Is there any DAC compatible with FreeBSD?

I've been listening to the dual PCM56 DAC for a couple of weeks now using the setup shown in my last photo, and I can highly recommend it, I'm amazed how good it sounds at the low price. I bought a couple of spares since they are so cheap! I think there may be a burn-in effect, it seems to sound even better after a couple of weeks playing. I think the passive low-pass filter they have implemented works well. Surprisingly, I think it sounds better than the WM8740 I tested earlier. Somehow, the R2R dac sounds more 'analog'. For a low cost system, this is very nice IMHO. Of course the headphone amp, SMSL PO100 and linear PSU get the most out of the two PCM56 chips; I'm sure any other good quality headphone amp, would work just as well. But the real magic lies inside the Burr-Brown PCM56 chips themselves. Very easy, fatigue free listening, very musical. This was tested using DT-990 PRO headphones.

I've got an SU-1 on order to try out one of the AK chips, but I'm really pleased with this small BB NOS dac.
 
Last edited:
I use a general USB scarlet 8i6 focusrite. It works out of the box in Linux, no need for any driver, i.e. usbaudio & alsa.
Could not get it to work in Freebsd.
As long as there is no "qasmixer" application or alternative mixer detecting all channels many will not work ...

ardour5/jack didn't worked neither with my usb-dac.
I successfully used a Focusrite Scarlett 2i2 with FreeBSD, with no drivers. But it only has two channels. I have read other places that more channels are a problem.
 
This is only obliquely connected to audio, but I thought it was interesting. The video looks at some thin film laser-trimmed resistor networks, and discusses some details about how they work and how the laser trimming is done. Interesting because chips like the Burr-Brown PCM56 DAC (and others in that series) have an internal laser-trimmed NiCr R2R resistor ladder, which I expect was made using similar techniques to those shown in the video. In the PCM56 the ladder must be physically much smaller than here since the whole chip has to fit into a standard 16-pin DIP package. It also makes me think that as the number of bits increases, the thin-film R2R network will increase in size and also cost, and that is likely to be one of the motivations for the changeover in the industry to delta-sigma designs for chips beyond 16-bits. It's quite interesting to see how these things work under the covers.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rxy-VpSDPg4

I think chips like the PCM56 must have been quite expensive to manufacture (and buy) when they were originally launched, especially if the R2R network in each chip was laser trimmed under some kind of active testing process, as he describes; the PCMC56 datasheet does mention that the R2R ladder was laser trimmed. Presumably being able to buy these now at low prices is really only possible because they are effectively "surplus stock" that has been sold off cheap to the highest bidder for disposal. Of course this chip would be considered obsolete today in the age of 24-bit streaming hi-def audio, being only a 16-bit dac, and you can't use it in small devices like smartphones because the thru-hole 14-DIP package is far too large. It's kind of interesting that digikey still has a decent number of them on the shelf, although they say its out of production.
 
Multi-channel as such is no problem, works for me:
Code:
uaudio0 on uhub4
uaudio0: <Icon Global 32Ci4, class 0/0, rev 2.00/1.00, addr 2> on usbus3
uvideo0: 2 format(s), iface_index=1, endpoint=0x81, psize=3060, isoc
uvideo0: default format: pixfmt=0x47504a4d, 1280x720, max_fbuf=1843200
uvideo0: UVC camera on /dev/video2
uaudio0: Play[0]: 192000 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer. (selected)
uaudio0: Play[0]: 176400 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Play[0]: 96000 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Play[0]: 88200 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Play[0]: 48000 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Play[0]: 44100 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Record[0]: 192000 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer. (selected)
uaudio0: Record[0]: 176400 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Record[0]: 96000 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Record[0]: 88200 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Record[0]: 48000 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: Record[0]: 44100 Hz, 14 ch, 32-bit S-LE PCM format, 2x4ms buffer.
uaudio0: MIDI sequencer.
pcm5 on uaudio0
uaudio0: No HID volume keys found.

Whether specific models like the 8-channel scarlett work I don't know.
 
