From Transport to DAC - the different modes

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
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
 
Manfreds posting on the other thread:

the DIR9001 PRO thing Post #139
Hi,

I´m not so firm with the forum so I don´t 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 let´s 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 ?

I´m happy that there are no differencies and I can read some more of the interesting things about the PCM63 way of living...
I´m 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.
 
My answer to Manfred, to get this thread alive...:

Re: the DIR9001 PRO thing Post #142

Originally posted by caine28

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.


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


But: I havent done this way ........... on the market who
sell **** for gold, Tent sells things they are let´s 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....


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.


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......
 
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

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....
 
Re: And there was still a question to Dr. H:

Dr.H said:
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
 
Re: wrong thread (please allow me).

irgendjemand said:
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.
 
irgendjemand said:
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.

IJ

Subscribed, thanks.
 
Thanks for responses.

Herb, my question was:
Using your transport, feed the cheap/poor quality clock to the DAc; How does it compare with just using SPDIF?

Manfred and others: Yes, the Theta has a balanced AES/EBU 110ohm output, BUT a poor quality clock (just a little crystal).

I am going to try a simple experiment: :smash:
CKSLN on SM5842 to 5V (HIGH)
16.xxx clock (poor quality) from transport to XTI on Sm5842

If the result is good/promising, then I'll replace the poor qulaity theta 16.x with a XO clock from Tent;

Since the SPDIF seems good (reclocked using 74HC74), I will not go for the X03.2.
 
Re: Connection Problems (?)

PA0SU said:
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.

Herb,
something very strange happened to me with your Transport to DAC Cables-Set: It is working perfectly when the SM5842 (digf.) is on the regular mode, but it does not work at all when it is on "Jitter Free Mode"!!

Seemed to be completely impossible, but this is the situation.

My regular digital cables-set (ca. 65 cm each) works with no problem in both modes. Seems like the cables-set with the Ferrite become altogether too long ??

I don't get it! I was trying it several time - the cable works normally, but once I try to use the Jumper for the "Jitter Free Mode" it stops playing!! As I said , it does not happens with my regular 75Ohm digital cables-set (I am talking here about the SPDIF and Clock Cables, of course).

?????????

Greetings!

IJ.
__________________
 
Dr.H said:
Yes, the Theta has a balanced AES/EBU 110ohm output, BUT a poor quality clock (just a little crystal).

I am going to try a simple experiment: :smash:
CKSLN on SM5842 to 5V (HIGH)
16.xxx clock (poor quality) from transport to XTI on Sm5842

If the result is good/promising, then I'll replace the poor qulaity theta 16.x with a XO clock from Tent;

Since the SPDIF seems good (reclocked using 74HC74), I will not go for the X03.2.


It is of course your good right...
:headbash: :headbash: :headbash:
 
Dr.H said:
Thanks for responses.

Herb, my question was:
Using your transport, feed the cheap/poor quality clock to the DAC; How does it compare with just using SPDIF?

Manfred and others: Yes, the Theta has a balanced AES/EBU 110ohm output, BUT a poor quality clock (just a little crystal).

I am going to try a simple experiment:
CKSLN on SM5842 to 5V (HIGH)
16.xxx clock (poor quality) from transport to XTI on Sm5842

If the result is good/promising, then I'll replace the poor qulaity theta 16.x with a XO clock from Tent;

Since the SPDIF seems good (reclocked using 74HC74), I will not go for the X03.2.

This is the wrong way to go. Every experiment with a bad clock is absolutely worthless. In case you are comparing eg. 150 ps jitter with 120 ps. So.....
Start with a good clock. Believe me, otherwise you will make no any progress..................
 
PA0SU said:
Start with a good clock. Believe me, otherwise you will make no any progress..................

Dr H.,

Paul told you this long ago: go for Tent XO. This was NO :bs: !
I told you this not so long ago: go for XO3.2. I shared with you my own experiance as well, quite very detailed.... This was NO :bs:
Manfred told you the same upon his joining to this forum.... NO any :bs:
Herb tell you this again and again... NO :bs:

We all were trying to find a way, helping you to use your Teata Transport in connection to the SM5842 and not having to purcase a new 11,xxx Transport...

Well, you really don't have to use our advices here, of course not; go the other way arround, why not? But if so, please don't be too upset if someone is loosing his good manners here... includes myself in my previous post to you.

This however should have not happened, I know. I Will try to be an :angel:

Sorry for using the headbash... I had better used Herb's kindest approach: Start with a good clock. Believe me, otherwise you will make no any progress..................

Your Irgendjemand.
 
Dr.H said:
Thanks for your advice.
.........
That's the Y in DIY.
And we all learn and benefit that way.

I will probably go to Tent XO eventually, but my route ok?

For a preparation to a good clock it could be wise to build already the extra clock-connection with B&C's and prepare the dig.fi to accept the 384.fs from the transport. Make it working.

When the Tent XO3.2 arives you have less work before you will be jubilant.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.