to the anti-phase input. So if I connect RG 1 & 2 to the outputs pins, the input pins go no where. I think I'll need to jumper across pins 1 & 2 of the RG resistor pads on the circuit board to get IN+ and IN- to the anit-phase circuit.
Maybe I'm not seeing something on the schematic.
RossG
Russ White said:
I am not sure what you mean. There should be no RG connection to the inputs at all. Just each Output and GND. No jumpers involved.
Note that RG there are two pads at the shunt end, one that goes to GND and one that goes to anti-phase input. Use the pad that goes to GND. That's all there is to it.
I understand what you are saying about connecting RG1&2 to the output pins.
But what I mean about jumpers is connecting the IN+ and IN- to the circuit. Sorry about pestering you on this but I want to get it right, naturally.
According to the CounterPoint schematic it shows the IN+ and IN-going through RG2 and RG1 to the anti-phase input. So if I connect RG 1 & 2 to the outputs pins, the input pins go no where. I think I'll need to jumper across pins 1 & 2 of the RG resistor pads on the circuit board to get IN+ and IN- to the anit-phase circuit.
Maybe I'm not seeing something on the schematic.
RossG
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.