The LiTe DAC-AH, another NOS DAC; this one has 8 x TDA1543 (Philips) arranged in parallel. The photo shows the thinkpad x220 running FreeBSD 14.4R, with DT-990 PRO headphones, and at the left the DAC-AH LITE is the lower black box, and the silver panel box above it is a mosfet preamp, which drives an HD8-A1 headphone amplifier on a lower shelf, not visible in the photo. Gorgeous sound quality, very natural and musical. The dac itself is driven, via its coax input, by an SMSL PO100, which provides the USB interface to FreeBSD. The dual Burr-Brown PCM56 previously discussed is also excellent in this configuration. So this is another nice system for FreeBSD based audio.
dac-ah-1.jpg


The DAC itself is nicely made, having an all steel case, rather than the more usual aluminium. The circuit board is through-hole, this version has an active low-pass filter after the set of 8 TDA1543 dac chips in parallel, based on a pair of analog devices AD847 op-amps. The internal power supply is based on the usual R-core transformer. The two photos below show the internals of the case, and a close-up of the circuit board.
dac-ah-2.jpg

Briefly, moving from right to left in the photo above, we have the power supply section at the upper right of the PCB; the digital receiver is between the power supply heatsinks and the rear panel; then the d-to-a converter section, in the central vertical strip of the board, comprising 8xTDA1543 in parallel, and finally on the left an op-amp based output stage, one per channel, together with its associated regulated power supply.

A couple of things I didn't like. The top of the case gets quite warm above the power supply heatsinks, I may drill some holes in the top to allow ventilation. I am also not very impressed with the wiring layout of the power cables, directly above those heatsinks; I would have sited the mains socket on the front of the case, perhaps, or at least well away so that the cables did not lie directly on top of the heatsinks. They have at least fitted an inline fuse to one of the AC lines going to the transformer. I don't really understand why they have sited the mains switch in the centre instead of to one side to save space, placing it in the front centre means the case has had to be lengthened to accommodate the switch, but that is a minor detail; maybe someone liked the way the central power button looks.

The digital interface to the coax/spdif sockets is provided by a Cirrus CS8414 digital receiver chip https://www.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/pdf/84295/ETC/CS8414.html , which may or may not be fake, either way, it seems to work fine.
1785967659905.png


The TDA1543 is a Philips/NXP dual channel 16-bit dac that can support both NOS and oversampling operation, datasheet is linked below. The unit maker says that in this design the chip is configured in NOS mode. It appears to be a low-cost derivative of the TDA1541, although the block diagrams of the two chips look quite different in some areas, so it's not the same chip.

These two dac chips are capable of good results and have a cult following amongst audio enthusiasts (especially, the TDA1541). The 1541 has considerably better distortion figures than the 1543, see a comparison here https://www.bramjacobse.nl/wordpress/?p=9600 .

The opamp used in this circuit to build the output buffer is an analog devices AD847, which is a high speed buffer op-amp https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD847.pdf , which is an 'interesting' choice. The circuit digram shows a 5532, though, so they have changed it. The two op-amps on my board have ceramic packages, so perhaps they are genuine; the writing on the back of the chips is very faint, but I can make out the markings and the AD logo. Well, they sound fine, anyway.

dac-ah-3.jpg


This DAC is quite well known online, it has been quite widely discussed, for example on head-fi.org and diyaudio. There are a couple of links here discussing modifying it to use a passive LP filter, which some people think improves the sound quality.

In my version the op-amps are not socketed so I would have to do a little work if I wanted to experiment with these mods. To be honest it sounds pretty nice with the active filter, as they ship it. I believe there is another version of this dac available, which has the op-amps socketed.

Anyway, this is another nice combination, that works well with FreeBSD, it sounds very nice. My main reservation is the wiring layout of the power cables, directly above the power supply heatsinks, but in terms of sound quality, it's very nice.

FWIW, I found another review of this dac, here https://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/lite_dac_e.html . I think he has reviewed an earlier version, the pcb looks slightly different with red solder mask, and he mentions the op-amps used are burr-brown, not the AD's I have in mine. Otherwise, it looks very similar. The power cables routed over the top of the heatsink didn't seem to worry him, he didn't mention them.

It got another good review here https://www.highfidelityreview.com/lite-dac-ah.html and there is a head-fi discussion here https://www.head-fi.org/threads/lite-dac-ah-8x-tda1543-nos.548724/ . It seems that various versions of this design have been around for a while. Lots of people say discarding the output op-amp stage and replacing it with a coupling capacitor is the way to go, so I may try that some time. Then again, I'm sitting here listening to it, and it sounds very nice already.
 
