From Transport to DAC - the different modes - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 4th December 2008, 09:56 PM   #1
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default From Transport to DAC - the different modes

All,

This thread is meant for discussing different topics which started previously on the thread "Reclocking Balanced PCM63" but went off-topic.

Major subject here is - dealing with the different aspects of connecting Transports and DACs while sometime injecting the system clock directly to the digf., thus bypassing the receiver in the DAC; using a VCXO or not, etc.

This is in respecting of Paul's wish, to have the original thread -"Reclocking Balanced PCM63" clean of highjacking. Please!

Greetings,

IJ
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th December 2008, 10:19 PM   #2
PA0SU is offline PA0SU  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
PA0SU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven
IY,
you are a wise man! thanks.
__________________
Systems that assume to know too much are more a hindrance than a help.
(Software Tools)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 02:41 AM   #3
PA0SU is offline PA0SU  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
PA0SU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven
Default Manfreds posting on the other thread:

the DIR9001 PRO thing Post #139
Hi,

Im not so firm with the forum so I dont find a button to answer on the right fitting part in the thread...
... the question about the DIR9001 and the Pro-Version of it, please look on the big auction-house with the e and type number 160301121098 in. This man sells also the Pro-Version !
Then you could make your own experiencies on it.

But: the much better way seems to be not to use the SPDIF in the normal way. Taking a better clock is everyway much better.
I cannot say if a VCXO is better then a clock-signal from the Transport to the DAC, or from the DAC to the Transport, what
also would be a Idea...

Taking a XO3 is of course a improvement over the original Clock on Board the Player. No discussion here.
I would say the Clock-Signal-Path from Player to DAC is only worth to do it when you have a very good Clock. I would say with the original "bad" Clock in the Transport and sending it to the dac you probably have no improvement over using two "bad" clocks...

But: I havent done this way with the original Clock.
I have only experiencies with the Tent Clock.
Tent Clock is good for us, let me say this again.
I have heard some other Clocks in the last years...
I think i could say most of them on the market...
there a little differencies I would say. The Tent is shure one of the
more musicaly ones, when I have to take it in words.
Some other are very stable and clean too, most ones are really bad, but some are a little cool, the XO3 and also the newer XO3.2 is a little more my thing, the timing is more swinging...
hard to say it with words...
So some of the bad words on top are right, I do like Guidos way of doing the things. There are many other on the market who
sell **** for gold, Tent sells things they are lets say worth the price. What can we want more...

One thing I want to think about:
Is there a generally thing that 256fs is less problematic then 384fs, cause the frequency is lower.
What can we say about this basics ?

Im happy that there are no differencies and I can read some more of the interesting things about the PCM63 way of living...
Im still on the first steps on the theme reclocking.
Good spzzzzkt is still here...
I think we all have or own sort of humor and we should accept this and see this as good sign...

So, I look forward to get the best PCM63 DAC soon...

For my interest:

How do you use the SM5842APT ?`
* jitter-free or normal mode ?
* Dither on or Dither off ?
Whats your oppinion on the differencies in sound ?

Have a good night,
Manfred.
__________________
Systems that assume to know too much are more a hindrance than a help.
(Software Tools)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 02:48 AM   #4
PA0SU is offline PA0SU  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
PA0SU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven
Default My answer to Manfred, to get this thread alive...:

Re: the DIR9001 PRO thing Post #142

Originally posted by caine28

Quote:
Hi,

But: the much better way seems to be not to use the SPDIF in the normal way. Taking a better clock is everyway much better.
I cannot say if a VCXO is better then a clock-signal from the Transport to the DAC, or from the DAC to the Transport, what
also would be a Idea...
Stick to one clock: an XO, whatever you do. A VCXO is nearly always worse than a good XO.
The only disadvantage of putting the XO in the DAC (and connect it back to the transport) is that sooner or later the transport will be powered on without a clock signal. Many transports do not survive this.

Quote:

I would say with the original "bad" Clock in the Transport and sending it to the dac you probably have no improvement over using two "bad" clocks...
I agree for sure

Quote:

But: I havent done this way ........... on the market who
sell **** for gold, Tent sells things they are lets say worth the price. What can we want more...
The only way to judge is to measure the jitter or phase noise of the oscillator in question. The needed measuring equipment is very expensive. Some people here have the possibility of doing this with their home brew equipment (as I do) or with professional equipment of their employer (as I do, to verify my home brews).
Audio tests are often very deceptive....

Quote:

One thing I want to think about :
Is there a generally thing that 256fs is less problematic then 384fs, cause the frequency is lower.
What can we say about this basics ?
Not really. The difference in frequency is small. Some CD-players (combinations with DVD) run on 24 MHz or higher. This will be more problematic.

Quote:

How do you use the SM5842APT ?`
* jitter-free or normal mode ?
* Dither on or Dither off ?
Whats your oppinion on the differencies in sound ?
I copied the diagram from the TentDAC (as I call it) and they use DITHN = low, so dithering = on and SYNCN is not connected and so is high (internal pull up resistor) which means: jitter-free mode.

