The Monkey Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 Ok, so we all know that I'm DACrazy. I recently purchased a Dodson DA-217 MK II D, which is a vintage '90s DAC. I have yet to see a bad review of the unit, but there also is not a tremendous amount written about it. Also, the designer is dead. Regardless, after 1 hour, I can say that this DAC sounds pretty damn good. As many of you know, I have been very much in love with my ECD-1. Well, the Dodson may be better. I have a lot more listening to do, and I will post some internals here. But I think this is a pretty promising find. Oh, and I'm fully willing to admit this could be placebo... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penger Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 Quick! Sell me your ECD-1 before the placebo wears off! Just kidding. Keep us updated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feckn_eejit Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 The force seems to be strong with this one out there on the internets. Bet it isn't placebo. I considered a DA-218 a few years ago when their prices tanked on the used market... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazel Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 Ok, so we all know that I'm DACrazy. Hello. My name is Josep, and me too I recently purchased a Dodson DA-217 MK II D, which is a vintage '90s DAC. I have yet to see a bad review of the unit, but there also is not a tremendous amount written about it. Also, the designer is dead. My last (better say 'more recent') buy has been a Pass Labs D1 unit, 90s too but a bit later, and -fortunately- its father/s are still alive (Wayne Colburn and Nelson Pass). I have a lot more listening to do, and I will post some internals here. But I think this is a pretty promising find. Good. Waiting for those stripped nudity pics Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atothex Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 ^Oh, are you Josep on HF? If so, there is about nothing to indicate you're the same guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 Yeah pictures would be key Pfft dac crazy... there is no such thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 15, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 hmm, I may have to retract my statement about the designer being dead. I can't find confirmation one way or the other... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Icarium Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 Maybe he is UNDEAD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feckn_eejit Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 The Dodson dude being dead really does ring a bell from when I was researching the DA-218 a couple of years ago... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazel Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 ^Oh, are you Josep on HF? If so, there is about nothing to indicate you're the same guy. Yeps yes I am . Showing similar interests hehe When I joined HF long ago I was so naif as to use my own name (and there were not much members so the nick was free...). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazel Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 hmm, I may have to retract my statement about the designer being dead. I can't find confirmation one way or the other... An useful (?) link: Defunct Audio Manufacturers - D - audiotools.com. The company does not seem stopped. But who knows... maybe Icarium is right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hopstretch Posted July 15, 2009 Report Share Posted July 15, 2009 The Dodson dude being dead really does ring a bell from when I was researching the DA-218 a couple of years ago... Just to be a douchebag -- what's the difference between a DA-217 MKII D and a DA-218? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 I'm not sure, but I've read that the 217 can be upgraded to "85%" of the 218 with some tweaks. I'll try to find a comparison. The 218 is/was the most recent flagship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Some internals. I'd appreciate it if you guys could help me understand what's going on inside. Let me know if you'd like MOAR/better pics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atothex Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Sexy pics, sir. How much was it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherwood Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Some internals. I'd appreciate it if you guys could help me understand what's going on inside. The big yellow things are called "tubes". Probably the blue ones too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 The big yellow things are called "tubes". Probably the blue ones too. Like the ones they use for teh internets? Cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazel Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 The way the BB 1704 DACs are mounted is, to say the least, curious. When seeing them on daughter boards on thinks of a 'pop' replacament were there have been pcm63, but not here. Also, how the I out goes to the first opamp (many good 627 in sight btw) with a Caddock resistor for I to V is... curious too? A bit too (bad) DIY to my taste. Now I am curious to see what's inside the metal box (input receiver and digital filter). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asr Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 whoa, PCM1704! I see only two 1704s though, are there two more? Like maybe on the underside of each of those "daughterboards"? I'd be disappointed if the balanced output was achieved through phase inversion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 17, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 Yeah, I'm confused about the 2 1704s, too, as I was told there were 4. I will look underneath this evening. I'm also going to try to get a schematic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazel Posted July 17, 2009 Report Share Posted July 17, 2009 The four big caps makes one think there is a real balanced source, but... just two 1704 with its obvious IV resistor makes me think this is not a "true" balanced source. After I discovered the popular Benchmarck DAC1 is'nt either, no surprises for me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 I can't see underneath the damn daughterboards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin gilmore Posted July 18, 2009 Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 The pin on the 1704 lifted going directly to the opamp and caddok i/v feedback resistor is done that way to avoid any possible extra capacitance on the dac output wire. I have seen lots of high impedance circuits built this way for a minimum of interactions from circuit board materials. Not really a bad thing. There were regular dip versions of the 1704 available that probably plugged in directly into the socket, but still the one wire would have been lifted and soldered the same way. Definitely not enough parts to be balanced with 4 dacs. After the I/V conversion is a 4 pole active filter with a pair of 627's. Then the 712 as the phase inverter, and another pair of 627's as the output amplifiers. Standard sort of thing. Open up the RF can and lets see how good the build quality really is. The metal can just pulls up. For its time it is built reasonable. Definitely not crummy diy. But not 4 layer shielded circuit board either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Monkey Posted July 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2009 Thanks Kevin. The metal can is proving to be a bit more difficult to remove than I anticipated. I think it may be soldered at one point. I'll post a pic. I'm kind of disappointed that it doesn't have 4 1704s. I was under the impression that it did. Still sounds pretty good, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.