The Phillips DAC960...circa 1987

AlphaEcho35

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
I tend to be a skeptic when it comes to trendy or "to good to be true" claims in audio. This was the case with Philips TDA1541 chipset based DACs. How could 28 year old technology be any better sounding than current technology?

I am fortunate enough to have a good friend in our local audio club who has an extensive collection of audio gear and has lately been working his way through various different DAC's of differing topologies. I have been running a Schiit Bifrost Uber for several years now and have been very happy with it. I use Deezer Elite (16/44.1 FLAC) through a Sonos, into the DAC and then amplifying it with a Rogue Audio Cronus Magnum driving a pair of Totem Acoustic Hawks.
I was able to audition a Metrum Hex DAC, which was a significant step up from the Bifrost, mainly in the area of low frequency extension. The top end was luxuriously "liquid", while sacrificing a little bit of detail. I considered acquiring the Hex, although the cost was a bit out of my reach.
In comes the Philips DAC960. I had not heard of the popularity of this old DAC chipset - I understood that Phillips was the co-inventor of the original compact disc digital format, and that they are the P in sP/dif. But had no idea that folks were still claiming this early generation DAC chip was still one of the best out there.
My introduction to the TDA1541 chip was the DAC960 - a very early stand-alone DAC from Philips, similar to a popular Marantz model with very similar heritage.
I brought the DAC960 home, at first to try and troubleshoot a problem that my friend was having trying to audition it in his system - it seems it would not work with his high end CD transport. It would not lock on the sampling rate.
I brought it home, hooked it up to my Sonos, and immediately it locked on to the 44.1 sampling rate.
What happened next is what thoroughly impressed me. The DAC had the deep low frequency extension of the Metrum Hex, with the detail of the Bifrost Uber, but went beyond both with a liveliness and shimmer in cymbals - a real sustained decay in the sound that seemed so much more lifelike. Eric Clapton's string plucking on Layla on Clapton Unplugged - I could hear the energy in the string plucks. On piano - I could hear the metallic sound of the strings as they were hit and then the quick decay.
If you have the chance to audition one of these, don't pass it up. I don't know how other TDA1541 chip based DAC's compare to the DAC960, but I can say that it is indeed an impressive DAC. I was able to acquire it for a very reasonable amount and I am very happy with it. Forget hi res formats - I have so much to rediscover with standard 16/44.1 material that I will be busy for a long time.

index.php


The legendary Philips TDA1541A chip
index.php


The DAC960 is built like a tank
index.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1917.jpg
    IMG_1917.jpg
    123.6 KB · Views: 465
  • IMG_1921.jpg
    IMG_1921.jpg
    117.3 KB · Views: 463
  • IMG_1922.JPG
    IMG_1922.JPG
    55.4 KB · Views: 312
Last edited:
Interesting.... I just got my Philips CD880 up and running after sitting in the closet for 5+ years because I needed a "drawer closed" microswitch. She is up and running and rock solid. Heavy as hell and I can pound on the top if it with my fist and it tracks perfectly.



It has "Digital out" RCA and optical outputs....



I'd love to pick up a DAC960 and see how it sounds..... The player has the same TDA1541 DAC that the 960 has, I wonder how similar it would sound to my stock Philips CD player.....

 
I have a similar vintage Arcam Black Box (first edition)
I down sample everything to 44.1, the only frequency it works with, and everything is more musical and enjoyable. I am a concert piano technician and have trained hearing.
These are less high spec than new stuff, but more musical, which is all that matters.
 
I have the 960 cd player, but it has issues and I haven't been able to use it. Thanks for reminding me that I need to get that thing going.
 
And you've only got the 'ordinary' TDA1541A.
The high-performance, and ultra-high performance versions were designated "Silver crown" & "double crown", and they have crowns printed on them:

285912171.jpg
 
Same DNA - they probably sound very similar. :yes:


I was wondering if Philips didn't simply "split" the CD880 into 2 components - The Philips CD882 (which looks EXACTLY like my CD880 except the DAC is missing from the boards inside) and the Philips DAC960 . I think the CD882 is simply a transport for the Philips DAC960 which I believe is its matching component. Dan :music:
 
Last edited:
And you've only got the 'ordinary' TDA1541A.
The high-performance, and ultra-high performance versions were designated "Silver crown" & "double crown", and they have crowns printed on them:

285912171.jpg


So what exactly is the difference between the 1541A, 1541A single crown and the 1541A double crown ???? Dan :music:
 
So what exactly is the difference between the 1541A, 1541A single crown and the 1541A double crown ???? Dan :music:


The crown and double crown were specially selected for meeting tighter specs for linearity and THD. They all had the same internal design and came off the same production line - the crown versions just did better in final testing.
 
So what exactly is the difference between the 1541A, 1541A single crown and the 1541A double crown ???? Dan :music:

index.php


I think you would be hard pressed to hear an audible difference between the versions.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2015-09-30 at 3.12.29 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2015-09-30 at 3.12.29 PM.png
    54.7 KB · Views: 320
Last edited:
I was wondering if Philips didn't simply "split" the CD880 into 2 components - The Philips CD882 (which looks EXACTLY like my CD880 except the DAC is missing from the boards inside) and the Philips DAC960 . I think the CD882 is simply a transport for the Philips DAC960 which I believe is its matching component. Dan :music:

I think that is exactly what they did. If you have not already seen it, check out the Dutch Audio Classics site - it has tons of info on the early TD1541 based components from Philips and others:

http://www.dutchaudioclassics.nl/Philips/
 
I have a similar vintage Arcam Black Box (first edition)
I down sample everything to 44.1, the only frequency it works with, and everything is more musical and enjoyable. I am a concert piano technician and have trained hearing.
These are less high spec than new stuff, but more musical, which is all that matters.

