The latest TDA1541A USB DAC built here is not reliable. I put an early disclaimer to not follow that built yet. The DAC is works by using one FET BF245A per channel. This is to amplify the V out from the passive resistor at the DAC output. But it seems doesn't have enough juice to crank up the output level, thus the sound quality is not as good as my expectation.
I have another idea to improve this TDA1541A USB DAC. This will be cover on the next post. But today concern is more about the proof of authenticity of my TDA1541A IC. Then I will also compares to the higher version of this TDA1541A is the S1 single crown.
Let's this story begin.
As you can see from my TDA1541A is having a weird marking. The word "A" and number "4" should be rounded not straight as mine. Although one of my experienced friend tells me that my TDA1541A is original, this small difference is still makes me restless.
So to proof this, I should buy another TDA1541A. I will comparing both of them. My friend also helping me to find the original TDA1541A. He got one and the price is not cheap. It is dismantled from another used CD player, so it should be original.
Another offering also comes later is the TDA1541A S1 the single crown. It is far more expensive and honestly out of the budget. But for the sake of my knowledge, so here they are:)
The first test is between the doubt "straight letter" TDA1541A with the original TDA1541A that I bought later.
I don't hear any major difference in sound signature between them. The IC die surface also having same warm temperature while in operation. Perhaps only my subjective feeling that the original TDA1541A that I got later have more detail in upper frequency than the "straight letter" TDA1541A. This difference can be heard but the sound signature are all the same.
At this moment I could only say that the "straight letter" TDA1541A is could be original.
Here are the various version of TDA1541 on my hand, they are:
TDA1541
TDA1541A
TDA1541A (straight letter 4 & A)
TDA1541A S1
I also borrowed the TDA1541 non A. But I look at the PIN number 3 is broken and has been repaired. So I withdraw my plan because I am afraid it can be broken again when I put into the IC socket. This TDA1541 non A has been return to the owner.
Then let's talk about the TDA1541 S1 single crown.
Before I build this TDA1541A USB DAC, I already have the Nakamichi DAC-101 here. This Nakamichi DAC-101 is using dual DAC IC TDA1541A-S1 single crown. I can remove one TDA1541A S1 from that Nakamichi DAC-101 and test in this USB DAC unit, but that is not my style. This Nakamichi DAC-101 already settled in sound quality and I am lazy to open it again. So I better find another TDA1541A S1 single crown for this project and I will also comparing both of them.
More information about this TDA1541A, they have several grades as per original datasheet stated. This grading are differentiate after the IC manufactured by testing the error number on the digital conversion.
In the real application, at the moment I changed from the TDA1541A to this TDA1541A S1 single crown, I experience more detail in the sound presentation in almost all frequency range. Especially at the higher frequency is more noticeable detail and airy. The background more darker and quiet while most important thing is the mid-range presentation become smoother.
Note should be taken that those improvement between the TDA1541A and the Crown are not night and day. You can hear and feel the difference but it is not major. So you should never have big expectation for changing the graded of the TDA1541A only and wish the sound are improving miles away. They are basically the same process manufactured but the selected "Crown" has lower digital error specification only.
So in summary, this TDA1541A S1 do make a difference in sound presentation but not a major difference from the standard TDA1541A.
Disclaimer: Any statement and photos in this article are not allowed to copy or publish without written permission from the writer. Any injury or loss from following tips in this article is not under writer responsibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment