Dear Sirs,
I would like to hear some comments about the reclocking process.
What is your experience?
I have an external dac (Behringer SRC 2496) and prefer the sound without reclocking (i.e. using the clock embedded in the incoming SPDIF digital signal).
It seems indeed more natural and less digital to me.
Kind regards,
beppe61
ITALY
I would like to hear some comments about the reclocking process.
What is your experience?
I have an external dac (Behringer SRC 2496) and prefer the sound without reclocking (i.e. using the clock embedded in the incoming SPDIF digital signal).
It seems indeed more natural and less digital to me.
Kind regards,
beppe61
ITALY
danb1974 said:
It IS a problem because the way SPDIF is coded, much jitter is induced in the interface, so a wide bandwidth PLL at the DAC is a disaster, no matter how clean the drive is.
The conversion process is of utmost importance as jitter induces distortion in the DAC, hence the DAC clock should be of lowest jitter possible. In addition all signals entering the DAC chip should be reclocked as to reduce on-chip crosstalk.
best
Re: Re: No reclocking DAC. Are they fine?
I thought that, then had to lengthen a digital (S/PDIF) cable, and it didn't sound as good. As an engineer, I thought, "It's only 1s and 0s, so why the difference?" So I looked at the characteristic impedance of the cable and its termination. Whoops. The connection was generating jitter because of the Manchester coding violation alluded to by Guido plus mismatched impedances. What you need is a proper cable with guaranteed matched source and desitination impedances; then they'll all sound the same.
stolbovoy said:3) Digital cables sound the same
I thought that, then had to lengthen a digital (S/PDIF) cable, and it didn't sound as good. As an engineer, I thought, "It's only 1s and 0s, so why the difference?" So I looked at the characteristic impedance of the cable and its termination. Whoops. The connection was generating jitter because of the Manchester coding violation alluded to by Guido plus mismatched impedances. What you need is a proper cable with guaranteed matched source and desitination impedances; then they'll all sound the same.
Dear Sirs,
I want to thank you all for your extremely kind and very valuable reply.
For the first time I get very valuable responses to my doubts.
Sadly the task to connect adequately a transport and a dac seems very difficult to make.
Actually I hoped it was simpler.
Anyway you have been very helpful for me understanding something more of the phenomena.
Thank you very much sincerely.
Kind regards,
beppe61
I want to thank you all for your extremely kind and very valuable reply.
For the first time I get very valuable responses to my doubts.
Sadly the task to connect adequately a transport and a dac seems very difficult to make.
Actually I hoped it was simpler.
Anyway you have been very helpful for me understanding something more of the phenomena.
Thank you very much sincerely.
Kind regards,
beppe61
Every bandlimited system with non static input data signals induces jitter, because the non harmonic part of the differential equation is not zero or better said not equal for every time interval. Of course there are other differences like signal dispersion, unstable reference points by noisy power supplies, ground bouncing and probably some more.
Timing also in the digital domain is an analog phenomenon as there are no electrical '0's and '1's but only (analog) signal levels.
Re: Re: Re: Re: No reclocking DAC. Are they fine?
Hi,
True, problem is in the recovery (allthough at the sending end much can be gained too)
But in this discussion one assumed a wide bandwidth PLL at the receiving end. In that case data related jitter is the result, due to the coding type. Much wordse is the LF jitter induced due to slowly varying near DC content. That is much more difficult to filter out.
Crystal CS8415 has a PLL running at the preambles which are always on the same distance, independing on the data content.
Those fond of async reclocking: Be aware that timing errors are converted into data errors.....
best
stolbovoy said:
Hi,
True, problem is in the recovery (allthough at the sending end much can be gained too)
But in this discussion one assumed a wide bandwidth PLL at the receiving end. In that case data related jitter is the result, due to the coding type. Much wordse is the LF jitter induced due to slowly varying near DC content. That is much more difficult to filter out.
Crystal CS8415 has a PLL running at the preambles which are always on the same distance, independing on the data content.
Those fond of async reclocking: Be aware that timing errors are converted into data errors.....
best
Guido Tent said:
Dear Mr. Tent,
thank you sincerely for your extremely kind and valuable reply.
At present I am using a 1m SUPRA mod.Trico digital cable.
I am really sorry to learn that I have no hopes to find usable digital cable terminated with RCA.
Are they all equally bad for SPDIF digital transfer or there are some that can be acceptable.
Kind regards,
beppe61
Guido Tent said:
Dear Mr. Tent,
thank you very much again for your extremely kind and valuable reply.
After your words (that anyway mirror some others opinions) the fact that all this digital device use RCAs for I/O connections remains a mistery to me.
May be one day ....
Thank you very much indeed.
Kind regards,
beppe61
beppe61 said:
Hi
It works with RCA, but it isn't perfect
We thank the RCA to Sony engineers, who insisted, in setting the redbook standard for CD players, on the use of RCA, because consumers didn't have any experience on digital audio, but always had an RCA audio cable at home......
RCA connectors are about 30 ohm.
Gee, Guido......
How many times have I posted the exact same information about connector impedance, only to have someone tell me that I am nuts.
Guess what:
I am not. Neither is Guido.
However, 1.5 m may be a bit on the short side. 0.5 m or less definitely is. 6 m is probably overkill, but try it sometime.
Everyone gets hung up on this 1s and 0s crap, and fail to see the big picture:
It is digital. Time Domain. Stop thinking frequency domain, which is what you are really doing when you worry about voltage levels, i.e. 1s and 0s. When something happens is a lot more important than what actually happens.
When you understand that, you will understand why silly things like RCAs, XLRs and the like, are the worst possible connectors the average consumer is used to (and therefore designed in by Sony).
Easier still is to figure out why 0.5 m is too short. Think timing, and it will make sense.
Jocko
How many times have I posted the exact same information about connector impedance, only to have someone tell me that I am nuts.
Guess what:
I am not. Neither is Guido.
However, 1.5 m may be a bit on the short side. 0.5 m or less definitely is. 6 m is probably overkill, but try it sometime.
Everyone gets hung up on this 1s and 0s crap, and fail to see the big picture:
It is digital. Time Domain. Stop thinking frequency domain, which is what you are really doing when you worry about voltage levels, i.e. 1s and 0s. When something happens is a lot more important than what actually happens.
When you understand that, you will understand why silly things like RCAs, XLRs and the like, are the worst possible connectors the average consumer is used to (and therefore designed in by Sony).
Easier still is to figure out why 0.5 m is too short. Think timing, and it will make sense.
Jocko
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.