modifying an old philips cd160

Dedicated to the silver disk spinner
User avatar
Mike H
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 20157
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:38 pm
Location: The Fens
Contact:

#31 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Mike H »

Ant wrote: Tue Sep 26, 2017 10:48 pm Ahahaha.... But if i solder a socket in, I wont cook the chip trying to solder that in!
Exactly!

At last! :D
 
"No matter how fast light travels it finds that the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it."
User avatar
jack
Thermionic Monk Status
Posts: 5493
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:58 pm
Location: ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ oʇ ƃuıʌoɯ ƃuıɹǝpısuoɔ
Contact:

#32 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by jack »

Sockets allow you to swap the opamps around, but they do have an effect on the signal. Maybe not as big as that of changing the opamp, who knows? It's another variable in the equation.

You are unlikely to damage modern opamps by soldering with a decent iron (40W, fine tip) and a fairly steady hand.
Vivitur ingenio, caetera mortis erunt
Ant
Shed dweller
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:45 pm
Location: Yorkshire

#33 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Ant »

Ive dropped the 2 lme 49720's in this morning and run through a couple of cd's so far. Made sure I used the zap strap so i didn't fry the chip with static and used a sucker to desolder the lm833's, couldn't get any braid locally so ive sacked that for now. I'll order some though and give it a go when the cd371 arrives.
Didn't get any sockets either, again something i'll do to the 371.

Re the iron I use, its a precision gold a55kj. not a top dollar iron by any means, but really nice to use, with 3 user selectable temp settings which have made this project abit easier with the smallest tip. I did have a maplins blue temperature controlled iron which was ok, this one is much better.have steady hands, but crap eyesight, must invest in a magnifier at some point.....

There is quite a difference with the new op amps, it seems easier to listen to if that makes sense, no need to strain to follow an instrument, its just there. Marginally better imaging, marginally better depth. More subtle. Less shouty.

Bass is much more controlled, and that signature early cd screech seems to be much improved. Details are easier to pick up and follow.
It seems more natural, more atmospheric. The little details are there. Especially at the top on things like ride cymbals and the like.

I looked at the datasheet for both the original and new op amps, the lme's thd is quoted as 0.00003%, the lm833n is quoted as 0.002% so there is a pretty good explanation for what i seem to be hearing, in terms of it sounding more natural.
If its oscillating I cant tell, only way to see would be to scope it.

Neil Young's harmonica on his unplugged album isn't wince inducing now

I'd say mod number 2 is a successful upgrade over standard rather than just being a sideways move which is always a possibility.

Next step, maybe a set of regs?, change the 1541 decoupling caps?, swap out all the axial caps on the board? swap out the nichicon fw lytic output caps for something else?, clock upgrade?

I have read people have removed the muting transistors, but im not sure why as they dont seem to be in the signal path on rhe cct in the service manual, they appear to drop off the track that goes to the sockets rather than the signal going through them and out. So i cant see any point in doing that unless someone knows better and ive missed something fundamental which is entirely possible :D

Suggestions welcome on step 3

Im finding this quite an enjoyable little side project
Also starring Rex Hamilton as Abraham Lincoln

www.bte-designs.weebly.com
User avatar
DSJR
User
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:11 am
Location: Suffolk Coastal

#34 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by DSJR »

I was given a CD371, thought it sounded soggy and bland although the mech was fine, and ended up 'selling' it to Cash Converters for a tenner as I have enough CD player jobbies already.

Do please note you can't make a silk purse out of these cheapskate pigs ears. I know it's fun for peanuts, but since I think Philips did the basics right and even put better output caps in this sample, the power supplies probably are extremely basic and I suspect this is the area where some attention could be put. Trouble is, it'll cost in terms of transformers and also extra regulators fitted where none were previously! The basic electronics are probably just fine I reckon, just not well supplied? and the flimsy plastic case does little to help the disc drive which can vibrate alarmingly when running - the master clock is a weak point too on all these Philips Marantz jobbies I recall. The 1541 DAC era saw much ultrasonic and general hf/rf 'noise' coming out of the player down the signal cables and back into the mains I remember and this is where I was introduced to ferrites and also mains filters for these sources, which don't seem to have a 'dynamic demand' on the mains supply as amps do and my once expensive heavy Micro seiki CD-M2 benefited from these things and still sounds bloody good for it - ferrites on the signal cables certainly improved the non-balanced outputs on this machine, which used this way is related to the Marantz CD94 based donor chassis, which was available in untrimmed form as an OEM chassis I remember, which Micro Seiki tweaked further on and off the circuit boards. I believe it was a Ben Duncan article in an old HFN that suggested a 'ten times' capacity for the filter over the requirement of the unit it's filtering. It's worked for me and certainly hasn't made the music worse on the sources I have here. I just don't use them on the active pre or the power amps.

