Interesting if not OT banter on vinyl v digital. I built my brother a reasonably tricked Ian canada streamer....trafo output....good but not crazy good psus. Plenty rails. Cost maybe £500 and yet to do Andrea Mori clocks. He has a Brinkman bardo, alnic, avalon system. He hears the difference but at the price difference the digital is a good return for the money. Very good.
10 and 15 MHz
Piezo203 is the worst, I bought it on the flea market at the VHF meeting in Weinheim.
I got piezo200 for free as an add-on, it looks awful, but at least far out it is
the best of the bunch.
The Lucent traces are not running free but are locked to GPS.
Lucent_15 MHz is the normal output of the GPS receiver, the tripled MTI-260.
Lucent _10 MHz is one of the 4 10 MHz outputs of my add-on.
It has a CFB amplifier after the oven, then a doubler with 2 BF862,
then a CFB amplifier for each output.
< http://www.hoffmann-hochfrequenz.de/downloads/DoubDist.pdf >
As you can clearly see, as long as you don't have a catchy story to add to your results, nobody gives a **** on your results in this thread.
Not quite- I am. In particular on the 10 MHz it seems one oscillator was right at the noise floor. What determines the noise floor? The reference oscillator or the noise of the ADC's?
Are there spurs from the switching supplies that are suppressed?
Any suggestions on getting the most from a Timepod?
Are there spurs from the switching supplies that are suppressed?
Any suggestions on getting the most from a Timepod?
I'd argue it is spot on topic. The original premise of the thread was great sound from digital demands a SOTA low phase noise oscillator. Confirmed!Interesting if not OT banter on vinyl v digital. I built my brother a reasonably tricked Ian canada streamer....trafo output....good but not crazy good psus. Plenty rails. Cost maybe £500 and yet to do Andrea Mori clocks. He has a Brinkman bardo, alnic, avalon system. He hears the difference but at the price difference the digital is a good return for the money. Very good.
Hi Ovidiu,
I missed you, I was worried.
In my very very honest opinion it's not a question of stories.
Most likely the problem is that is a little difficult using 10 or 15 MHz oscillators in digital audio.
Unless you use a fractional PLL, of course.
I missed you, I was worried.
In my very very honest opinion it's not a question of stories.
Most likely the problem is that is a little difficult using 10 or 15 MHz oscillators in digital audio.
Unless you use a fractional PLL, of course.
Not quite- I am. In particular on the 10 MHz it seems one oscillator was right at the noise floor. What determines the noise floor? The reference oscillator or the noise of the ADC's?
Are there spurs from the switching supplies that are suppressed?
There are no easy answers, take a look at this:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1681-7575/ab8d7b/pdf
Spurs appear to be mostly mains frequency harmonics (multiples of 50Hz, Gerhard is in Germany).
What determines the noise floor? The reference oscillator or the noise of the ADC's?
In my case, I have free access also to the ADC clock. And so I have seen that the 'noise of the ADCs' - which is in a good part comes from the ADC clock, is quite inportant, if one aims for the low floor.
Do you mean if you don't like a piece of music then by definition it is rubbish?
No I mean sonic spectaculars such as 'direct disco' and 'The sheffield track record' really are rubbish and only good for showing off to your mates how good you think your system is.
Anything wrong with Harry James for example? 🙂
Harry James is not my cup of tea, but I can see that being one of the few that shines out from the sheffield labs catalogue as being worth >1 listen.
There are no easy answers, take a look at this:
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1681-7575/ab8d7b/pdf
Spurs appear to be mostly mains frequency harmonics (multiples of 50Hz, Gerhard is in Germany).
Learned a lot from that paper. None of this is easy. Also mentioned in the paper are the extreme efforts to eliminate external influences- shielded room + serious power filters etc.
Still we are a long way from connecting the measurement to the audio output of a DAC.
Absolutely, in fact the phase noise numbers perpetrated in this thread are, from a SQ perspective, as an audiophoolish placebo as one can get. But then everybody is entitled to his own illusion and group thinking is anything but new in psychology.
syn08 with all due respect I beg to differ. I'm not sure anyone is using these clocks because of a number or the brand of the tool used to produce a number.
But almost unanimously we have been rewarded with substantial leaps in sound quality as the quality of the clock signal improved. As I went from FOX to NDK to NDK SDA to WTMC v1.0 or to WTMC 2.0 each step you wonder if you've reached the point of diminishing return. But no, its been surprising how much impact phase noise has on even a 30 year old R2R chip.
But almost unanimously we have been rewarded with substantial leaps in sound quality as the quality of the clock signal improved. As I went from FOX to NDK to NDK SDA to WTMC v1.0 or to WTMC 2.0 each step you wonder if you've reached the point of diminishing return. But no, its been surprising how much impact phase noise has on even a 30 year old R2R chip.
Demian,
have you performed the ADC test?
There is a script in ..\Timelab\Script folder to run the test: 5330A_ADC_test.js
have you performed the ADC test?
There is a script in ..\Timelab\Script folder to run the test: 5330A_ADC_test.js
But almost unanimously we have been rewarded with substantial leaps in sound quality as the quality of the clock signal improved. As I went from FOX to NDK to NDK SDA to WTMC v1.0 or to WTMC 2.0 each step you wonder if you've reached the point of diminishing return. But no, its been surprising how much impact phase noise has on even a 30 year old R2R chip.
Exactly my point, thanks for confirming.
Well,
keep in mind that Ovidiu is one of the designer of the PGP amplifier, claimed at 0.0001% THD.
ooops.. I wanted to write measured at 0.0001% THD.
Sometimes measurements matter, other times strangely they don't.
This is the strange world of audio.
keep in mind that Ovidiu is one of the designer of the PGP amplifier, claimed at 0.0001% THD.
ooops.. I wanted to write measured at 0.0001% THD.
Sometimes measurements matter, other times strangely they don't.
This is the strange world of audio.
But almost unanimously we have been rewarded with substantial leaps in sound quality as the quality of the clock signal improved..
Just because lots of people anecdotally say this doesn't make it real.
Which works both ways, funnily enough.Just because lots of people anecdotally say this doesn't make it real.
No. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I'm making no claims just pointing out that the plural of anecdote is not data. I don't care if people built instrumentation grade clocks for their DACs and like them, but I have an issue with all these claims of SQ improvement based on sighted listening of something they have proudly built.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
- Home
- Source & Line
- Digital Line Level
- The Well Tempered Master Clock - Building a low phase noise/jitter crystal oscillator