I tend to agree with you. After dabbling quite a bit with hi-res formats, I find the most significant factor is the quality of the recording. I've really lost interest in pursuing anything beyond 16/44.1 because I just think its not worth the effort.
 
It is an excellent DAC. It should lock onto 32 and 48kHz too.

The usual digital filter (not part of the 1541) used 4x oversampling, so the TDA1541 was actually running at 176kHz sampling rate. Its technical limit is 6MB/sec, or about 196kHz. 48kHz at 4x oversampling is beyond its specs, but it may cope.
 
The usual digital filter (not part of the 1541) used 4x oversampling, so the TDA1541 was actually running at 176kHz sampling rate. Its technical limit is 6MB/sec, or about 196kHz. 48kHz at 4x oversampling is beyond its specs, but it may cope.

The DAC960 has 32/44/48k indicators and is specified to 48k. My CD12/DA12LE uses the same basic chipset as the 960 (except a 1541S1 and a battleship build) and is also quite happy at 48k with its 48k light on all DVT broadcasts via optical from a STB or TV.
 
I haven't been able to find a definitive guide to the differences between the 1541 and the 1541A.

Yes, the various "crown" versions were a matter of chip-by-chip sorting of the regular production run. The chipset had a known issue with monotonicity at the quiet end, I think the "crown" versions were better in that regard. I also suspect that the manufacture of the 1541A chips in general improved as time went by--so there was more inherent accuracy in the later production runs even in the non-Crown versions.

The matching Philips filter chip was the SAA 7220, although some DAC/CD player manufacturers used other filters in front of the 1541/1541A. My "favorite" CD player uses the 1541A D/A chip, but a Sony filter. I don't know if that's better or worse than the '7220, but at any rate I find it musical.

Be aware that the "crown" versions are being counterfeited. I suspect genuine ones are REALLY rare.
 
I tend to be a skeptic when it comes to trendy or "to good to be true" claims in audio. This was the case with Philips TDA1541 chipset based DACs. How could 28 year old technology be any better sounding than current technology?

I am fortunate enough to have a good friend in our local audio club who has an extensive collection of audio gear and has lately been working his way through various different DAC's of differing topologies. I have been running a Schiit Bifrost Uber for several years now and have been very happy with it. I use Deezer Elite (16/44.1 FLAC) through a Sonos, into the DAC and then amplifying it with a Rogue Audio Cronus Magnum driving a pair of Totem Acoustic Hawks.
I was able to audition a Metrum Hex DAC, which was a significant step up from the Bifrost, mainly in the area of low frequency extension. The top end was luxuriously "liquid", while sacrificing a little bit of detail. I considered acquiring the Hex, although the cost was a bit out of my reach.
In comes the Philips DAC960. I had not heard of the popularity of this old DAC chipset - I understood that Phillips was the co-inventor of the original compact disc digital format, and that they are the P in sP/dif. But had no idea that folks were still claiming this early generation DAC chip was still one of the best out there.
My introduction to the TDA1541 chip was the DAC960 - a very early stand-alone DAC from Philips, similar to a popular Marantz model with very similar heritage.
I brought the DAC960 home, at first to try and troubleshoot a problem that my friend was having trying to audition it in his system - it seems it would not work with his high end CD transport. It would not lock on the sampling rate.
I brought it home, hooked it up to my Sonos, and immediately it locked on to the 44.1 sampling rate.
What happened next is what thoroughly impressed me. The DAC had the deep low frequency extension of the Metrum Hex, with the detail of the Bifrost Uber, but went beyond both with a liveliness and shimmer in cymbals - a real sustained decay in the sound that seemed so much more lifelike. Eric Clapton's string plucking on Layla on Clapton Unplugged - I could hear the energy in the string plucks. On piano - I could hear the metallic sound of the strings as they were hit and then the quick decay.
If you have the chance to audition one of these, don't pass it up. I don't know how other TDA1541 chip based DAC's compare to the DAC960, but I can say that it is indeed an impressive DAC. I was able to acquire it for a very reasonable amount and I am very happy with it. Forget hi res formats - I have so much to rediscover with standard 16/44.1 material that I will be busy for a long time.

attachment.php


The legendary Philips TDA1541A chip
attachment.php


The DAC960 is built like a tank
attachment.php
Hi Greg. I am glad you like the 960 so much. The little bit I heard it when fed from my Sony
was the typical multibit sound. I have really gone crazy with my setup lately but the sound. O my God
Using MacBook Pro running amerro for tidal with 2 jitterbugs, several different USB cables into an
Uptone Audio Regen feeding a Melodius X8 Ultra usb converter. Using the I2S output feeding the
I2S input on my Master 7. The connection is using An Audioquest Cinnamon eithernet cable (cat 7)
The Master 7 is set to non oversampling and the system really sings. Happy holidays
Alan
 
Back
Top Bottom