Finally, an affordable CD Transport: the Shigaclone story - Page 683 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, 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 1st March 2013, 03:45 PM   #6821
diyAudio Member
 
Erik van Voorst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rotterdam
Quote:
Originally Posted by dimkasta View Post
holy #@$#@%.@!!!!!

That's an expensive clock...
Yeah my audio buddy said:

...well Erik if I understand it correctly we now went from an 80 cent resonator to an 800 dollar clock...
__________________
To baldly go where no man has gone before................(James Kirk)
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 09:47 PM   #6822
c12mech is offline c12mech  United States
diyAudio Member
 
c12mech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GTMO
Erik, no one will ever be able to say that you did not take this project seriously.

Speaking of Dexa, can anyone comment on their regulators. If the clock is that good I can only wonder if the regulators are in the same class.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st March 2013, 10:53 PM   #6823
diyAudio Member
 
Erik van Voorst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rotterdam
Quote:
Originally Posted by c12mech View Post
Erik, no one will ever be able to say that you did not take this project seriously.

Speaking of Dexa, can anyone comment on their regulators. If the clock is that good I can only wonder if the regulators are in the same class.
I will give them a try soon
__________________
To baldly go where no man has gone before................(James Kirk)
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2013, 11:02 AM   #6824
c12mech is offline c12mech  United States
diyAudio Member
 
c12mech's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GTMO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Voorst View Post
I will give them a try soon
Why did I get the feeling that you would say something like that. Looking forward to hearing your observations.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2013, 01:14 PM   #6825
BMW850 is offline BMW850  Netherlands
diyAudio Member
 
BMW850's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: North East of the Netherlands
John Walton and the New Jersey Audio Society did test 13 different regs in Linear Audio Vol 4, measurements as well as controlled listening tests.

Here a graph of this test I found on the Internet.

Regards,
Rudy
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 13 different regs.jpg (196.8 KB, 356 views)
__________________
Itís not what you know, but who you know ďand where they areĒ
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2013, 01:50 PM   #6826
brgds is offline brgds  Poland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Poland
The gear under listening tests was a preamp... There is more in the article, each regulator was measured in terms of noise, impedance and line rejection, and that is really good staff when you consider which regulator to chose for a concrete application.
__________________
Andy
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2013, 03:58 PM   #6827
diyAudio Member
 
Erik van Voorst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rotterdam
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncle_leon View Post
That Dexa clock is very expensive, so it had better be really good, because at this price point I would begin to consider atomic clocks...

Am I right that the page you showed is for "10 Mhz only" considering the "nature"......the Shiga uses as you know 16.93 Mhz...

All the ebay stuff I came across was not of any use either...

This 16.93 Mhz was quite a problem in my extensive search to try to obtain/implement the (Rubidium/Atomic) best clock possible (not exceeding my "clock-budget" of lets say 1500 dollar)...and if you do find a suitable one how will it perform...(experience somewhere)...a bit expensive to gamble...high stakes...

For the time being the Dexa was and proved a safe bet for me...

I will even buy it for myself.
__________________
To baldly go where no man has gone before................(James Kirk)

Last edited by Erik van Voorst; 2nd March 2013 at 04:05 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2013, 08:53 PM   #6828
diyAudio Member
 
Erik van Voorst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rotterdam
The spectratime you are referring to is by the way EXACTLY the same as you will find in the Antelope Eclipse 384
__________________
To baldly go where no man has gone before................(James Kirk)
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd March 2013, 09:21 PM   #6829
diyAudio Member
 
Erik van Voorst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Rotterdam
Originally posted by CraigBuckingham



Those recording engineers are misguided.

Rubidium master clocks are optimised for good long-term stability as time references. Very short-term stability or phase noise that is in the low end of the audio band is therefore not as critical a design parameter.

Current state of the art crystal oscillators are virtually at the limits that physics dictates for the type or resonator used. SC cuts performing better than AT cuts.

Rubidium master clocks use a CRYSTAL OSCILLATOR stabilised to the rubidium hyperfine transition of 6 834 682 610.904 324 Hz. It is that hyperfine transition frequency accuracy that gives long-term accuracy by the use of synchronising to it.

The short-term accuracy is determined by the CRYSTAL OSCILLATOR used in the rubidium standard.

A brief description on that can be found here Rubidium standard - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A more detailed description here PRS10 - Rubidium Frequency Standard

So to put it in simple terms the Rubidium standard oscillator is superfluous, redundant - lowers performance and adds unnecessary cost when applied to high quality audio/digital conversion.MAYBE SOME INTERESTING STUFF TO READ IF YOU WANT TO KNOW MORE ABOUT CLOCKS
__________________
To baldly go where no man has gone before................(James Kirk)
  Reply With Quote
Old 3rd March 2013, 03:06 PM   #6830
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New Jersey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean Henderson View Post
syklab,

The 19.58 mm was measured from the TOP of the CD Turntable, point A, without a CD or the Clamp resting on it...to the top of the chassis, or point B in your photo.

If it is easier to measure this way...from the Bottom of the CD Turntable to the top of the chassis, or point B in your photo, the measurement is 17.34 mm. For reference, the thickness of my CD Turntable samples is 2.24 mm.
Did we conclude that 19.58 mm is the optimal distance? I measured one of my mechanisms and I have 19.6088 mm. Wasn't sure if that was enough of a differnce to worry about.
  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



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:06 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