Please, see the post #695
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/grou...hronous-i2s-s-pdif-fifo-kit-group-buy-70.html
I haven't taken anything personal or tried to attack you, I've just tried to help you with the areas that you said you had concerns about.
I had posted exactly my earlier post over on the other thread. I decided that if we were to talk specifics about the FIFO design, it was inappropriate in a Vendor's Bazaar thread about a different product, I won't cowardly trash a product in a separate thread, see how that sword cuts both ways?
What exactly did I take out of context? Your post was specific in that you were concerned about Ian's use of the word ultimate and that you were not convinced that transport side tweaking would be no longer necessary with the FIFO+Reclocker. I tried to post specific information that was backed up by measured and as close to scientific as practical in DIY findings in this thread, most of which are by Ian's thorough work.
Hardware is the root cause of the issue. People filtering a USB cable or a computer power cable or using a linear PSU for a computer or futzing about with software tweaks are not actually addressing the real system level issue. Whatever is being filtered should not have been in the signal wires in the first place IMO.
Unfortunately all 'experts' on software side optimisations are biased. They have typically invested time and money in minutiae of details that are just a way to avoid dealing with root cause issues that are in the hardware they have chosen.
As Andrea points out, if measurements aren't enough then try a few different crystals and find your favourite and enjoy. Funnily, this is also Ian's recommendation in the Dual XO manual from memory
Of the issues that I mentioned as caveats:
- The clock is the end user's choice. Choose one that suits your preferred jitter spectrum, measured jitter performance, subjective taste, whatever your flavour it is the single largest influence on sound output of Ian's FIFO. Once the jitter of the clock is below all sane measurement thresholds it is possible that the flip flops used for reclocking the signals are the dominant jitter source. At that point you're on your own.
- Conducted noise from the transport and FPGA are addressed with properly designed, PCB, decoupling and an additional isolator if you chose to build that PCB also. Power your transport with a heretic-like SMPS or USB power, no worries. But please be sure to power the XO with a regulator that suits HF oscillator loads, Ian even has discussed changes between Tantalum or X7R MLCC caps on the TPS7A4700 regulator that he has designed or type of mechanical isolation for the oscillator board that may have impact on the jitter spectrum; that is the level of minutiae he is working with.
It really is important to take the comments in this thread in context, the comments are quite often dealing with a level of detail not often discussed on DIY pages by people who actually know who they're talking about. Often armchair experts will mention some big words on forums to big note themselves, here Ian is basically giving his design time away for free. If you wanted to pay his hourly rate, then not many on these forums would be paying the asking price.
- Radiated noise - frankly if your DIY construction is susceptible to radiated noise then you should be taking a long hard look in the mirror, it is wiring and PCB choice and the way you mount it in the enclosure. All of these things can be addressed, by you, nothing that Ian or any designer does can address radiated noise.
I have not posted an absolute statement that the transport side will not make any impact because I (and anyone else) cannot guarantee that your construction methods are sufficient to ameliorate the above stated issues that are, in every DIY project ever, the responsibility of the DIYer. Also, I believe this statement from Obi Wan Kenobi in Revenge of the Sith is enlightenting:
If you can add to the list above I am all ears, though I'd want some pretty compelling presentation, based in reality not conjecture, as to what exactly might be going on.
Cheers,
Chris
I havn't seen any convincing argument that would make me go on with this.
All this talk won't get anybody any further.
And... ...if SW experts are biased (and narrow minded -- or nicer -- focussed) , then don't forget to put the HW expert fraction on the list.
That's a general problem of being an expert.
Enjoy. (Unsubscribed)
All this talk won't get anybody any further.
And... ...if SW experts are biased (and narrow minded -- or nicer -- focussed) , then don't forget to put the HW expert fraction on the list.
That's a general problem of being an expert.
Enjoy. (Unsubscribed)
The TPS reg needs rect, filtering and probably a pre-reg then it can act as a 3pin local regulator...