Maybe you should look out for a surviving Arcam Alpha 5 next time and see about doing an 'Avondale' on it. The transport was Philips' best ever generation for tracking and the case was a little sturdier too.
Ant
Shed dweller
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:45 pm
Location: Yorkshire

#35 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Ant »

S'all abit of fun dave :D
The 371 came earlier so ive had a poke about in it.
Has a really nice cdm 2 mech in it. die cast alloy drawer, subframe, and other parts, with a cast and machined resin chassis for the swingarm. Pretty much the same as the cdm 1, and very similar to the cdm1 mk2 mech wot was in the arcam delta 170.3 and Philips cd880. The cast and machined resin chassis rather than machined alloy chassis of the cdm1 mk 2 was the difference.
Apparently the cdm2 was designed to make it cheaper to manufacture ( the resin chassis) but it turned out that it was not cheaper to manufacture the resin chassis, so was pointless. So they made the cdm2/10 instead which used the resin chassis they had developed, but with plastic drawer parts instead of the die cast bits to reduce the costs that way instead.

Someone has been in it already, and kindly replaced the output caps with some nichicon muse of the correct value, and has replaced the lm 833n op amps with some Motorola mc34082's.
Thats all they have replaced, so i'll do the same with this one as ive done with the 160, and replace all the electrolytics with nichicon gold fws.

The 6800uf psu cap is leaking in it, so ive powered it up, checked it works, reads and plays discs, and skips to different tracks then powered it down.
I'll not use it until ive done the recap and given the transport abit of a service. Just some grease on the runners and top clamp.
The unit feels alot less plasticky than the 160, and the transport weighs a ton.

I like playing with these, maybe i'll be able to fix the mother in laws cd303. I want it :D the Philips version of the marantz cd73
Also starring Rex Hamilton as Abraham Lincoln

www.bte-designs.weebly.com
Cressy Snr
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10552
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 12:25 am
Location: South Yorks.

#36 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Cressy Snr »

Well, what is is I read about silk purses and sows' ears.
Now I am fully aware that compared to most of the cognoscenti of the hi-fi world I have proven myself to be somewhat unsophisticated and really ought to find a different hobby, but bear with, bear with. :wink:
I'm currently auditioning the modded CD160 (second pair of ears and all that) in my system and it sounds great.
Far more oomph, architecture, pace, rhythm, timing, body and solidity than I have heard from CD, in many a year.
Very, very good, for very little outlay, other than a few caps and a couple of modern op-amps.
Bitstream? Delta-Sigma? PAH!
Sgt. Baker started talkin’ with a Bullhorn in his hand.
User avatar
Thermionic Idler
Old Hand
Posts: 1018
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:22 pm
Location: Southsea

#37 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Thermionic Idler »

It's also got a proper CD transport - I think it's the Phillips CDM-4 in that one, my Marantz CD-94 has the CDM-1. Both single-beam, swing-arm, built like a tank, CD is ready to play within less than one second of loading (compare that with any new machine). Interesting that the lasers in these are still working after 30 odd years, yet they fail regularly in much newer players (which is why I will never, ever invest significant money in a new CD or SACD player).

I think I'm right in saying that the single beam transports are also far better at coping with disc errors than the 3 beam transports as well. Although it didn't sound too good, my CD94 successfully played a visibly well-rotted CD almost all the way to the end whereas the PC DVD drive didn't even recognise the TOC. IIRC the triple beam thing was to get around Phillips' patent... I think? Might be wrong.
Deck: Garrard 301 - Audio Origami PU7 - NW Analogue DH3S
Phono: Pete Millett LR, Lundahl SUT, AMB σ22 PSU
Linestage: Bruno Putzeys Balanced Pre + Hans Polak relay mod, LCDuino control
Power amps: 300B PP 'Symmetric Reichert'
Speakers: FF225WK Big Mets
Ant
Shed dweller
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:45 pm
Location: Yorkshire

#38 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Ant »

The reason for single beam was the swing arm. The triple beam one couldnt go on the swing arm because of the tracking error for the second and third beam. The other 2 beams 'read forward', basically reading the bit of the disc in front of the bit that the first beam is playing. Useful for fast read times for cd rom and for data buffering in the case of a portable cd player. but it has to move in a straight line. The swing arm motion isnt linear, and because it moves in the same manner as a tonearm, the second and third beam position relative to the pits and flats on the disc changes. If there is one beam there is no offset.

Ive got a 4700uf samwha cap to go in the 371 to replace the dodgy 6800uf cap, maplin only had a bloody great snap in cap of the right value. So the 4700 will do for now until I order the replacement cap set.

