Asynchronous I2S FIFO project, an ultimate weapon to fight the jitter - Page 71 - 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 24th June 2012, 06:47 PM   #701
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
I really hadn't considered what's been done in the past too heavily, in fact I don't really know. I figure that having this FIFO in hand, and I were still hot to mod the transport, syncing the transport clock is what I'd do. I'd probably leave the original mcu cyrstal or resonator there use a transformer and a very high resistance to couple onto the input side of what's probably a pierce osc on the mech mcu. Something stupid simple like that would probably cause permanent synch-up in a short while, provided the frequency is "matched". I don't know. Maybe it would be too hard to provide an aux output from the precision clock without adding precious picoseconds of wobble to the main output and you'd be better off with a "rogue" transport and tons of memory.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th June 2012, 09:52 PM   #702
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
well, in that case i'll tell you, yes thats what people at the pointy end of this type of thing have been doing with various degrees of success for years (mostly not very); none of it gets close to what is actually a perfectly good system, i'm really not sure what you are trying to improve, or why

the fifo very deliberately went the other way and in doing so has produced the best result i've seen with fairly trouble free operation across the board given reasonable working conditions. it really isnt as simple as you think to make it all match and to do so, would be a completely different design, for which I would suggest you start another thread. …

weve got people in here with universally glowing reports, many calling it a game changer and you think youve got a better solution, which happens to have been done to death? not trying to be rude, really, but I find it really quite puzzling as to why you would suggest to get rid of the fifo buffer from the fifo buffer project in the fifo buffer thread, to the fifo buffer fanboys =)

Last edited by qusp; 24th June 2012 at 09:59 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 24th June 2012, 10:51 PM   #703
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
I was thinking that since completely asynchronous operation is possible (after this project, suppose), it creates an opportunity for synchronization by practically simple means with very small amounts of control current (small enough to be drawn from the main osc without ruining it). Call it a paradox if you will. In fact the full amount of memory in some cases, if not all, may still be necessary. I didn't mean to challenge the Hermetic Order of Asynchronicity, but I don't believe the asynchronicity is what makes it work, it's just a side effect of making it work the way this project does. Anyway, I don't know that it can be done well or better. I was just answering a question asked about what can be done to the transport now that nothing but the words matter. If everyone already knows that's actually better in my view.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 01:07 AM   #704
diyAudio Member
 
iancanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Quote:
Originally Posted by anaeroben View Post
Hello,

About source/fifo clock frequency difference, it is believed that most difficult to manage is when source frequency is lower than fifo : buffer have to be filled enough before starting to deliver output samples to avoid running out of samples. Ian, is it so that what you call smart strategy adjust buffer length according source/fifo frequency difference (:-) !!
Understanding is it worth to minimise frequency error of source (avoid low end sound card ?), PLL solution is better to deal which frequency difference but then bye-bye killing jitter performances !
One silly question, could fifo input be USB (so source frequency > fifo)?
It's a long way, but hoping, i can mange to built a DAC board to be used with fifo.

benoit
Hi Benoit,

Actually making a really nice low jitter clock is very difficult, however making a clock comes with good ppm is very easy. The worst audio clock I have ever met was from a CDROM, but few of them worse than 100ppm. The audio clock form a PC or a Mac or a USB are even better. FIFO normally doesn't have problem with this kinds of sources.

FIFO never change any bit on data, nor track the input clock frequency. It 100% bit perfect guaranteed, and the clock is also 100% original. The FIFO controller may adjusts the FIFO deepth at the middle of silence when it close to full or empty. So, usually FIFO doesn't going overflow if you source is not too bad .

The bigest problem of a FIFO is the buffer delay. For music play back applicatrions is OK. But for editing or multi-track recording, or video synchronizing, gonna be problem.

Regards,

Ian
__________________
Ian GBV - I2S to PCM converter board & FIFO KIT
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/group...ml#post3662743

Last edited by iancanada; 26th June 2012 at 01:12 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 02:45 AM   #705
diyAudio Member
 
iancanada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toronto
Default I2S input backdoor

True story: My boss is the kind of guy who always comes up with new idea. At the beginning, he came back for me, “Ian, how about we include this feature in the project?”, I said,” …Well….it’s achievable…but I need two weeks more…this section has to be re-designed.” Later on, I could roughly guess what his new idea is gonna be. So, I’ll leave some backdoor in my design. And now, when he says ”Ian, I have a good idea…” I say, ’’ That’s great, I like the idea, I’ll show you something tomorrow” J .

Yes, you’ve already guessed there is a backdoor for the I2S input. I noticed there is a strong requirement on switching between S/PDIF and I2S sources before feed signals into FIFO. So, I think I have to tell the secret. The I2S input backdoor is left on the S/PDIF interface board. But it needs a new version of FPGA firmware support to open. Now, my questions are:
1, Do you need I upgrade the FPGA firmware for the GB II to support this I2S backdoor?
2, With the I2S backdoor enabled, the S/PDIF board sources selecting loop will be: OPT->COX->TTL->I2S->loop back, is that OK?
3, Although I left the I2S backdoor, but I didn't place a real connecter footprint on the PCB, only 4 SMT resistor’s footprints. So I have to say the backdoor is not that perfect. You have to tap a 4P PH2.0mm connecter by yourself as the picture below. Does it work for you if you really need this I2S input backdoor?

Have a good night.

Ian
Attached Images
File Type: jpg TapI2S1.JPG (380.5 KB, 470 views)
File Type: jpg TapI2S2.JPG (476.2 KB, 456 views)
__________________
Ian GBV - I2S to PCM converter board & FIFO KIT
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/group...ml#post3662743

Last edited by iancanada; 26th June 2012 at 03:05 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 07:23 AM   #706
zinsula is offline zinsula  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
zinsula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Hi Ian,

1) at the moment i do not need I2S, but it would be certainly helpful, if one wants to add an USB to I2S device, or a second S/PDIF to I2S receiver. Who knows!


2) I have rather another "issue" related to this source selection.
I'm planning to build the S/PDIF and FIFO with DAC into a Preamp, which can switch between analog line level sources and the built in DAC.
If i want to connect two digital sources to the S/PDIF input board (eg OPT and COX), the toggling functionality isn't really great and would not be compatible with the preamps input selection. For me, direct input selection would be better....
See, I'm kinda like your Boss ;-)

3) Regarding the connector, well one has to try...

Ciao, and thanks
__________________
If you can't trust your ears, then CLICK HERE
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 07:29 AM   #707
qusp is offline qusp  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
qusp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
direct input selection by software with assigned numbers, rather than cycling through? I think hes trying to avoid redesigning the board, as i'm sure are those waiting. …

I would think it wouldnt be difficult to send enough pulses in one command to make it act like direct
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 07:54 AM   #708
NicMac is offline NicMac  Italy
diyAudio Member
 
NicMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
To me it seems that opening the I2S "backdoor" is all benefit and no downs.

I can wait - so it gets my vote for GBII.

Cheers,

Nic
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 09:53 AM   #709
PET-240 is offline PET-240  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brisbane Northside
Just so I follow, if I'm using a USB to I2S device as source I can input direct to FIFO not SPDIF board. However if I want SPDIF input as well I would need to use the back door method?
I'm all for extra functionality as long as I understand.
Also I figure for pause we must wait till buffer empties before music stops?
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th June 2012, 11:49 AM   #710
zinsula is offline zinsula  Switzerland
diyAudio Member
 
zinsula's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
[...] I think hes trying to avoid redesigning the board, as i'm sure are those waiting. …
Don't worry, of course I do not ask to redesign the board.

Depending how the selection is done, it might be possible to access the MUX pins directly. Will check that with Ian directly, didn't want to flurry anyone here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by qusp View Post
[...] I would think it wouldnt be difficult to send enough pulses in one command to make it act like direct
Depends how skilled one is in programming and what selector system he has already for this task.
__________________
If you can't trust your ears, then CLICK HERE

Last edited by zinsula; 26th June 2012 at 11:55 AM.
  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
XMOS-based Asynchronous USB to I2S interface Lorien Digital Source 2167 25th September 2014 08:58 PM
exaU2I - Multi-Channel Asynchronous USB to I2S Interface exa065 exaDevices 1357 3rd March 2014 08:51 PM
DAC chip selection + I2S jitter questions drwho9437 Digital Line Level 2 26th July 2010 12:50 PM
Simple FIFO to I2S CPLD, for MCU players / reclocking KOON3876 Digital Line Level 21 19th September 2008 04:00 PM
asynchronous reclocking and low jitter clocks ash_dac Digital Source 3 8th February 2005 09:22 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:51 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