This thread has been locked.

If you have a related question, please click the "Ask a related question" button in the top right corner. The newly created question will be automatically linked to this question.

How to choose an analog DAC

Other Parts Discussed in Thread: DS90UA101-Q1, DS90UA102-Q1, TLV320DAC3203, TLV320AIC3254, TPA2013D1, PCM5142

Hello all,

I am trying to decide on what analog DAC would be good for what I need. Would someone be willing to give me there advice?

I am building a custom set of headphones (because I cant find ones I like). And I have to have a separate box that holds the MCU, batteries, DSP, Bluetooth module, etc.. What I would like to do is, have the 2.7W amplifier inside the headphones, right next to each speaker. That way, there is less loss from the wire (about 3Ft). But if I put the amplifiers in the headphones, I could get noise on the differential pair inputs. Since the long wire could act as an antenna. 

So I thought, why not use a serializer like the DS90UA101-Q1, to send the audio to the headphones. And use the DS90UA102-Q1, to deserialize the audio. But I have no idea what would be a good choice for a DAC. Im looking for one that can run off 5V or less, has great sound, that doesn't use a BGA package (all others are OK).

So, would anyone recommend a DAC that would be a good fit for me? Or does anyone have other ideas, that might be a better option for me? Maybe different parts, different ideas, etc..

Thank you for taking the time to read this

Anthony

  • Hi, Anthony,

    I would suggest to use the TLV320DAC3203. It is a stereo audio DAC with 100 dB SNR. It can be supplied by 3.3V or less. Additionally, it is available on RGE package. Finally, it features PowerTune (a mechanism to balance power-versus-performance trade-offs at the time of device configuration) and signal processing blocks for filtering and effects.

    Please take a look of the datasheet and let me know if you have questions or comments.

    Best regards,
    Luis Fernando Rodríguez S.

  • Hello Luis,

    Thank you for the reply.

    That DAC looks good, The signal processing is a little overkill for me. I am using a TLV320AIC3254 for my DSP, the DAC signal processing would not be used. Also, I see from the datasheet, the outputs are single ended. Is there any real benefit on using single ended, over Differential Inputs, when the DAC and the amplifier (TPA2013D1) will be almost on top of each other?

    Thank you

    Anthony

  • Hi, Anthony,

    You're right, the device has single-ended outputs. Actually, the single ended outputs needs less power consumption and evidently they need less pins to be used. The differential outputs are always suggested because they ensure a reduction of the common noise. It is a trade off between power consumption and performance.

    Best regards,
    Luis Fernando Rodríguez S.
  • Thank you Luis,

    I get it now. Thanks for the suggestion, I will go with that DAC.

    Anthony
  • Hello Luis,

    I have been looking at the TLV320DAC3203. And its not a bad option, but I could not find anything about using PurePath to set up the DSP. I like the idea of having a DSP with each amplifier, that makes for an easy board design. So I was looking around at other DACs. I found one option I liked. What would you think about the PCM5142? I like it because it will work with PurePath, and it will output perfectly for my amplifiers.

    I'll give you a run down of what I am doing, maybe that will offer some insight on what options would be best.

    Large over-the-ear headphones with 4 watt speakers on each side.

    I am using two TPA2013D1 amplifiers, one amplifier for each side.

    Two 1000mAh Li-Ion batteries, one battery for each side.

    A BlueCreation BC127 Bluetooth module in I2S mode. 

    I was thinking of having the TLV320AIC3254 managing the DSP, But after some experiments, I found out I only need about a 14 band EQ. I was planing to have a DAC on the same board as the amplifier. And have two DAC/amplifier boards, one board for each side. 

    I hope this is understandable. Let me know if it doesn't.

    Thanks for all the help

    Anthony