Last edited:
There has been some really crazy level modding of the Lite dac-ah. For example ...
crazy.jpg

Yes, those are 40(!!) piggyback-soldered dac chips, he gave it a little upgrade! He says it sounds like dynamite.😁 Don't think I'm going to attempt anything like that. :-)
 
The LiTe DAC-AH, another NOS DAC; this one has 8 x TDA1543 (Philips) arranged in parallel. The photo shows the thinkpad x220 running FreeBSD 14.4R, with DT-990 PRO headphones, and at the left the DAC-AH LITE is the lower black box, and the silver panel box above it is a mosfet preamp, which drives an HD8-A1 headphone amplifier on a lower shelf, not visible in the photo. Gorgeous sound quality, very natural and musical. The dac itself is driven, via its coax input, by an SMSL PO100, which provides the USB interface to FreeBSD. The dual Burr-Brown PCM56 previously discussed is also excellent in this configuration. So this is another nice system for FreeBSD based audio.
View attachment 26906

The DAC itself is nicely made, having an all steel case, rather than the more usual aluminium. The circuit board is through-hole, this version has an active low-pass filter after the set of 8 TDA1543 dac chips in parallel, based on a pair of analog devices AD847 op-amps. The internal power supply is based on the usual R-core transformer. The two photos below show the internals of the case, and a close-up of the circuit board.
View attachment 26907
Briefly, moving from right to left in the photo above, we have the power supply section at the upper right of the PCB; the digital receiver is between the power supply heatsinks and the rear panel; then the d-to-a converter section, in the central vertical strip of the board, comprising 8xTDA1543 in parallel, and finally on the left an op-amp based active low-pass filter/output buffer, one per channel, together with its associated regulated power supply.

A couple of things I didn't like. The top of the case gets quite warm above the power supply heatsinks, I may drill some holes in the top to allow ventilation. I am also not very impressed with the wiring layout of the power cables, directly above those heatsinks; I would have sited the mains socket on the front of the case, perhaps, or at least well away so that the cables did not lie directly on top of the heatsinks. They have at least fitted an inline fuse to one of the AC lines going to the transformer. I don't really understand why they have sited the mains switch in the centre instead of to one side to save space, placing it in the front centre means the case has had to be lengthened to accommodate the switch, but that is a minor detail; maybe someone liked the way the central power button looks.

I found a circuit diagram on diyaudio, shown below; it can be seen that the 8 dac chips are wired in parallel, so I assume they must be closely matched during manufacture; they appear to have achieved that, as it sounds very good, although I'm only going by what I can hear, without measurements. A requirement to match the dac chips is probably why these units are more expensive. But perhaps 8 chips from the same batch (same wafer?) come out pretty closely matched anyway. Their claimed rationale for using 8 chips in parallel is to improve performance at the high end of the audio frequency range, compared to a single chip. Unlike the PCM56 design, which (I think) uses one dac chip per channel, this design has all 8 dac chips wired in parallel, each outputting both channels, at least, according to the circuit diagram, which I assume is accurate.. Also visible, the LPF op-amps have their own independent regulated split-rail power supply, which is good. The circuit is actually fairly simple, you could replace the 8 parallel TDA1543's with a single one, for example. The digital interface to the coax/spdif sockets is provided by a Cirrus CS8414 digital receiver chip https://www.alldatasheet.com/datasheet-pdf/pdf/84295/ETC/CS8414.html , which may or may not be fake, either way, it seems to work fine.
View attachment 26909

The TDA1543 is a Philips/NXP dual channel 16-bit dac that can support both NOS and oversampling operation, datasheet is linked below. The unit maker says that in this design the chip is configured in NOS mode. It appears to be a low-cost derivative of the TDA1541, although the block diagrams of the two chips look quite different in some areas, so it's not the same chip.

These two dac chips are capable of good results and have a cult following amongst audio enthusiasts (especially, the TDA1541). The 1541 has considerably better distortion figures than the 1543, see a comparison here https://www.bramjacobse.nl/wordpress/?p=9600 .

The opamp used in this circuit to build the active low-pass filter and output buffer is an analog devices AD847, which is a high speed buffer op-amp https://www.analog.com/media/en/technical-documentation/data-sheets/AD847.pdf , which is an 'interesting' choice. The AD847 datasheet shows a circuit for using it as a high speed output buffer for current-output dacs, so perhaps they started from there. The two op-amps on my board have ceramic packages, so perhaps they are genuine, however, the writing on the back of the chips is very faint, although I can make out the AD logo. Well, they sound very nice, anyway.

View attachment 26908

This DAC is quite well known online, it has been quite widely discussed, for example on head-fi.org and diyaudio. There are a couple of links here discussing modifying it to use a passive LP filter, which some people think improves the sound quality.

In my version the op-amps are not socketed so I would have to do a little work if I wanted to experiment with these mods. To be honest it sounds pretty nice with the active filter, as they ship it. I believe there is another version of this dac available, which has the op-amps socketed.

Anyway, this is another nice combination, that works well with FreeBSD, it sounds very nice. My main reservation is the wiring layout of the power cables, directly above the power supply heatsinks, but in terms of sound quality, it's very nice.

FWIW, I found another review of this dac, here https://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/lite_dac_e.html . I think he has reviewed an earlier version, the pcb looks slightly different with red solder mask, and he mentions the op-amps used are burr-brown, not the AD's I have in mine. Otherwise, it looks very similar. The power cables routed over the top of the heatsink didn't seem to worry him, he didn't mention them.

It got another good review here https://www.highfidelityreview.com/lite-dac-ah.html and there is a head-fi discussion here https://www.head-fi.org/threads/lite-dac-ah-8x-tda1543-nos.548724/ . It seems that various versions of this design have been around for a while. Lots of people say discarding the output op-amp stage and replacing it with a coupling capacitor is the way to go, so I may try that some time. Then again, I'm sitting here listening to it, and it sounds very nice already.
Thanks blackbird9 really enjoy reading this type of FreeBSD/audio content but it's a shame it gets so little engagement

Hey ho, keep posting 🤗
 
Well, it's nice to know someone is reading my rubbish! 😄 :beer:
I think FreeBSD's OSS audio stack is capable of producing some really good results, it's a shame it doesn't get a bit more visibility.
I will, indeed, keep posting, until someone tells me to stop! 😄
 
Last edited:
Well, this is a bit of an unfortunate post to have to put up here. But it's better that people know what I've found out, just in case anyone was actually thinking of getting one, based on what I wrote earlier.

I found this thread https://www.head-fi.org/threads/circuit-error-in-lite-dac-ah-easy-fix.198589/
regarding the Lite dac-ah. The first post identifies a genuine hardware bug. The circuit was designed to run the TDA1543 chips from two 8V 7808 regulators, in fact I can see '7808' in the screen-print on my board, next to the components. At some point, the makers changed it to use 6V 7806 regulators instead, almost certainly to reduce thermal dissipation in the 1543's, to keep them within safe operating parameters. From other entries in that thread, some people who tried retrofitting 7808's found that the 1543's get very hot and need heatsinks fitting, holes drilling in the case, etc, so it's better to run them cooler at 6V, albeit with a slightly reduced output level. Otherwise you need to think about a different thermal solution and perhaps even a different case altogether, in fact one of the guys in the thread did re-build the whole thing in a much larger case.

However, after changing the voltage regs from 8V to 6V, the manufacturers then failed to adjust the value of two critical bias resistors, to match the new operating voltage ☹️. The consequence is that the audio outputs of the TDA1543 dac chips are driven into clipping on loud passages of music (eg when playing led zep and motorhead), which means you get high levels of audible distortion. To check if the head-fi posts are correct, I listened to a few tracks from the forum 'Heavy Metal' thread, and I can hear the distortion, it's there, all right. ☹️

I checked my unit's board, and I can see by visual inspection that mine has 6V regulators fitted, and the unchanged bias resistors appropriate for 8V Vcc. I've only been listening to fairly quiet music with it for the last few days which is probably why I didn't spot the distortion. It shows that relying on your ears doesn't always work, either!

The fix is easy (in principle), you just replace the two resistors with the correct values for 6V Vcc, at a cost of a few pennies each and a little bit of soldering; the resistors are just standard 5% carbon or metal film 1/4W resistors. However, in practical terms, in my unit it looks like being quite a fiddly job, to get at the board to do the work, although it can be done.

So, although it sounds good when it's not clipping, I would not recommend the Lite dac-ah to anyone else. It's not ready to go out of the box, really it's "broken-as-delivered", it requires a hardware fix from the word go. I've decided that since it's a simple fix, everyone on the head-fi thread says changing the resistors stops the distortion, and it sounds good with quiet/medium volume passages, I'm going to keep mine and replace the two resistors, but its a pain having to faff around correcting a stupid mistake made by the manufacturers, in a brand new piece of equipment.