The dedicated transport I used was an arcam delta 170.3 and interestingly, that had a second optical output rhat was a 'clock link'. This was there to synch the clock in the transport with the clock in the black box dac.
The transport in that player was the cdm1 mk2, very very similar to the cdm2 transport in this cd 371.
I got a fantastic sound out of the delta and a musical fidelity x24k dac. Think that was a wolfson dac.
The cd160, the 371 and the delta would play digestive biscuits if they had data on them, the mf xray I had, the inca design katana and the Sony 930 I had would regularly spit discs out and refuse to read them.
Philips knew what they were doing
Also starring Rex Hamilton as Abraham Lincoln

www.bte-designs.weebly.com
User avatar
DSJR
User
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:11 am
Location: Suffolk Coastal

#39 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by DSJR »

My current workroom CD player - Denon DCD-1015, was an excellent £300 worth in the late 90's and was given to me some years ago as surplus to requirements. Rumbly plastic drawer but it sounds great as a machine to feed preamps I'm testing and it offers a fine digital output for my ton-up twin supply QED DAC, which on quick comparison doesn't sound any better, but which offers a little more subtlety and a tad more 'air' on a prolonged listen. The similar sounding but far more complex heavyweight DCD 1520 has an amazing transport as used by Sony at one time, but the optical output sender is failing and may need replacing (TORX 172 I think it is) and it didn't respond to cleaning :( so it's sulking in the corner right now.

I need extra space in the workroom general gear-rack, so there's a Sony CDP-M11 coming (a friend let me have it for a token tenner), which may make a good transport if a bit bland as a stand-alone - we'll see.
Ant
Shed dweller
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:45 pm
Location: Yorkshire

#40 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Ant »

I reckon the m11 would be a nice thing to play with, the earlier Sony units seem to respond well to tweaks from what ive read, and I like Sony players in general, I heard a cdp x 303 es some years ago and that was lovely. I almost bought it
Also starring Rex Hamilton as Abraham Lincoln

www.bte-designs.weebly.com
User avatar
DSJR
User
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 11:11 am
Location: Suffolk Coastal

#41 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by DSJR »

I've only heard this sample the once and not for long, so just maybe it could do with a few hour's use after a year or two as an 'ornament' for it to free-off musically. When I heard it the sound was rather dry and over-damped if anything, but I remember how the Krell power amp I had was like this (plus some 'grain' too) as it too hadn't been used for a couple of years - it was a 'spare...' After a good few hours' use, it lost that 'solid state grain' feel and settled down into the fine amp it really was... Ran too hot for me, but I digress, sorry! Hopefully the Sony will make a fine transport if nothing else.
Ant
Shed dweller
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:45 pm
Location: Yorkshire

#42 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Ant »

The krell ran too hot, you wanna try a pass f5!
Its like a 3 bar electric heater after an hour :D
The Thing (as she calls it, she aint overly enamoured with the way it looks, although she does like nicks base mounted blue led) sounds bloody good though.

I fitted the replacement psu cap, i can trust it not to let go now, and im not sure which I prefer. The 160 or the 371. The nichicon muse non polarised caps and the Motorola op amps that are in this particular 371 are quite pleasing.

I'll reserve judgement until they are both altered in the same manner though. Getting the board out to replace the dodgy psu cap was a pain in the arse, the front had to come off and the transport had to be removed as it sits over the board.

The drawer had to come off to get at the subframe screws and has to be tilted down to clear the front drawer stop so it can slide off the runners. Only possible if the fascia is removed.

And it has the stupidest headphone socket in the world. It has no volume control. Quite why you would want a headphone socket that has no volume control is beyond me.........
Also starring Rex Hamilton as Abraham Lincoln

www.bte-designs.weebly.com
Ant
Shed dweller
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:45 pm
Location: Yorkshire

#43 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Ant »

Question. NOS capacitors for the output. Ive read quite a gew things on quite a few blogs and sites re the output caps on old machines. There are quite a few people who have found that an obscure nos roederstein ek series bakelite capacitor makes a great output cap for these old machines. However, im averse to using old nos caps.
These caps are marked made in West Germany, so are going to be at least 30 years old. They are available fairly easily at a fairly readonable cost, but i dont really want to have to piss about reforming them.
What does the board think?
Also starring Rex Hamilton as Abraham Lincoln

www.bte-designs.weebly.com
User avatar
IslandPink
Amstrad Tower of Power
Posts: 10041
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 7:01 pm
Location: Denbigh, N.Wales

#44 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by IslandPink »

Ant wrote: Sun Oct 01, 2017 12:49 am The krell ran too hot, you wanna try a pass f5!
Its like a 3 bar electric heater after an hour :D
The heatsinks shouldn't be much more than 50 C when it's warmed-up - otherwise you need to check the bias.
"Once you find out ... the Circumstances ; then you can go out"
Ant
Shed dweller
Posts: 2332
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 6:45 pm
Location: Yorkshire

#45 Re: modifying an old philips cd160

Post by Ant »

You can leave your hand on it, don't think its hotter than it should be
Also starring Rex Hamilton as Abraham Lincoln

www.bte-designs.weebly.com
Post Reply