Hifi Forum TDA-1541A DAC Review

[voodooless]

Why I should convince anybody to sth. I know from experience? NO WAY.

Then why post in the first place?

 

[audio_tony]

The frequency response is linear +-0.5dB. Noise is at -96dB. THD at 0.0x%. This is all beyond the limits of perception since 1980.

A flat frequency response did not tell the full story with vintage players, many of which could have a hard sounding top end even with a flat response.

My first CD player was a Sony CDP-190, which sounded very clear, but always had a sharpness to the sound. My next CD player (Sony CD-790) was a dramatic improvement over the 190. The 790 and 227 were very closely matched, but the 227 still had a nicer (smoother) top end.

CDP-190 - 2Hz to 20kHz +1dB -1.5dB / THD 'less than' 0.05%
CDP-790 - 2Hz to 20kHz +/- 0.3dB / THD 'less than' 0.003%
CDP-227ESD - 2Hz to 20kHz +/- 0.5dB / THD 'less than' 0.0025%

All three of the above players have a different sound in the upper frequencies in particular. I know, I've owned all three (and still have the 227).

The specifications don't always tell everything, in particular with DACs and CD players (although less so with DACs these days).

I'm not claiming I can hear differences between 0.05% and 0.0025% THD because I can't. But each player clearly had it's own sound signature.

 

[CardiganB]

Less details and less DR it is bound to sound fuller. Brain tends to hate too many details as it requires extra efforts to make sense of it but that does not mean older tecnology is more faithful. Older tech has a type of sound while newer dac make music closer to as it is recorded. So try a modern recording with a lot of small level details like Ralph Alessi band and you would hate your old dac.

OMG, your auditory system needs no help in recognizing the more lavishing of two presentations. If it required thinking the hobby would be like prying on a toenail. I've no doubt whatsoever that NEC stopped building compact disc players by 1990 because there was simply nothing left to do. Furthermore, headphone listening has convinced me that subsequent development of playback was due not to performance shortcomings in cd players but rather the inherent flaws of loudspeaker listening ie., a different set of requirements that cater to those limitations.

 

[danixmen]

Hello everyone, I introduce myself, my name is Dani and I am from Spain.
I've been reading the forum for a long time, especially the threads regarding DAC dongles. I have registered to contribute my humble opinion about the old dacs like the 1540, 1541 and 1549 that I have heard. I don't understand measurements or the graphs you post in the forum. My only gauge is my ears (and my tastes) and I like these old DACs better than the modern ones I've had. I already say that I hear with my ears, I don't understand graphics. I find them more musical than modern DACs. I also have vintage amplifiers from the 60's that have a warmer sound than other more modern amplifiers that I had and ended up selling. They are personal tastes...my personal tastes and no graphics can change my preferences.
Greetings !

 

[pseudoid]

Hello everyone, I introduce myself, my name is Dani and I am from Spain.
...They are personal tastes...my personal tastes and no graphics can change my preferences.
Greetings !

Welcome aboard, Dani, from Spain,
Graphics may indeed be hi-sugar content eye-candy for your musical tastes at the current time.
Hoping your preferences will be positively influenced by the ASR reviews (and the valuable commentariat) in your future audio hardware purchases.

 

[cncjerry]

Hi, I know this is an old thread, but I didn't kick it open .

I recently restored a Sony PCM-2500a/b DAT, spent a lot of time with the tapeheads where I've been a member for 10yrs or so, and someone mentioned that the PCM-2500a had this great DAC chip in it, a TDA1541. I was wondering what all the fuss was about, and how could it be so great being so old. I found this site, surprised I hadn't found it sooner as this forum is more inline with my thinking about audio in general.

I did some light testing comparing the TDA1541 to a CS4396 board I have from roughly the same era using an HP Dynamic Signal Analyzer. I have an HP 8903a audio analyzer but I can't get the cables that far. I was thinking, if I sold the TDA1541 chip, maybe I can buy some more DAT decks? Maybe 5 more if I paint some crowns on it?

Anyway, great site, looking forward to reading more.

Jerry

 

[voodooless]

I did some light testing comparing the TDA1541 to a CS4396 board I have from roughly the same era using an HP Dynamic Signal Analyzer

And..? What are the conclusions?

Welcome to ASR, btw!

The CS4396 and TDA1541 chip releases are more than a decade apart.

 

[dcolak]

I must be out of the loop. Do I understand correctly that the appeal of this device is the “vintage” DAC chip? I ran across this description (source linked below):

The sonic characteristic of TDA1541A DAC players is very easy to distinguish - after hitting PLAY after trying other DACS you can hear a big difference immediately, BUT I can't describe it at all. It is very hard to put in words. The sound is very rich, full, mature, ripe, analogue, liquid, dynamic, and with huge macro dynamics. It has the best midrange, best treble and very very good bass.
The main difference is: that I like it more than any other DAC chip, it is so ear friendly.

TDA1541A

TDA1541A DAC crown Philips

www.lampizator.eu

Ok, bear with me here.

I am driving Wharfedale Elysian 4 with 2xTopping LA90 in mono.

I have Benchmark DAC 1 HDR, also Topping E30II, Topping DX3Pro, Nad M51 DACs, to name a few.

Elysians with any of those DAC's sound... strange, voices are not "real" the cymbals, metals do not sound "real."

I found an old NOS DAC with Philips TDA1541A chips and for shits and giggles connected it to Topping LA90's and Elysian 4s.

Man, what a surprise that was... I could start hearing different voices easily, I could easily track any of the singers, even in chorus, instruments became easy to track and everything started sounding "REAL."

I am not joking.

I also noticed that NOS DAC was heavily distorting with full digital signal, so I had to lower digital volume a bit and distortion went away.

Of course I don't believe in cables, magic DAC and things like that, I disconnected the NOS, started connecting all other DAC's.

None of the other DAC's sounded "real."

Again, I am not pulling your chain.

My other system consists of:

NAD M3 + NAD M51 + JBL Array 1400.

I found out that NAD M3 + Topping E30II + JBL Array 1400 sounds SUBLIME. Out of this world, so I kept that combination.

Topping E30II + 2xTopping LA90 + Elysian just hinted the same magic but no where close to Arrays, it did not give me the goosebumps like the NOS DAC either.

2xTopping LA90 + NOS DAC 1541a + Wharfedale Elysian 4 does not sound sublime, it sounds REAL, so I kept that combination.

I came here searching for the measurements, I knew NOS DAC's measured really bad... but... something is going on there.

 

[WDeranged]

Ok, bear with me here.

I am driving Wharfedale Elysian 4 with 2xTopping LA90 in mono.

I have Benchmark DAC 1 HDR, also Topping E30II, Topping DX3Pro, Nad M51 DACs, to name a few.

Elysians with any of those DAC's sound... strange, voices are not "real" the cymbals, metals do not sound "real."

I found an old NOS DAC with Philips TDA1541A chips and for shits and giggles connected it to Topping LA90's and Elysian 4s.

Man, what a surprise that was... I could start hearing different voices easily, I could easily track any of the singers, even in chorus, instruments became easy to track and everything started sounding "REAL."

I am not joking.

I also noticed that NOS DAC was heavily distorting with full digital signal, so I had to lower digital volume a bit and distortion went away.

Of course I don't believe in cables, magic DAC and things like that, I disconnected the NOS, started connecting all other DAC's.

None of the other DAC's sounded "real."

Again, I am not pulling your chain.

My other system consists of:

NAD M3 + NAD M51 + JBL Array 1400.

I found out that NAD M3 + Topping E30II + JBL Array 1400 sounds SUBLIME. Out of this world, so I kept that combination.

Topping E30II + 2xTopping LA90 + Elysian just hinted the same magic but no where close to Arrays, it did not give me the goosebumps like the NOS DAC either.

2xTopping LA90 + NOS DAC 1541a + Wharfedale Elysian 4 does not sound sublime, it sounds REAL, so I kept that combination.

I came here searching for the measurements, I knew NOS DAC's measured really bad... but... something is going on there.

I get what you're saying. I understand that cutting edge DACs are irreproachable and that's the way I go when playing back needledrops. But when playing high quality recordings I find modern DACs too holographic and pristine, they sound subjectively artificial to my ears. I obviously have a preference for distortion.