Only? Most freq we listen to are midrange and below. Check your shock and horror at your speaker and room.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Read the fine print before you jump to conclusions, Scott.... [AES vol 61 no.11, 2013 nov]
-RNM
Last edited:
Yep, fer sure. I dropped out of AES after decades of paying my dues shortly after Lips came to power. Especially when he attacked seasoned designer, Walt Jung for actually hearing what audiophiles have heard and he dared to say so. Just like Scott's reactionary comment to his beloved DBLT and phase.... without even reading the AES paper. WoW. THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
I posted the Conclusion of the art.
Those with more inquiring minds can read the entire article as I put source of it up there. To fill or fine tuning the knowledge gaps. This is another fairly recent piece of audibility about Phase.
So. What is so special to you about 800Hz?
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Mark... re Phase Noise in clocks..... have you or any other used the NEL model O-CEM-XX (oven Controlled)? -140 at 10Hz. -170dbv at >1Khz phase noise.
Typical clock for most High-End DAC's -- including Buffalo 1 DAC is like -45 at 10Hz and -115 at 1KHz.
It beats out a low cost ($900) Rubidium clock by a mile.
THx-RNMarsh
Typical clock for most High-End DAC's -- including Buffalo 1 DAC is like -45 at 10Hz and -115 at 1KHz.
It beats out a low cost ($900) Rubidium clock by a mile.
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
Your welcome to pay for a copy for me, I took the sense of what you posted just as Bill did.
I don’t know where you get your numbers but they are wrong.
This is a $1.36 XO from Kyocera and the numbers are far better:
KC2520K22.5792C1GE00 Kyocera International Inc. Electronic Components | Crystals, Oscillators, Resonators | DigiKey
There’s going to be a point where the logic in the DAC swamps anything your clock contributes also.
You can afford it, Scott. If you want to add some fine points to your vast knowledge regarding phase and listening/hearing.
THx-RNMarsh
Ah... thats progress, perhaps. Mine from actual measured results:
Again the truth is in the details --- Your's are "C" weighted (cheating).
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
You posted it! Attached is the specific sentence from the pdf you attached. Now the fact that phase shift matters at lower frequencies is both interesting and annoying and worthy of discussion.
Attachments
I'll note that if I ever develop a compelling need. It's too bad JC's comments about Lips (as you call him) are not repeatable in polite society.
Excuse my non sequitur - Just introduced myself to Paco Osuna on YouTube ...... dark mean minimal my taste in techno, I could spend days dancing to - where have I been? Then Miwon ........ impeccable beautifully crafted intelligent electronica in a world of its own with a massive cinematic soundstage.
Thank you phase, thank you Scott - must carry on with building my echo celestial horn orchestra to play this kinda stuff on ........ OK butting out, signing off ToS
Thank you phase, thank you Scott - must carry on with building my echo celestial horn orchestra to play this kinda stuff on ........ OK butting out, signing off ToS
Last edited:
Who measured that? What test setup? How do they even know what a typical clock is??
Kyocera specifies the model of Wavecrest analyzer they used.
Just what do you think is in your Benchmark?
Rubidium clocks are the right solution for a different problem. A good crystal oscillator is the right solution for audio. Those are very good and will be a restricted product ( and very $$$). Anything with phase noise below -150 dB gets special treatment.
The phase noise won't make it through any DAC or ADC I know of. The internal additive phase noise will limit it. However it will sell DAC for premium prices.
I would guess a 3 month lead time or more. The BVA's which were the best close in were a 1 year lead time.
Let's talk about Dr. Lipshitz then. He is a real professor and he knows his math. I will give him that. However, he has insisted that all of us who have been working to improve audio electronics can't trust our own ears, and he has stated this for the last 40 years.
However, when he makes engineering mistakes (he is not an engineer) he ignores them, at least the ones that I pointed out to him in one of his double blind tests, (about 40 years ago) He ignores what does not help his opinion, and that is very close to many here, that audio is easy, and that just about everything sounds OK. Walt Jung and I tried to talk to him, and we conversed for some time, but it fell into 'deaf ears' so to speak.
Now, Scott, I have known him for perhaps 35 years, and he used to believe in audio quality differences. He is who developed the Cap differential test that Walt and I published. I would not known about the AD524 without Scott. But for some reason Scott went sour on both Walt Jung and me, apparently thinking that we were addled or something, because we heard audio differences and believed our ears, even if Lipshitz said we couldn't, and so it goes, even here today.
However, when he makes engineering mistakes (he is not an engineer) he ignores them, at least the ones that I pointed out to him in one of his double blind tests, (about 40 years ago) He ignores what does not help his opinion, and that is very close to many here, that audio is easy, and that just about everything sounds OK. Walt Jung and I tried to talk to him, and we conversed for some time, but it fell into 'deaf ears' so to speak.
Now, Scott, I have known him for perhaps 35 years, and he used to believe in audio quality differences. He is who developed the Cap differential test that Walt and I published. I would not known about the AD524 without Scott. But for some reason Scott went sour on both Walt Jung and me, apparently thinking that we were addled or something, because we heard audio differences and believed our ears, even if Lipshitz said we couldn't, and so it goes, even here today.
IIRC.... Walt stopped writting how to improve audio quality and accuracy (better circuits and modifications) because of Lips. Lips would destroy Walts credibility and audio wasnt THAT important. WJ still had to make a living.
Such is the means to stifle people by those who make their way to powerful positions. Like Prez.
So, I dont blame Scott for caving in also. But now all are retired
THx-RNMarsh
Richard,
Regarding clocks, not sure that extremely low jitter 10MHz or 100MHz clocks are all that useful for audio. It is true that Sabre dacs can use 100MHz clocks to playback just about any sample rate, but one is typically still stuck with the internal ASRC and interpolation filter performance. Most people seem to find that Sabre dacs sound best if clocked synchronously much like is standard for AKM dacs (which is quite doable via USB, SPDIF is more complicated). In the synchronous case two audio frequency clocks are needed, one for the 44kHz family of sample rates, and another clock for the 48kHz family. Often clocks such as Crystek 957 or NDK NZ2520SDA are used, as they can offer quite good phase noise performance down at 10Hz and 1Hz offtsets, and do so for reasonable cost. It is possible to do even a bit better than the NDK and Crystek parts, but not typically for dacs selling for less than somewhere around a couple of thousand dollars. If going all out for low jitter, then there are a number of other things that should be done to a very high level of quality as well, and those things also tend to drive up cost.
Regarding clocks, not sure that extremely low jitter 10MHz or 100MHz clocks are all that useful for audio. It is true that Sabre dacs can use 100MHz clocks to playback just about any sample rate, but one is typically still stuck with the internal ASRC and interpolation filter performance. Most people seem to find that Sabre dacs sound best if clocked synchronously much like is standard for AKM dacs (which is quite doable via USB, SPDIF is more complicated). In the synchronous case two audio frequency clocks are needed, one for the 44kHz family of sample rates, and another clock for the 48kHz family. Often clocks such as Crystek 957 or NDK NZ2520SDA are used, as they can offer quite good phase noise performance down at 10Hz and 1Hz offtsets, and do so for reasonable cost. It is possible to do even a bit better than the NDK and Crystek parts, but not typically for dacs selling for less than somewhere around a couple of thousand dollars. If going all out for low jitter, then there are a number of other things that should be done to a very high level of quality as well, and those things also tend to drive up cost.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.