The sound card is working with one or two inputs. The console 48 or more. I was surprised that it did not do the rate conversion. They now sell an add on card to do it. First time it showed up we did that input analog until I got a stand alone converter.
When I was playing with reclocking the data the popular chip (Forget the number) had to be booted correctly to give less than 5 nS as measured on my AP System 2 otherwise it had at least 20 nS. That was actually noticable on the test bench.
Now these days there are systems (Dante) that will work for my systems. So I use them and don't worry about the issues anymore. (The older Cobranet never did well although a lot of folks used it and some still do.)
Your cite puts the jitter limit at 32 nS max, not RMS!
" The competitor’s transceiver loses lock entirely with jitter input greater
than 350mUI. " UI=192 nS for 44,100
And that is a single link system.
Last edited:
Ed the reference is for an SPDIF receiver to not drop bits, not the jitter at the DAC or the reproduced audio. They state that the Wolfson receiver does 7UI before data is lost and the recovered clock is 50ps. You said the guys hear it, what system actually clocks data into the DAC with a clock that has 12ns jitter?
It's right there in their figure 5 5UI input jitter 50ps output jitter.
Last edited:
I was just impressed that he allowed that some differences might be inaudible.
The mention of feedback on the other hand is perilously close to that tail-chasing dog we all know and love 🙂
His pitch of course is for the patented topology using feedforward and feedback, which is also very very old. And the limitations on conventional feedback to correct for (particularly) dead-zone crossover distortion have most to do with the system gain going to zero in the crossover region.
Considering that Olive hasn't even gotten to any amplifier DBTs as yet, although he has admitted that he ought to, makes the likelihood of DAC DBTs anytime soon rather remote.
The data is dropped in transit. The stadium is not the insides of a CD player.
They give the unit interval of 132 nS which is in transmission it is actually more time once all the data packets have been removed from the audio stream to the D/A. So a jitter of 50 nS RMS should have no trouble screwing up an occasional packet.
OK so finally, it's a problem unique to you and we don't have to care about it.
Only if you are not using an outboard D/A. Otherwise you are sending the same data format. My system distributes the AES data on fiber so it should be similar to the optical out on some CD players.
Yeah. It's interesting reading the number of DAC's that are at highest performance at -12 dBFS. -3/-6 would probably work.
Any examples of recordings that have that (and are not mp3)? I don't know if I have heard it but would be nice to have an example we can all play with.
😎🙂
Too many here who will use marketing descriptions as a basic for argument for or against a technical position. I would include spec/data sheets in that marketing. You will never see - not even a clue - anything which is negative nor other tests which might show other imperfections. It just isnt good marketing, otherwise. Specmanship is its own art form. Standards help a lot but are limited also. So, to get the 'complete' picture often requires doing your own T&M.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I tried the 797 in the oscillator for the old HP339A. It did not perform as well as some others. It depends on the circuit Z values in that application.
THx-RNMarsh
Really? 5 UI would be 5X 132 nS or 660 nS jitter before the data is dropped. And that is not a particularly demanding spec. If you are using fiberoptic and its appropriate for the distance I don't see how you could get the equivalent of 600' of dispersion in a stadium. Are you using plastic fiber? Fiber is by definition point to point. No intermediate points reflecting etc unless Its a bad installation. Are there repeaters etc? Have you hooked up a scope and looked at the eye pattern? Mabe a bit error rate test? There are older communications BERTs that would work around the data rates you are using.
There is a lot of reissued stuff. Esp classical but old R&R groups also. And Blues.
To get hold of the owners and obtain the "original' master is often hard to do and transfers take a lot of care with them to prevent further deterioration. So, unless it was cut and mastered recently, chances are it will have that bass roll off. And, some today will make a single copy or 2nd gen Master to work off of and still cut bass for the rising popularity of LP, again..... rather than produce two working masters -- one for CD and one for LP. And now there may be some truth in making music play louder, as well.
I do not know with absolute certainty, either. But, I am narrowing things down one by one to likely remaining cause(s).
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I dont doubt it. India will be starting construction of the 3rd LIGO observatory soon. Wonder what they will use.
So tell us what the exterior circuit Z's influence is on 797's distortion ?
Pls.
THx-RNMarsh
So tell us what the exterior circuit Z's influence is on 797's distortion ?
Pls.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
What are you using, 2 tin cans and a piece of string? What kind of error correction is sensitive to the amount of data? CRC corrects all single-bit errors, not some percentage of them which varies with data volume, and it doesn't matter whether the error is on the MSB or the LSB. This is getting embarrassing.
assume a moderate level. Not expert level. what then can you say about external Z vs distortion as a few major points? Even if they are somewhat general.
THx-RNMarsh
- Status
- Not open for further replies.