Ian has a section about that in the recently posted Si570 manual
as if you would ever endorse something that would render your long fought 'expertise' redundant anyway, pretty sure you only read the pages for the anecdotes.
if you are not convinced at this stage, then there is no saving you. part of the enjoyment must be having something to fret about and conspiracies to mumble under your breath
Last edited:
part of having an open mind is recognizing a better and more complete solution when you see it, even if it means leaving things behind. if we take a leaf out of your book, all efforts are fruitless and the quarks hold all the cards. I can understand someone that may feel fifo to be an OTT solution, or simply something that doesnt fit their goals just yet (the need for an all in one AV or DSD solution), but as far as i'm concerned, the votes are in and it does what it was designed to do. properly implemented, the demons are vanquished.
for those who feel my comment above harsh, there are some theories in the other thread about hochopeper and I being one and the same... nope, we just both subscribe in general to similar branches of scientific endeavor based on knowledge accrued by others blazing the trails. Funnily enough, there are many things which are agreed upon and quite demonstrable/repeatable to those willing to keep an open mind.....
typical that you were hiding at the Brissie head-fi meet Chris, there is only photos of me posing with a ridiculous Eichmann power cord sash (not mine) ala Mike Tyson and photos of your Dac and your leg
for those who feel my comment above harsh, there are some theories in the other thread about hochopeper and I being one and the same... nope, we just both subscribe in general to similar branches of scientific endeavor based on knowledge accrued by others blazing the trails. Funnily enough, there are many things which are agreed upon and quite demonstrable/repeatable to those willing to keep an open mind.....
typical that you were hiding at the Brissie head-fi meet Chris, there is only photos of me posing with a ridiculous Eichmann power cord sash (not mine) ala Mike Tyson and photos of your Dac and your leg
Last edited:
I'm very sorry that I made a terrible mistake.
"Kphi" is a "Phase detector gain [V/rad]" of the measurement system.
By using the calculator shown in the glt's blog page, I calculated a phase jitter value from the phase noise plot and got 0.258 [ps RMS].
Si570 Clock Board R&D history review: Ver1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.5
It took me eight months to develop this small Si570 clock board. PCB has been re-designed and prototyped for four times, as well as the driver firmware. I didn’t decide to publish it until I went through all V1.0, V2.0, V3.0, V3.5 versions.
I got a little bit pressure because so many people are waiting for it. I’m sorry for keeping you waiting too long. Please forgive me I just don’t want to give up pursuing perfect, though I know I’m still far from it.
I’m an engineer and an audiophile. I trust science, measurement and my ears. I like this diyAudio community which has good ambiance to share the joy of project with each other. I just feel a bit unfair and don’t understand why somebody upset I keeping improve on my project. Did I move anybody’s cheese?
Ian
It took me eight months to develop this small Si570 clock board. PCB has been re-designed and prototyped for four times, as well as the driver firmware. I didn’t decide to publish it until I went through all V1.0, V2.0, V3.0, V3.5 versions.
I got a little bit pressure because so many people are waiting for it. I’m sorry for keeping you waiting too long. Please forgive me I just don’t want to give up pursuing perfect, though I know I’m still far from it.
I’m an engineer and an audiophile. I trust science, measurement and my ears. I like this diyAudio community which has good ambiance to share the joy of project with each other. I just feel a bit unfair and don’t understand why somebody upset I keeping improve on my project. Did I move anybody’s cheese?
Ian
Attachments
Last edited:
Don't stress Ian, some people just have their head up their bum complaining about the smell and not being able to find the light switch.
These things take time and is something most people COULDNT do, I can understand the concepts but the actual design etc........beyond my current skills and to be honest, interests.
I'm interested in making sure your time isn't wasted by people complaining because they can.
Most of what they speak should be flushed down the dunny, wonder where they get that from.......
These things take time and is something most people COULDNT do, I can understand the concepts but the actual design etc........beyond my current skills and to be honest, interests.
I'm interested in making sure your time isn't wasted by people complaining because they can.
Most of what they speak should be flushed down the dunny, wonder where they get that from.......
I was the first subscriber for the FIFO GB and I never have a feeling of being a beta tester!!
There was no any problem on the FIFO, SPDIF and single clock board, everyone enjoy excellent SQ with the FIFO. Not a single software or hardware fault on Ian's project that required recall for service.
I would consider the dual clock board and the coming i570 is an upgrade of the FIFO. It is not something that developed due to previous design fault.
Ian, your effort is highly appreciated and supported by members, the GB list proved everything.
There was no any problem on the FIFO, SPDIF and single clock board, everyone enjoy excellent SQ with the FIFO. Not a single software or hardware fault on Ian's project that required recall for service.
I would consider the dual clock board and the coming i570 is an upgrade of the FIFO. It is not something that developed due to previous design fault.
Ian, your effort is highly appreciated and supported by members, the GB list proved everything.
I was also a subscriber of the first two fifo's, as much as I am enthusiasic about the project I also bought an RD30 DAc board from Rockna. Why? because all these high speed digital circuits are radio receivers, keeping all the digital, the usb, the fifo, the sis570 clock, the dac's all on one small PCB has an advantage I can't dismiss.
I like the flexibility of Ians approach, and the way that the I2S is galvanically isolated now, but it will be a few months before I can compare the two approaches with my rig. If there is a vulnarability it is common mode noise entering the I2S input of the fifo, doesn't matter how good your software is if your ground is "contaminated" the clock performance will be impacted, and if all the boards of the fifo and their connection pick up EMI from my monitor or PC or the 6 amps of tube heaters then all is for not.
I agree that the Fifo is the ultimate from a software standpoint but the all the indiviual boards, footprint, and "interconects" concern me a bit. But I am a worry wart, I am probably way off base
Thanks bigpandahk, mostly I was the guinea pig
. I go through both alpha and beta .Ian
Last edited:
Ian,
I believe everyone in this thread appreciates a lot your work, but keep in mind this is a commercial project, not a diy project.
No schematics, nothing to soldering, only a few cable to plug in, then you HAVE to expect that folks could give their opinion, not necessarily positive, on a device, I repeat, that's a commercial project. This does not mean that your work is not appreciated.
For example, I appreciate very much your work and as you know I bought 5 units, but If I have a doubt I post my doubt on this thread to share it with other folks who joined the thread, and I expect a reply to my doubt.
I asked several times to measure the jitter of the standard XO, useful to understand the source of the jitter.
I don't own a LeCroy scope, I own a poor Rigol digital scope, so I cannot do that measurement myself.
I ask this measurement because I have a doubt about the re-clocking board (and I have never seen any schematic) and then it could be useful to clarify my doubt.
Since I bought 5 units from IAN and I sent money to IAN, I expect a reply from IAN, not from any other people.
Thanks
Andrea
I believe everyone in this thread appreciates a lot your work, but keep in mind this is a commercial project, not a diy project.
No schematics, nothing to soldering, only a few cable to plug in, then you HAVE to expect that folks could give their opinion, not necessarily positive, on a device, I repeat, that's a commercial project. This does not mean that your work is not appreciated.
For example, I appreciate very much your work and as you know I bought 5 units, but If I have a doubt I post my doubt on this thread to share it with other folks who joined the thread, and I expect a reply to my doubt.
I asked several times to measure the jitter of the standard XO, useful to understand the source of the jitter.
I don't own a LeCroy scope, I own a poor Rigol digital scope, so I cannot do that measurement myself.
I ask this measurement because I have a doubt about the re-clocking board (and I have never seen any schematic) and then it could be useful to clarify my doubt.
Since I bought 5 units from IAN and I sent money to IAN, I expect a reply from IAN, not from any other people.
Thanks
Andrea
Hi Andrea_mori
I think I already answer you questions time ago.
Another thing I have to mention is, this project is not an open source project, though I have been sharing information with community as much as I can. If there are something I didn't public, that means I reserved them for myself, at least for now. I thank you for your kind understanding
Ian
Few people shares information as much as me in this community. But I just don't understand why Im still always being asked for more.
I'm quite struggling, being a nice guy or telling the truth. Sometimes I just couldn't help . It seems I should keep silence and stop telling secret. I don't want being attacked for no reason.
Thanks andrea_mori, you make me doing some consideration on if to continue this project in DIY community or switch it to real commercial product as you think so. I have been enjoying sharing diy project and joy of the progress with the community and full with thanks for so many helps I received. But it seems I could never expect satisfying everybody. I'll carry out the GBIV and daughter board as I promised. Then I have to make a decision.
I know you are interested in developing low jitter clock/re-clock project. Please send email if you want to know something from me. I'll answer you question as possible as I could to see if there is any help.
Regards,
Ian
That's your answer right there, Ian.
You make the vast majority of this community extremely happy. People ordering again and again can only be a good sign.
And, of course, there are a few members who (allegedly) are not satisfied by your work, info you provide etc. They could always opt out, read other threads or something. Them sticking around probably shows they're not as unhappy as they'd like us to think or - even worse - may have some vested interest in bashing your project..
Anyhow, please keep up the good work.
It is a pain that a lot of forums of really importance for the DIY community end up like this. It is never because of stimulating criticisisme or positive input!
I do not respect the attitude of the complainers and I hope that people like Ian have the power to continue were they are busy with.
Like sharing knowledge that brings a lot of us a litlle further in our hobbies.
I sincerely hope GB4 will not be the last thing Ian will give us.( All he did untill this moment has not anything to do with commerce btw!)
Ed
I do not respect the attitude of the complainers and I hope that people like Ian have the power to continue were they are busy with.
Like sharing knowledge that brings a lot of us a litlle further in our hobbies.
I sincerely hope GB4 will not be the last thing Ian will give us.( All he did untill this moment has not anything to do with commerce btw!)
Ed
Last edited:
+++1. I was troubled by your post Andrea; It struck me as unfair and unappreciative - regardless of the repeated assertions otherwise. I started a post no fewer than 3 or 4 times, only to erase it, calm down and consider this situation.
Bottom line; some will never get it. This project feels very much like the a man who make something rare and valuable available for little money to those who otherwise would likely not be able to acquire or afford it. Rather than appreciate their good fortune and demonstrate their appreciation with help, gratitude and humility - demands are made and the giver goes on to regret the gift.
And make no mistake; though Ian has charged for these components - they are a gift. It's been long established that the R&D and manufacturing costs have NEVER come close to covering the expense. Further, these components are simply not available to us otherwise. If those were retail, the price would reflect all of the overhead necessary to satisfy these demands on time and resources.
Sorry for the soapbox all. Ian - I echo the encouragement of others; do not let the attitude or demands of some rob your joy in this hobby, or drown out the gratitude and appreciation most of us have for your time and effort. Your work has elevated my knowledge and enjoyment. However you decide to proceed, you'll have my support and gratitude.
Bottom line; some will never get it. This project feels very much like the a man who make something rare and valuable available for little money to those who otherwise would likely not be able to acquire or afford it. Rather than appreciate their good fortune and demonstrate their appreciation with help, gratitude and humility - demands are made and the giver goes on to regret the gift.
And make no mistake; though Ian has charged for these components - they are a gift. It's been long established that the R&D and manufacturing costs have NEVER come close to covering the expense. Further, these components are simply not available to us otherwise. If those were retail, the price would reflect all of the overhead necessary to satisfy these demands on time and resources.
Sorry for the soapbox all. Ian - I echo the encouragement of others; do not let the attitude or demands of some rob your joy in this hobby, or drown out the gratitude and appreciation most of us have for your time and effort. Your work has elevated my knowledge and enjoyment. However you decide to proceed, you'll have my support and gratitude.