That’s fine, but I still think modding the MKII with a Lundahl 1948 would be beneficals for sound stage and musicality…
1 Like
I agree… The transformer used is a weak link in the MKII and the DS. Face it it’s a $35.00 iron core transformer. Nickel or cobalt core transformers sound so much better as we all discovered modding the DS.
Is this the “Modding the Directstream DAC MKII” topic ???
1 Like
Some high end electronics use an electronic fuse. The circuit monitors the current and if it is exceeded it counts the cycles and opens the main power relay. This same circuit is also sometimes used to auto select the correct power taps on the transformer for proper input voltage selection.
3 Likes
Wow. That’s disappointing–and perplexing. They must think it doesn’t matter.
It’s all about the cost of parts and a price point at which they can offer a product at a fair price and make a profit. All manufactures do this. This is why we modify them to make them sound better.
4 Likes
No I think it was a budget decision and there were more important things to include. Remember the Lundahl’s would make the DS II possibly 2,4K more expensive (by the usual calculation factor), even if they only cost 250$ each for us aftermarket.
2 Likes
I posted some info and photos of some transformers we are listening to currently in the Modding the DS topic that may be of interest to some here. I don’t want to post it here as I’m not planning on purchasing a MKII to mod and test at this time.
1 Like
M6 Line Grain Oriented Silicone Steel (edcorusa.com)
Do you really think I don’t care about the audio transformers? In the TSS where the price can be a lot higher, I plan on using Jensen JT-11SSP-7MPC transformers which are clearly better than the XS4400.
Still the XS4400 is a quadfiler reasonable quality transformer which is clearly better than the transformer used in the DS (ask anyone who did the XS4400 transformer upgrade.)
8 Likes
The XS4400 is probably one of the best transformers at that price point. There will always be something better. Question is where do you stop. The transformer you recommended JT-11SST 7MPC long ago is a great transformer and hard to beat. I’ll be saving up for your TSS DAC. Can’t wait.
1 Like
I don’t understand what you mean. So the iron core transformer in the MK2 does effect the sound quality? And folks posting to this thread about replacing them with upgraded transformers are correct?
Just help me understand.
3 Likes
I was explicitly responding to
The transformers do matter. But Mk II isn’t the TSS, it doesn’t have the best possible components everywhere, it doesn’t take isolation to the ultimate extreme, … But still I don’t know how PS Audio can sell it at the low price they do. There’s a lot of cost in the parts that are used and many are the best possible versions. The XS4400 is an appropriate choice for the audio output transformers.
This thread is about possible modifications to the Mk II DAC. There are always upgrades possible. Upgrading the audio output transformers is one of the easiest possible mods that involves only soldering and it won’t negatively impact the rest of the DAC if done correctly.
Except for replacing the audio output transformers, the Mk II already incorporates all of the mods that people talk about for the Mk I. E.g. In the Mk I, one of the possible upgrades was replacing the AD8132’s with AD8139’s. But that upgrade involves replacing some of the power supplies in the DS’s analog card without affecting the rest of the circuits as well as many surface mount part replacements.
9 Likes
Look what I had to do to improve on the original DS. It’s crazy but worth it. My opinion is this is the best transformer I ever heard. There is more to making improvements to the sound quality then transformers as Ted has implemented most of them in the MKII.
2 Likes
Unquestionably true. Amp designers pay attention to transformers as well. Our Jeff Rowland 625 S2 uses custom designed Lundahl input transformers built with a high turns ratio and wound with Cardas high purity copper wire.
There’s so many things that matter, it’s a matter of finding the right balance between sound and price.
3 Likes
Thanks Ted!
2 Likes
I’d be curious to know if anyone else has formed an opinion on I2S 1 vs 2. The I2S 2 port would be much more convenient, as the I2S 1 port is hard against the XLR output, making it hard to avoid contact between the two cables.
Not yet and I have both running for some time. I may try it tomorrow.
I found i2S1 quieter than 2 when using shorting plug on non listening i2S input . However i Have done no burn in on 2. You are right about closeness with XLR out.
Is there a difference between I2S 1 and 2 in SQ? Yes, there is. But only if I know which one I am hearing. Under a blind test I would absolutely fail the test. Doing a quick 10-minute switch I keep hearing better SQ in I2S 1 with PST, but it is probably because I am used to hearing from this input (therefore there should be a SQ difference). If I had always heard it from I2S 2, would I prefer it too? If it is, then there is trivial difference between the two. It takes a few minutes for each change to stabilize too so a quick A/B comparison is useless.
As of now my feeling is the difference is small enough that it could vary from unit to unit.
I will stay with PST and I2S 2 (always used 1 before) for a few days to see if I can hear a definitive difference. If I do, I will post.
1 Like
I wonder if the 3M absorber on lid above FPGAs is lessening differences between i2s 1 and 2. I tested them without. So many possibilities.
2 Likes
I am listening to I2S 2 with PST now for an hour or more, and it is getting better by the minute. But I do not know if it is better or worse than one. I will listen more tomorrow.
3M and full break-in are lessening the difference, I think so too.
1 Like