Asynchronous I2S FIFO project, an ultimate weapon to fight the jitter

Hi Ian, i tried another source, same problem. :(

Although if you give the Altera chip a tickle on the right side halfway up; it starts locking with the "lock" and "empty" leds flashing...

Could it be a dry solder joint?

On close inspection of the Altera chip i noticed a very small amount of solder half way up one of the legs nearly touching the leg next to it, this is the same place described above. Solder was removed, but the problem remained.

Sorry for my ignorance, this project may just defeat me! So very close though, its playing me sweet music right now.. just had to tickle it... i know its weird.

Hi ryan,

No worry about that. Send it back to me if you don't mind. I can fix it for you. I can scan the chip:).

For it's lead free smt, manual re-work some times easy to get problem caused by the temperature and the material of the solder wire.

Good luck.

Ian
 
Last edited:
Thanks Chris and Ian

I took a photo of the suspected problem area with a hi res camera, it reveals something suspicious. Looks like a fragment of solder in the same area where it needs a tickle to start working...

Thanks for your help guys. Either way, Ian has kindly offered to have a look at it for me if i cant fix it.

Ryan
 

Attachments

  • suspect.jpg
    suspect.jpg
    891.4 KB · Views: 634

TNT

Member
Joined 2003
Paid Member
Si570 interest list:

1. bigpandahk
2. tagheuer
3. hochopeper
4. qusp (of course)
5. AR2 - definitely!
6. wktk_smile
7. hirez69
8. CeeVee - you bet!
9. number9
10. analog_sa - GB maniac
11. edbk
12. atom6422
13. misterrogers X2 - Of Course!
14. NicMac - as usual!
15. Zoran
16. PET-240
17. Coolhead
18. Slartibartfasst
19. SYklab
20. Regland
21. Neb001
22. SPWONG
23. Greg Stewart (also of course!)
24. Vitalica
25. spm
26. Fridrik
27. ccliu
28. makumba1966
29. lindamar
30. Finaxe
31. Odysseas x2
32. palmito
33. crazikid
34. deanoUK
35. Julf
36. DUC985
37. rsotirov
38. kvl
39. bkdog
40. necplusultra
41. Nikola Krivorov X2
42. nvduybom
43. Popolvar
44. TNT
 
Si570 interest list:

1. bigpandahk
2. tagheuer
3. hochopeper
4. qusp (of course)
5. AR2 - definitely!
6. wktk_smile
7. hirez69
8. CeeVee - you bet!
9. number9
10. analog_sa - GB maniac
11. edbk
12. atom6422
13. misterrogers X2 - Of Course!
14. NicMac - as usual!
15. Zoran
16. PET-240
17. Coolhead
18. Slartibartfasst
19. SYklab
20. Regland
21. Neb001
22. SPWONG
23. Greg Stewart (also of course!)
24. Vitalica
25. spm
26. Fridrik
27. ccliu
28. makumba1966
29. lindamar
30. Finaxe
31. Odysseas x2
32. palmito
33. crazikid
34. deanoUK
35. Julf
36. DUC985
37. rsotirov
38. kvl
39. bkdog
40. necplusultra
41. Nikola Krivorov X2
42. nvduybom
43. Popolvar
44. TNT
45. TUBO
 
Any comment on this ESS9018 inverted/normal synchronized MCLK solution?

Running ESS9018 with inverted MCLK is an interesting topic. Somebody thinks it’s important, while others seems don’t much care about it. So, I did some real test on this issue with Si570 clock board V2.0 and my BIII DAC today.

Si570 prototype clock board V2.0 was configured into both normal and inverted MCLK mode. Please see the screen shoot pictures below of the waveform testing result. The white waveform is the ESS9018 MCLK running at 98.xxx MHz, the green waveform is the “eye” of I2S BCK (or SCK, WS and SD as well) signal. We can see, with normal phase MCLK configuration, changing on I2S signals follows the raising edge of MCLK. While with inverted MCLK configuration, changing on I2S signals follows the falling edge of MCLK. With the Potato 74G74 being as the re-clock FF, the delay Tpd is around 2ns and the raising/falling time is around 0.6-0.7ns. Si570 clock board was powered by an external TPS7A4700 reg PCB with a battery pack as the DC input.

The interesting thing is they really sound a bit different. But I’m not quite sure which one is better. The normal phase MCLK already sounds very good, when it turns to the inverted MCLK, feels the background a bit more quiet and dark. It’s more obvious running at 45.xxx/49.xxx MHz then at 90.xxx/98.xxx MHz. Maybe I already got familiar with the sound of normal MCLK, feels wise, the normal MCLK sounds a little bit rich. But, overall, I still think the inversed MCLK plays positive.

Based on my testing result, I think I have to include this normal/inverted MCLK feature into Si570 clock board V3.0 design. But my question is which one is better to be as the default configuration?

Ian
 

Attachments

  • NormalMCLKG74.png
    NormalMCLKG74.png
    40.9 KB · Views: 558
  • InvertedMCLKG74.png
    InvertedMCLKG74.png
    41.8 KB · Views: 549
  • system.JPG
    system.JPG
    157.4 KB · Views: 548
  • TPS7A47RegMLCC.JPG
    TPS7A47RegMLCC.JPG
    107.6 KB · Views: 547
  • Si570Board.JPG
    Si570Board.JPG
    200.9 KB · Views: 290
ahh hey Sorry Ian, well does it really matter which one is default? its just a setting isnt it? so can be chosen by the end user? I would say just go with Inverted since its what the datasheet calls for.

BTW its looking great and the eye diagrams are pretty interesting, thats a pretty serious scope youve bought yourself there!
 
ahh hey Sorry Ian, well does it really matter which one is default? its just a setting isnt it? so can be chosen by the end user? I would say just go with Inverted since its what the datasheet calls for.

BTW its looking great and the eye diagrams are pretty interesting, thats a pretty serious scope youve bought yourself there!

Thanks qusp, same point as you. With inverted MCLK as default, but could jump back to normal phase MCLK. Good idea :).

Ian
 
but I have to say with the inverted MCK if we visualize without the ringing, which we can presume is an artifact or the termination of the probe; the wave does look cleaner. in normal MCLK the down stroke looks a bit different to the upstroke, with the inverted MCK it seems to exhibit a more similar shape on the up and down.
 
Based on my testing result, I think I have to include this normal/inverted MCLK feature into Si570 clock board V3.0 design. But my question is which one is better to be as the default configuration.

It would be very nice if you could show us noise floor profiles observed in frequency spectra of DAC output for sine wave input signals.
Can you observe any significant differences in the profiles?
 
You see, and guys with AP will say I wish I have LeCroy, hahaha. :D
Does your scope has FFT feature? It might be manual process, but with good signal generator, you might be able to record and than read various Fqs.

I hope LeCroy can do what AP dose, FFT is built in. But it optimized to high speed waveform and RF signals. Audio signal might be the most difficult signal to measure. Agree with qusp, it's the noise floor. But I'm just wondering if a really nice usb sound care with a really nice low jitter ADC clock and suitable isolator could become a half AP? :D

Ian
 
Last edited: