Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Discussions › The YAD (Yet Another DAC) DAC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The YAD (Yet Another DAC) DAC

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 

The name was inspired by the fact that I have half a dozen abandoned DACs in my projects folder from the last 3 years, and this was just yet another DAC.


I've been messing with DAC designs on and off for the last few years, and finally got serious about it a few weeks ago. Here's what I've got so far. This is designed to be an ultra high end DAC with no corners cut anywhere (within mathematical reason). The bill of materials comes in well over $1000 and I'm trying to convince myself to actually build this thing.


This is a first draft of the board set: power supply, DAC (4-layer), and I-V stage. And of course four transformers to the left. Not pictured is a front panel with an LCD display.




DAC's: Quad of PCM1704U-K (Using a quad since it allows balanced output with a minimalist I-V stage)

Overall concept: NOS at 96khz, optional 2x oversampling at 48khz. User selectable filterless or single-pole 22khz roll off.

Architecture: FPGA FIFO reclocking for bit-perfect playback.

Clocks: Crystek CVHD-957 at 22.5792MHz and 24.576MHz

Clock Distribution: 50 ohm parallel terminated impedance matched transmission line with ultra low jitter 10x clock breakout Texas Instruments CDCLVC1310

Overall clock performance: Depending on how you define jitter and run the math, 100-300fs at the actual DAC chips

Power: 12 isolated power windings, 4 toroidal transformers, 18 application-specific pre-regulators, and 29 local LDO or shunt regulators

Chassis: Custom CNC milled aluminum, maybe even unibody if I can find a cheap billet of aluminum laying around

Front panel: LCD display with button interface to select output filter, oversampling options, bit-perfect testing, and whatever other options I come up with along the way


Core System

The main logic is run through a Spartan 6 FPGA. This talks to a CS8414 receiver chip (a great chip since it allows easy bit-perfect access to the incoming stream) and gets the input data and establishes the sampling rate. The FPGA then fabricates its own clock at 256fs by controlling a 16-bit DAC (AD5061BRJZ-2REEL7) connected to a VCXO. The FPGA runs a control loop that maintains a constant FIFO buffer length. I'm planning to have bounds, and it just adjusts the clock every few tens of seconds to bounce to the other bound, and repeat. While this may sound like a bad idea, changing the clock by a few hertz here and there adds single digit femtosecond jitter events, so it doesn't matter at all!


Clocks and Distribution

One of the most important parts of a DAC is the clock. In this case, I'm using VCXO crystals from Crystek (CVHD-957) that have phenomenal phase noise performance (by far the best in the industry for VCXO). They are immediately fed into a TI CDCLVC1310 clock breakout chip, which adds only 25fs of jitter and 30ps of skew. Perfect for this application! All outputs are fed through 50 ohm traces to parallel vcc/2 termination at destination. All traces are length-matched to reduce any further skew. 4 clocks are sent to PCM1704's, 1 to the FPGA, and 4 clocks are sent to 74-series flip-flop reclockers (arguably redundant for PCM1704, but whatever let's just do it... I'd rather the FPGA not directly touch the DAC chips at all).


The entire clock system is powered by five individual TPS7A4700 4.17uV ultra low noise LDO regulators, and pre-regulated by five LT1965 low-noise LDO regulators.


PCM1704 Power

These chips require four power supplies each, which is a bit annoying. To keep everything symmetric, I'm using TL431 shunt regulators (16 of them for the four chips). Each regulator is fed by a BJT constant current source biased by another TL431. Pictured is the quad of regulators for one chip:



I got a bit creative with the pre-regulator for this one. since it is a pure constant current draw for the entire rail, we don't actually need low impedance but instead extremely low noise is the only goal. Therefore, the pre-regulator actually has no feedback and instead is just a FET follower with constant gate voltage. The gate voltage is set by a zener resistor powered by a CRCRCRC filter. This has extremely good PSRR where it counts (better than any discrete LDO), and should be only a few uV of noise. This supply is powered by its own physical transformer so as to avoid loading from other secondaries causing low frequency noise that this pre-regulator might struggle with. Here is the pre-reg and its output PSRR:





I-V Stage

The IV stage uses a single BJT emitter input as the active signal path with a cascoded current mirror on both sides of the BJT. The output then goes to a 0.1% resistor and an optional relay-activated 22khz single-pole filter. The output is capacitor decoupled (I believe in capacitors because I am an engineer - let's not make this thread about whether or not the final output stage deserves to be DC coupled). This I-V stage is powered by basically the exact same supply used to pre-regulate the PCM1704 chips. Again, this is a pure constant current draw, and again it will have its own transformer to avoid cross-coupling of low frequency noise.







What's Next?

Well, I have to convince myself to dump about $1200 into this project. I'll probably start out building it single ended to save money and test everything (or is this a bad idea because I need PCM1704's from the same batch?).


The board files are not quite ready to be released, but I will (probably) open source this project at some point. 


Any ideas? Did I do something stupid? Did I do something you disagree with? Do you have any suggestions/questions? Do you want to say something? Can you convince me to build it?

post #2 of 7

I couple of years ago I drew up a reclocking circuit very similar to what you describe shown here:-


2 CPLDs clock data in and out of a buffer, the local clock is derived from a VCXO, the clock rate is managed to prevent buffer over- and underruns.

I've never been convinced that jitter is the problem it's made out to be, so I never attempted to build it. Like so much audiophile electronics, it's probably just a redundant agglomeration of expensive components, producing sound no audibly better than a motherboard-mounted Realtek 889 (see the Tom's Hardware review).

I'd be interested to see your progress, however. I built plenty of things with redundant performance, it's no worse than doing crossword puzzles. Good luck.

post #3 of 7

Why use the single most expensive and etheral chip on the market?


Otherwise it looks like a terrific project I'm anxious to see succeeding.


Still, I'd recommend using PCM63 if multibit is a must and maybe something from Analog Devices or Asahi Kasei to get good sigma delta (hybrid actually).

post #4 of 7
Thread Starter 

Sadly, I probably won't actually build this. It was fun to design, but I'll probably leave it be at least in the near term. Since all competently built DAC's sound the same (fine, so as to not start a flame war, in my opinion) it'd purely be for fun of the build. I did a double blind test of my laptops onboard sound with my gamma-2 the other day and failed any test, just to reassure myself that I should not put money into this with grad school coming up.


If I do build a DAC, it'll use less stupid power supplies and probably PCM63.

post #5 of 7

Competently designed DAC's do sound very same-ish, however there aren't that many that are done so. The thing that made me interested about this project was the CDCLVC1310 implementation. To this day this is the second DAC design I've seen using this chip.


If you have anything else coming, then I'm all ears.

post #6 of 7
Thread Starter 
Originally Posted by RudeWolf View Post

Competently designed DAC's do sound very same-ish, however there aren't that many that are done so. The thing that made me interested about this project was the CDCLVC1310 implementation. To this day this is the second DAC design I've seen using this chip.


If you have anything else coming, then I'm all ears.


What other DAC uses that? I'd be curious to take a look at it.


Most DAC's seem to just parallel distribute the clock with no breakout and no termination, which from a technical standpoint is a very bad idea. Of course, you're not going to be able to hear the difference so it doesn't actually matter. All the low level fempto clock BS going around affects audio levels several orders of magnitude below even the finest of hearing perception. 

post #7 of 7

The one I was talking about is still on the drawing board and not ready for showtime. The guy who's developing the project is using PCM1794 DAC chips, opamp output and a PGA type volume control. His idea was to use an FPGA to do the controlling and maybe get a fully hardware mode where no control is needed. If anything new pops up I'll keep you posted.


Also I love to build over the top projects. Take the QRV08 for example, the DAC should be at least as crazy!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › DIY (Do-It-Yourself) Discussions › The YAD (Yet Another DAC) DAC