AD1854 to AD1852

Hi

My customers chose the AD 1854 as an alternative to the AD 1852, which became an EOL.
The customer buffered the audio output of the AD 1854 and the customer gave control signals and data to the AD 1854 in the same way as the AD 1852.
However, AD 1854 did not behave similarly.
I doubt the MASTER CLOCK AUTODIVIDE FEATURE circuit.
Because the problem seems not to be an audio signal.
We are giving a burst clock to the AD 1854.
The burst clock is accepted by the data sheet, just like the AD 1852.
Is it wrong to give the same control signal to the AD 1854 and AD 1852?

 

Best regards

Parents
  • You said "If you are sending it a BCLK that is 6.144 MHz and you are not getting proper out of the DAC then I signal it is not that designed. MHz BCLK with 64 transitions per frame. "
    This is the customer's design intact.
    This design is dedicated to the AD 1852 and well verified by customers.
    This design is working properly.

     

    We were convinced that the format and signal of the design were correct.
    I will report that the customer gave up pursuit of failure and decided to proceed with the newly designed design.

     

    Thank you for your support.
    Thank you very much.

Reply
  • You said "If you are sending it a BCLK that is 6.144 MHz and you are not getting proper out of the DAC then I signal it is not that designed. MHz BCLK with 64 transitions per frame. "
    This is the customer's design intact.
    This design is dedicated to the AD 1852 and well verified by customers.
    This design is working properly.

     

    We were convinced that the format and signal of the design were correct.
    I will report that the customer gave up pursuit of failure and decided to proceed with the newly designed design.

     

    Thank you for your support.
    Thank you very much.

Children
No Data