My other concern is whether the high-speed opamps they have used are stable, since they have been substituted into a circuit originally designed for 5532's. The circuit diagram shows C33/C34 in parallel with the f/b resistors, which is the recommended fix to stop parasitic oscillation, and they are present on the pcb; and all four decoupling caps on the opamp power lines are present on the board too, all mounted very close to the opamps. The chips don't feel unduly hot to the touch, although I noticed they are quite warm, but that may be normal; so they may well be fine. Of course, unless I test it with instruments, I don't know for certain. They sound fine to listen to, of course, but that's just AF.

In short, there appears to be at least one real problem with this unit, so I can't recommend this dac to anyone else, for use with FreeBSD. Which is a shame, as it sounds good when its not driven into clipping by loud music. Its daft that they have messed it up, for the sake of changing two resistors; and they obviously didn't try listening to it very hard, after changing the 1543's operating voltage.
 
Last edited:
This thread https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/chinese-dac-ah-new-modifications.158494/ .
I've ordered the resistors they recommend. As 'whaleman' says, don't buy this dac, unless you want to DIY.
I'm still not convinced about the capacitor mod. However, replacing the I/V (current-to-voltage) conversion resistor with an active I/V circuit seems like a good approach, and that fixes one of the design flaws in the circuit. But I'm just going to try a pair of 240R resistors first, for reasons of practicality (and LME49713 is out of production, at least, digikey don't have any).
 
I used to be interested in audio years ago, but I lost interest because I never saw any good evidence that much of it is real. The biggest problem with all of this is that double blind testing is hard to do; the differences are tiny, so any leakage of information can swamp the result.

It didn't come as much of a surprise to me, but the final straw was the Philips Research Laboratory study done in the early 90s. This tested 6 pairs of CD players and power amplifiers; they ranged from a pair of very expensive, well reviewed Japanese valve components, down to the cheapest own-brand mini-system they could find in a local supermarket. Two people made it past the first stage, both professional reviewers, but after detailed audiological testing they were found to be picking-up on small differences in gain. They were retested , and the final result was that the study found no evidence that anyone in the study could make any statistically significant distinctions.

Part of the reason why the researchers didn't believe the initial result is that, while the two outliers were making distinctions just on the right side of statistical significance, they couldn't say which was which and their description of the sound didn't match their original reviews. Reviews are anecdotal but, in common with others, they were making assertions about warm vs. bright that were analyzed and found to be completely random.

I don't want to get into an argument about this, but it's well worth people at least taking a look outside the audiophile bubble before spending large amounts of money.
 
I used to be interested in audio years ago, but I lost interest because I never saw any good evidence that much of it is real. The biggest problem with all of this is that double blind testing is hard to do; the differences are tiny, so any leakage of information can swamp the result.

It didn't come as much of a surprise to me, but the final straw was the Philips Research Laboratory study done in the early 90s. This tested 6 pairs of CD players and power amplifiers; they ranged from a pair of very expensive, well reviewed Japanese valve components, down to the cheapest own-brand mini-system they could find in a local supermarket. Two people made it past the first stage, both professional reviewers, but after detailed audiological testing they were found to be picking-up on small differences in gain. They were retested , and the final result was that the study found no evidence that anyone in the study could make any statistically significant distinctions.

Part of the reason why the researchers didn't believe the initial result is that, while the two outliers were making distinctions just on the right side of statistical significance, they couldn't say which was which and their description of the sound didn't match their original reviews. Reviews are anecdotal but, in common with others, they were making assertions about warm vs. bright that were analyzed and found to be completely random.

I don't want to get into an argument about this, but it's well worth people at least taking a look outside the audiophile bubble before spending large amounts of money.
If the test was for speakers / headphones or earphones, the differences may be clearer. So would be for microphones.
All these mutually have physically moving parts (kinds of diaphrams) that directly handle physical sound waves and enclusures affects the behavior of moving diaphrams (cones, domes, ribbons, films, small iron tips, ...).
 
I used to be interested in audio years ago, but I lost interest because I never saw any good evidence that much of it is real. The biggest problem with all of this is that double blind testing is hard to do; the differences are tiny, so any leakage of information can swamp the result.

