Tasking power from J3 pin 1 & 11 is fine, pin 13 & 15 are power inputs for the I2S isolators....
Cool feature! Couldn't the noise be somewhat reduced by temporal averaging? Is the calibration procedure audible or is the output switched off in some way?
I'm already averaging, seems like that the ADC I selected is not really that linear, but it was low cost.... The calibration is done at power up, of course with outputs off.
My problem is I have three boards.... Currently. I'm learning towards doing the dam1021 first, keeping the formfactor and adding features, then the dam1941....
I can see the reasoning. I prefer the 1121 - I don’t think I’m alone in saying that those who have heard both the 1021 and 1121 prefer the 1121. So my preference would be the 1121 first 
but the only request I’d like to make would be that there be pin compatibility and dimensional compatibility of the pins so as to allow a straight swap of the new boards into existing 1021 and 1121 installations. Some of us have PCBs into which we plug the DAMs.
Is the XMOS chip on the 2541 a 216 or 208?
Another plug for the 1121 is the ability to choose your own input and power supply. I like having the option of, for example, isolators or no isolators on the inputs, not being ‘forced’ to use an onboard power supply, maybe even connecting a fiber optic-to-i2s board from the modem/switch to the 1121. After all, it is a DIY board.
I’ve sometimes wondered if the 1121 would not have sold more than the 1021 if it had been introduced first. But, as I said, I can understand why you might update the other boards first.
Please don’t forget us 1121 adherents, though
but the only request I’d like to make would be that there be pin compatibility and dimensional compatibility of the pins so as to allow a straight swap of the new boards into existing 1021 and 1121 installations. Some of us have PCBs into which we plug the DAMs. Is the XMOS chip on the 2541 a 216 or 208?
Another plug for the 1121 is the ability to choose your own input and power supply. I like having the option of, for example, isolators or no isolators on the inputs, not being ‘forced’ to use an onboard power supply, maybe even connecting a fiber optic-to-i2s board from the modem/switch to the 1121. After all, it is a DIY board.
I’ve sometimes wondered if the 1121 would not have sold more than the 1021 if it had been introduced first. But, as I said, I can understand why you might update the other boards first.
Please don’t forget us 1121 adherents, though
I have just got my dam1021 and now I have to run it to measure the phase noise (or jitter if you prefere).
How do you think the clocking could be fixed to reject the incoming jitter?
With firmware update?
If so please explain how the firmware could affect the jitter.
Actually, I consider the dam1021 more important, despite it being a DIY board I have more volume customers on it....
Maybe I will keep all three boards, thanks to the calibration I don't need to have separate -05 and -12 versions.... The dam1021 and dam1121 will also then sound the same, as all boards will be more like each other....
The PLL is implemented in software. It doesn't effect the clock itself but the utilisation of ejat is at hand can be improved.
//
So in a HW revision of the 1021 you would introduce re-clocking behind the fpga also in the 1021?
//