I hope the threesome did a good job. Some solutions you should believe from others, otherwise your life will be too short......

__________________
Systems that assume to know too much are more a hindrance than a help.
(Software Tools)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 03:03 AM   #5
PA0SU is offline PA0SU  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
PA0SU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven
Default Again from Manfred:

Theta... Post #140
Quote:

Hi,
Could you take a good picture from the theta to have a look an it ? This could help...

Good night, Manfred.
My dear Manfred: I have seen beautyful built transports and players, but they sounded awful and had the bad circuit diagrams...
__________________
Systems that assume to know too much are more a hindrance than a help.
(Software Tools)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 03:09 AM   #6
PA0SU is offline PA0SU  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
PA0SU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven
Default And there was still a question to Dr. H:

Re: Feeding 16.xxx to 5842-NO need for VCXO-PLL Post #138
Originally posted by Dr.H

Quote:
Herb, I would be interested to know if you tried feeding the original cd player clock back to your transport. How does it compare with the Tent clock?

The SPDIF of the Theta is reclocked, balanced etc and I think pretty decent. So perhaps all I need to do is buy a simple Tent XO?
What do you mean with: feeding the original cd player clock back to your transport ? As far as I understood the term 'transport' is synonym for 'CD-player' on diyAudio...., or? Please reformulate your question. I would like to answer it.

If the SPDIF output from you Theta is 'clean', a jitter poor clock (as a Tent XO) could be enough. But, are you sure that the SPDIF has been reclocked? The circuit diagram will tell you....
__________________
Systems that assume to know too much are more a hindrance than a help.
(Software Tools)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 11:22 AM   #7
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: And there was still a question to Dr. H:

Quote:
Originally posted by Dr.H

The SPDIF of the Theta is reclocked, balanced etc and I think pretty decent.
1).
Balanced? So you have a 110Ohm AES/EBU digital out? Not bad... but I don't know how this is working with Principia4. Probably the same? Herb, can you please help?


2). Theta is known for being excellent product. Luckily, you can use it with the SM5842 (384 fs.). May be you should still consider the relative small investment in a XO3.2 (in relation to the Transport high-costs). Truly hard to tell - how good is the original XO in the Theta and if the signal is indeed re-clocked before the signal (do you have also the 75Ohm SPDIF?) is leaving the unit.

Greetings,

IJ
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 01:52 PM   #8
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default wrong thread (please allow me).

Originally posted by Telstar in "Reclocking balanced PCM63"
Post #149

Hi Herb,

I think I could just use Tent vcxo:
http://www.tentlabs.com/Products/DA...ODAC/index.html
in my dac.
And the tent link:
http://www.tentlabs.com/InfoSupport/page25/page25.html
between it and the reclocked transport.

It should come close to your solution, right?


__________________
Less is More

IP: 62.101.65.xxx Today, at 03:37 PM Quote
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 02:07 PM   #9
PA0SU is offline PA0SU  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
PA0SU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven
Default Re: Re: And there was still a question to Dr. H:

Quote:
Originally posted by irgendjemand

1).
Balanced? So you have a 110Ohm AES/EBU digital out? Not bad... but I don't know how this is working with Principia4. Probably the same? Herb, can you please help?
Greetings,

IJ
If there is a real balanced output, you are free to connect it to an unbalanced input, per definition.
__________________
Systems that assume to know too much are more a hindrance than a help.
(Software Tools)
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th December 2008, 02:23 PM   #10
PA0SU is offline PA0SU  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
PA0SU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Eindhoven
Default Re: wrong thread (please allow me).

Quote:
Originally posted by irgendjemand
Originally posted by Telstar in "Reclocking balanced PCM63"
Post #149

Hi Herb,
...........
And the tent link:
http://www.tentlabs.com/InfoSupport/page25/page25.html
between it and the reclocked transport.

It should come close to your solution, right?
Yes Sir. Theoretically the TentLink should be better: the XO in the DAC (not in the transport this time) is closer to the dig.fi and the reclocking circuit so that there is less chance some jitter could be introduced.
BUT:
You need an extra PLL-VCXO in the transport to avoid that the transport could be powered on without a clock signal (the VCXO will output a clock-signal anyhow, also if it is not locked to the XO in the DAC [because accidently the connection is not there]).

With my solution however, you have to trust the connection between transport and DAC, so that this will not add jitter to the clock.
As long as you do not smash on the cable in question and you put some ferroxcube around it, no jitter will be added.
__________________
Systems that assume to know too much are more a hindrance than a help.
(Software Tools)
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trigger Modes for the xda intregrated amp? SmittyR Pass Labs 0 13th November 2008 01:50 AM
OPT failure modes jeff mai Tubes / Valves 3 29th March 2005 11:59 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 10:24 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2