It didn't come as much of a surprise to me, but the final straw was the Philips Research Laboratory study done in the early 90s. This tested 6 pairs of CD players and power amplifiers; they ranged from a pair of very expensive, well reviewed Japanese valve components, down to the cheapest own-brand mini-system they could find in a local supermarket. Two people made it past the first stage, both professional reviewers, but after detailed audiological testing they were found to be picking-up on small differences in gain. They were retested , and the final result was that the study found no evidence that anyone in the study could make any statistically significant distinctions.

Part of the reason why the researchers didn't believe the initial result is that, while the two outliers were making distinctions just on the right side of statistical significance, they couldn't say which was which and their description of the sound didn't match their original reviews. Reviews are anecdotal but, in common with others, they were making assertions about warm vs. bright that were analyzed and found to be completely random.

I don't want to get into an argument about this, but it's well worth people at least taking a look outside the audiophile bubble before spending large amounts of money.

It is very hard to tell modern D/A chips, class D amplifiers, preamps and similar electronic sections from each other, even cheap ones (as long as they are integrated correctly, which is not always the case).

As mentioned, transducers such as speakers, headphones and microphones still have huge differences.
 
bob2112 said "I used to be interested in audio years ago, but I lost interest because I never saw any good evidence that much of it is real...
I don't want to get into an argument about this, but it's well worth people at least taking a look outside the audiophile bubble before spending large amounts of money."

Well, then, you can just listen to your motherboard's built-in sound chip and tell yourself that's as good as it gets, there's no possible improvement to be gained from buying any other dac, or headphone amp for that matter; which makes this whole thread pretty-much pointless. That's fine by me, you can listen to whatever you want, I'm not trying to sell you anything. I don't have links to any of the companies whose gear I've written about, it's only for interest. I'm not in the audio trade, it's not like anyone is paying me to write this stuff. 😂

One of the best sounding dac's I've tested is also one of the cheapest, which is the small dual PCM56 R2R nos dac, that one cost me 22 GBP including delivery. Those burr-brown chips sound very nice, imho. The most unpleasant was the Aiyima DAC-A2 which sounded really synthetic and un-musical. But that's only my opinion, you might find them both indistinguishable, from the motherboard sound chip. All I can tell you for sure, is that they both work with freebsd.
 
TDA1543 47labs NOS dac clone. I bought this out of curiosity because of the good sound quality I got from the lite dac-ah, which uses the same dac chip (if we ignore the "broken-as-delivered" need to change some resistors on day one! 😂 ). This was pretty cheap, it cost me 25 quid delivered. I ran it from the same high quality linear PSU, and drove it from freebsd through the coax connector, using the SMSL PO100. Sadly it sounds dead and lifeless, to my ears, anyway; my advice would be not to bother. It uses a single TDA1543, and a handful of other components. It does come in a nice little metal case, its well-made, although disappointing that there was no power switch, but you do get a power LED. It just shows that it's not only the particular chip that matters, the circuit used is important too, and its also very interesting that several of the same dac chips wired together in parallel sound so much better in the lite dac-ah (assuming this one really does have the same chip, inside the 8-dip package, who knows). The dual PCM56 one is light-years ahead of this in sound quality, imho, and for less money too. So, this one was a bit disappointing, I was hoping it would be better, given the good reputation of the original.
1786621658707.png
1786621896657.png

I think this is really a cheap copy. There is a good thread about the real '47labs' single TDA1543 nos dac here. https://www.diyaudio.com/community/threads/pushing-the-limits-of-tda1543-nos-dac.187748/
I'm sure the real thing is rather better than this clone.
 
At least on ISA (not Instruction Set Architecture, but Industrial Standard Architecture) bus era, differences between the noise floor of Creative Labs Sound Blaster Pro and Turtle Beach Monterey was hearable. At the era, there were no USB nor FireWire DACs.
I found big differences in sound quality amongst on-board dac chips too. The old Conexant CX20590 chip in my X220 sounds very nice. Whereas the sound chip in my newer thinkpad T490 sounds, frankly, terrible; I can't remember offhand which chip it is. The realtek sound chip in my Soyo N100 minipc, which is an ALC269VC, sounds excellent, especially when used with an external headphone amplifier. Of course it's not just the chip itself, it's also the circuit they've used, the board layout, whether they included a separate amplifier to drive the 3.5mm socket, etc.
 
Back
Top