VOGONS


First post, by th1r5bvn23

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I reversed engineered the Audician 32 Plus sound card (also known as LWHA151A00) and made a replica PCB of it.

TL; DR: the project is on GitHub.

I initially wanted to integrate the OPL3-SAx sound chip in another project, but only to find that no public schematic is available yet. The datasheet is pretty vague on hardware design, and other projects use this chip are not open-source. I always love the real OPL3 and clean output of this card, so I made an effort to reverse engineer the card. I desoldered every component on the card and took a photo of each side, used a multimeter to check every connection and tried my best making a replica PCB. The value of every SMD MLCC capacitor is measured with the multimeter and guessed according to my knowledge.

The attachment PCB top.jpg is no longer available
The attachment 截屏2026-07-31 21.57.03.png is no longer available
The attachment 截屏2026-07-31 21.57.11.png is no longer available
The attachment Audician 32 Plus Replica.png is no longer available

I also collected and read a lot of reference documents, including datasheets of every chip and ISA specification. I came by a wonderful post of modding this card and it helped a lot.

Here are some interesting findings during the process:

- YMF718 (OPL3-SA2C) shares the same pinout as YMF711 (OPL3-SA2), while YMF719 (OPL3-SA3C) shares the same pinout as YMF715 (OPL3-SA3). Some source claims that YMF719 is a custom-labeled version of YMF715. The difference between OPL3-SA2 and OPL3-SA3 is that OPL3-SA3 has some 3D support and has a little different pinout on some filter caps. I've marked their difference in the schematic.

- The onboard wavetable (QS1000, QS1001A and TDA1311 codec) are connected correctly while the wavetable header has left and right output channel reversed. Contrary to previous information, the "reverse channel" bug of OPL3-SAx's wavetable header origins from the PCB itself, not the OPL3-SAx chip. I also found that ES1868 datasheet has the wrong pinout of wavetable header which is reversed on output channels.

- The CDROM version of the card is only capable of 10-bit address decoding and potentially has problem in PCI systems. Although simply adding back the 74LS138 and change the jumpers will work fine.

Though I did my best, but the PCB itself is definitely not a 1:1 replica to the original card. In most aspects they are the same, however I made some modifications, either due to the limitation of modern software, or fixing bugs:

- Fixed the reversed output channel of the wavetable header.

- Different footprints and fonts on all components due to, obviously, I used KiCad to draw the board. I don't want to waste time on replicating old footprints and fonts and I think most reasonable persons won't, either.

- The PCB was made slightly longer by ~1.5mm to stick strictly within ISA spec. Also the gold finger is moved forward by ~0.5mm according to the ISA spec. I always had hard time inserting to and pulling out the card from the slot and I finally knew why. Therefore the layout of some traces and vias is different from the original.

- Silkscreen of some chips are changed. Labway even wrote "74SL138" instead of the correct "74LS138"... on all the revisions of the PCB...

- I think it's illegal to use other's FCCID and CE logo without certification so I replaced them.

There are still several problems to be solved in this project (not important, however):

- Many components that are not on any of these cards are unknown. The values of some resistors and SMD capacitors cannot be easily guessed. There is also a chip U7 that I know some function of it but can never know the model.

- No ISA bracket is provided at the moment.

- Full replica is a little more expensive than buying a used card currently. But the card is not easy to come across these days.

I made all of the schematic, PCB layout and many reference documents including PCB photos available on the GitHub repository. I've ordered PCB from JLCPCB and it will be arrived in 3 days. I don't plan on selling any of the cards.

Intel Pentium III 933MHz, ASUS CUBX-L, NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 400, Yamaha YMF719E-S

Reply 1 of 11, by carlostex

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Great job, I love the YMF chipset family.

Reply 2 of 11, by th1r5bvn23

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

After sourcing all of the parts the card finally works! Although I bought the wrong audio connectors and they don't fit with the bracket. I've found the right connector and updated the project repository.

The card works beautifully with no noise when using line out. Everything just works!

The attachment IMG_20260806_202149.jpg is no longer available

Intel Pentium III 933MHz, ASUS CUBX-L, NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 400, Yamaha YMF719E-S

Reply 4 of 11, by th1r5bvn23

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

Update: 3D printable model of the bracket is now in the repository! I've tested and it worked perfectly.
IMG-20260811-232339.jpg

Intel Pentium III 933MHz, ASUS CUBX-L, NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 400, Yamaha YMF719E-S

Reply 5 of 11, by LSS10999

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Some clarification needed about this paragraph... regarding 33.8688MHz crystal.

C38, C39, R29, X2: If using a 3rd overtone crystal, which most probably is for 33.8688MHz in HC-49U package, then go with the values above. If using a fundamental crystal, then replace C38, C39 and R29 according to the crystal's datasheet. If the card doesn't work correctly then I suggest measuring the crystal output with an oscilloscope.

I'm interested in assembling one and am looking for materials, but when it comes to crystals I'm a bit confused upon reading this, as not many sellers seem to explain this aspect clearly enough. I wonder which type of crystal of this frequency is more common (fundamental or 3rd overtone), and is there any known RC value combinations in case of a fundamental crystal?

And by the way, can I use smaller (HC-49S) crystals instead of HC-49U? After searching online I couldn't find any clear difference between the two packaging other than physical dimensions, and HC-49S seems to be more common at present.

Reply 6 of 11, by NorsteinB

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie

I've got the original here and a very similar but Opti-based card that does have the QS1000/QS1001A wavetable portion that is left unpopulated on both the real Audician 32 plus as well as the Replica.

Can I do something to help? It would be so cool if you could have the Aucician but with that wavetable. It is considered low quality in parts of the retro scene, but I believe that is largely like the bad reputation of the ESS Audiodrive cards back in the day - they were almost exclusively used for cheap cards where the component quality led to muffled sound output or noise, it's not the fault of the chipset itself.

Reply 7 of 11, by shevalier

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Congrats.

th1r5bvn23 wrote on 2026-07-31, 14:34:

Here are some interesting findings during the process:

I get that it’s a replica, a "retro sound" and all that.But using the TEA2025 in its datasheet configuration is an insanely bad idea.
It has a gain of around 45dB and is designed for a 20mV input from a phono stage.To start with, this setup wastes gain that could have been used to reduce distortion.
And finally, the non-inverting input is pulled to ground inside the IC, so its offset is determined solely by the base current of the PNP transistor. Consequently, it cannot handle signals as low as 1–2V. Moreover, using a resistor-biased differential pair (rather than a constant current source) means it struggles to process common-mode signals (the classic non-inverting configuration from the datasheet).
Switch to an inverting configuration with 10dB gain.

It will make an excellent headphone amp.
Though back in the day, that kind of concept (plugging headphones into a computer) wasn't really a thing. 😀

Aopen MX3S, PIII-S Tualatin 1133, Radeon 9800Pro@XT BIOS, Audigy 4 SB0610
JetWay K8T8AS, Athlon DH-E6 3000+, Radeon HD2600Pro AGP, Audigy 2 Value SB0400
Gigabyte Ga-k8n51gmf, Turion64 ML-30@2.2GHz , Radeon X800GTO PL16, Diamond monster sound MX300

Reply 8 of 11, by th1r5bvn23

User metadata
Rank Newbie
Rank
Newbie
LSS10999 wrote on 2026-08-14, 03:25:
Some clarification needed about this paragraph... regarding 33.8688MHz crystal. […]
Show full quote

Some clarification needed about this paragraph... regarding 33.8688MHz crystal.

...

I'm interested in assembling one and am looking for materials, but when it comes to crystals I'm a bit confused upon reading this, as not many sellers seem to explain this aspect clearly enough. I wonder which type of crystal of this frequency is more common (fundamental or 3rd overtone), and is there any known RC value combinations in case of a fundamental crystal?

And by the way, can I use smaller (HC-49S) crystals instead of HC-49U? After searching online I couldn't find any clear difference between the two packaging other than physical dimensions, and HC-49S seems to be more common at present.

That problem occurred to me as well. I asked the seller of the 33.8688MHz crystal about whether it's fundamental or 3rd overtone and he replied me it's fundamental, while after I installed the surrounding components as fundamental only to find that it run at 11.2896MHz and the sound was distorted. There is no good way to know that. I would assume that 33.8688MHz 3rd overtone is more common. I would suggest you install fundamental RCs and try it first.

HC-49S crystals could be installed as it shares the same footprint with HC-49U on the PCB. If the legs are long enough, you can install it the same way as HC-49U. Anyway, be sure to not short the adjecent U8 pads.

NorsteinB wrote on Yesterday, 06:31:

I've got the original here and a very similar but Opti-based card that does have the QS1000/QS1001A wavetable portion that is left unpopulated on both the real Audician 32 plus as well as the Replica.

Can I do something to help? It would be so cool if you could have the Aucician but with that wavetable. It is considered low quality in parts of the retro scene, but I believe that is largely like the bad reputation of the ESS Audiodrive cards back in the day - they were almost exclusively used for cheap cards where the component quality led to muffled sound output or noise, it's not the fault of the chipset itself.

Could you take a high-quality photo of the card and possibly measure the connections and values of surrounding components? Although measurement of MLCC capacitors without desoldering them are not possible, I could guess from the datasheets. However, I can't test if the wavetable works.

shevalier wrote on Yesterday, 12:43:

I get that it’s a replica, a "retro sound" and all that.But using the TEA2025 in its datasheet configuration is an insanely bad idea.

...

To be honest, I'm not fond of the TEA2025. Speaker amplifier on sound cards is generally a bad idea by today's standard and a modern headphone amplifier should be used instead. In fact, some early PCI sound cards like the Sound Blaster Live! have already utilized a proper headphone amplifier. And the Sound Blaster Live! (1998) is only ONE year younger than these OPL3-SAx cards (1997). But the goal of this project is just to replicate that card and validate the reverse-engineered schematic. I'm indeed planning on making a properly mordernized version of OPL3-SAx sound card. As always, a bigger project is started with small steps.

Intel Pentium III 933MHz, ASUS CUBX-L, NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 400, Yamaha YMF719E-S

Reply 9 of 11, by LSS10999

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
th1r5bvn23 wrote on Yesterday, 14:58:

That problem occurred to me as well. I asked the seller of the 33.8688MHz crystal about whether it's fundamental or 3rd overtone and he replied me it's fundamental, while after I installed the surrounding components as fundamental only to find that it run at 11.2896MHz and the sound was distorted. There is no good way to know that. I would assume that 33.8688MHz 3rd overtone is more common. I would suggest you install fundamental RCs and try it first.

HC-49S crystals could be installed as it shares the same footprint with HC-49U on the PCB. If the legs are long enough, you can install it the same way as HC-49U. Anyway, be sure to not short the adjecent U8 pads.

Thanks for the reply. Just noticed the presence of a U8 pad which seems to be reserved for a specialized clock generator (MK1420S). Guess it will not look very pretty when using HC-49S crystals with this PCB layout...

From what I could find online about the MC1420 clock generator it seems to require a 14.318MHz clock, just I don't know where it should be sourcing the input clock from. The schematic suggests BUSCLK but the resistor in between is left DNP.

th1r5bvn23 wrote on Yesterday, 14:58:

To be honest, I'm not fond of the TEA2025. Speaker amplifier on sound cards is generally a bad idea by today's standard and a modern headphone amplifier should be used instead. In fact, some early PCI sound cards like the Sound Blaster Live! have already utilized a proper headphone amplifier. And the Sound Blaster Live! (1998) is only ONE year younger than these OPL3-SAx cards (1997). But the goal of this project is just to replicate that card and validate the reverse-engineered schematic. I'm indeed planning on making a properly mordernized version of OPL3-SAx sound card. As always, a bigger project is started with small steps.

Actually, my experience with HKZLab's ES1868_ISA8 card seems to suggest a similar issue with amplifiers. The card's SPKR_OUT which went through a LM1877 amplifier feels rather distorted, but its LINE_OUT (without the amp) is clean and loud enough even when testing with a simple headset. As such, I'm using the card's LINE_OUT exclusively and haven't any issue with volume and such.

Not sure how the output currently sounds at present (would need a properly assembled card to verify), but it may be a good idea to add a non-amplified output in the future.

EDIT: Just noted where the amplifier/line out switch (JP1) is...

Last edited by LSS10999 on 2026-08-15, 16:41. Edited 2 times in total.

Reply 10 of 11, by shevalier

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
th1r5bvn23 wrote on Yesterday, 14:58:

To be honest, I'm not fond of the TEA2025. Speaker amplifier on sound cards is generally a bad idea by today's standard and a modern headphone amplifier should be used instead. In fact, some early PCI sound cards like the Sound Blaster Live! have already utilized a proper headphone amplifier. And the Sound Blaster Live! (1998) is only ONE year younger than these OPL3-SAx cards (1997). But the goal of this project is just to replicate that card and validate the reverse-engineered schematic. I'm indeed planning on making a properly mordernized version of OPL3-SAx sound card. As always, a bigger project is started with small steps.

/ooftopic
To be honest, the NJM4556 as a headphone amplifier is no better than the TEA2025B.
Something resembling a proper headphone amplifier only starts to happen with the AD8397, thanks to its high output current capability. Unless you are catering to Sennheiser owners, whose headphones traditionally have an impedance of 150 Ohms, a single-supply amplifier with 3V RMS is more than enough for 32-Ohm headphones.And the TEA in an inverting configuration with a gain of 6–10 dB is actually more than good for this application because its output current is very decent.
Plus, it keeps that retro feel.

Aopen MX3S, PIII-S Tualatin 1133, Radeon 9800Pro@XT BIOS, Audigy 4 SB0610
JetWay K8T8AS, Athlon DH-E6 3000+, Radeon HD2600Pro AGP, Audigy 2 Value SB0400
Gigabyte Ga-k8n51gmf, Turion64 ML-30@2.2GHz , Radeon X800GTO PL16, Diamond monster sound MX300

Reply 11 of 11, by Tiido

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

As far as crystals go things at 30MHz and beyond are almost always 3rd overtone, it is difficult to make a fundamental mode crystal at such freqs.

T-04YBSC, a new YMF71x based sound card & Official VOGONS thread about it
Newly made 4MB 60ns 30pin SIMMs ~
mida sa loed ? nagunii aru ei saa 😜