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 24th March 2009, 01:23 AM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Quote:
Originally posted by peufeu
It's part of the USB audio standard. Unless you use asynchronous isochronous mode (which needs special hardware ie not PCM27xx) your clock will be derived from USB ticks.

USB audio standard 2.0 should correct this.

I'm building a FPGA based USB soundcard which will do it the right way (ie clock in the DAC)...
That sounds like a very interesting project peufeu. I think wavelength audio, and emipiricle audio have done USB 1.1 async mode receivers using TAS1020B, but this is limited to 24/96. I'm sure there must be plenty of microcontrollers now capable of handling higher bit rates? I would be very interested in such a project - I think I read somewhere that it took a year or more to develop the s/w that they use, but I'm sure an opensource project could get done more quickly, with the right ucontroller - any suggestions? Does windows/linux support async mode directly? ie do the wavelength/empiricle DACs require special drivers? What bit rate do the windows (or linux) drivers go to?


Quote:
Originally posted by BrianDonegan
USB -> I2S -> ASRC (with good clock) -> DAC. Then the USB source jitter doesn't really matter.
I don't agree. I think I read either the wavelength, or empiricle audio guy say that such USB receivers "go nuts" every 90 seconds or so. Any time you have two clocks that are not synchronizing in some way, they will drift. It's only a matter of time before they drift so far that your buffer is overrun or starved. I think I read that the USB clock can be 1% out - that's quite a rate of drift. Either you synchronize the clocks, or you "synchronize" the data with async buffer handshaking.

Quote:
Originally posted by sangram
Not exactly my question, I was referring to running the 9008 in SPDIF mode (direct SPDIF input, not I2S).

I was looking for a point of view between USB->I2S (or any other I2S-converted mode) and direct SPDIF, actually.
I would think that even in the short distance between receiver and DAC, spdif could introduce some jitter, and the DAC still has to "recover the clock" to some degree, whereas the seperate clock of I2S makes this much less a problem.
  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
Linear voltage regulator: how to make good use of "sense" and "ground sense"? NeoY2k Analog Line Level 7 6th September 2008 11:35 PM
TL, does this now make sense? Madmike2 Multi-Way 2 8th May 2005 02:39 PM
Does this make sense ? 00940 Solid State 7 27th March 2004 09:29 PM
does this make sense? nosegoblin Solid State 9 14th February 2004 02:19 PM
Does this make sense? Illusus Chip Amps 11 25th September 2003 01:59 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:17 AM.


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