The Timepod has a pair of Mini-Circuits power splitter, I don't see any reason to replace something in the instrument since it measures exactly like the Aeroflex PN9000 and the Agilent E5052.
Moreover the 3 cornered hat measurement tecnique allows to measure DUT better than the reference (thanks to the cross correlation).
The Timepod is the way to reach the best results but our target is the best audio chain as possible, so no need and no time to tweak the instrument that already does the job as expected.
For an FPGA project the AT-Cut crystal is more than enough, difficult to say if there will be enough interest to reach the MOQ, the GB is open.
I think Gerhard had explained it very well.
I do recollect that John had mentioned resistive dividers are more noisy but more "honest".
So in response to
Yes, good point. As far as it does not 'Better than expected'.. .😉 😀
The TimePod does have MCL Wilkinson type, hybrid differentially terminated power dividers.
Most probably the PhaseStation does not.
But it is really nitpicking, so never mind.
Ciao, George
I do recollect that John had mentioned resistive dividers are more noisy but more "honest".
So in response to
Yes, good point. As far as it does not 'Better than expected'.. .😉 😀
The TimePod does have MCL Wilkinson type, hybrid differentially terminated power dividers.
Most probably the PhaseStation does not.
But it is really nitpicking, so never mind.
Ciao, George
Last edited:
I believe that I have said several times that the measuremts of the Timepod have been compared with the ones obtained with the Aeroflex and the E5052.
The result is that the plots are almost identical when measuring the same oscillators, maybe the Timepod is a little pessimistic against the other two gears.
Therefore, again you are free to trust or not the measurements we have done for the community, spending a lot of time.
Moreover you can repeat all the measurements by yourself, I look forward.
But please, keep in mind that me and my co-developer we are not enjoying with LEGO toys, we are trying to develop the best audio system as possible for a hobbyist, without compromises.
So don't be surprised if our oscillators perform at least or maybe better than a 19000 USD device.
Andrea I found these boxes to put the oscillator board,they are well done,offers RMI/FRI protection, other sizes are available,
AL-77P Aluminum Enclosures and Boxes for Electronics
the frequency doubler board also requires protection against electromagnetic interference?
AL-77P Aluminum Enclosures and Boxes for Electronics
the frequency doubler board also requires protection against electromagnetic interference?
Any metal box is fine to shield the oscillator, we have choosen the Hammond box because it fits perfectly the board.
Also the frequency doubler should be shielded, the Hammond 1455J1201 fits the board
1455J1201 Hammond Manufacturing | Mouser Italia
Also the frequency doubler should be shielded, the Hammond 1455J1201 fits the board
1455J1201 Hammond Manufacturing | Mouser Italia
I attach the phase noise plots of the HCD661 OCXO at 11.2896 MHz measured with the Timepod (pink line) and by the manufacturer with the Aeroflex PN9000.
As you can see the plots are almost superimposable, just in case the Timepod is a little pessimistic.
As soon as I find the plot I will also publish the measurement of the same oscillator with the E5052B.
I wonder why you keep questioning the reliability of the measurements of the Timepod.
Just a curiosity.
Attachments
Do the OCXOs and the frequency doublers need to be shielded from each other? Can I just put 2 OCXOs and 2 frequency doublers into one, single 1U chassis?
Yes, Andrea told me the same thing before . My clock board + oven has been powered up for years, and it runs very hot. The 7812 is constantly over 100C, and the heat will easily transfer to the clock board below. I believe some part value are off the spec already.
Poting
Latest Schematics
Hi Andrea. Admiration for the work you did.
Are the schematics from post #1506 the latest ones?
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/dig...itter-crystal-oscillator-151.html#post5073292
Hi Andrea. Admiration for the work you did.
Are the schematics from post #1506 the latest ones?
https://www.diyaudio.com/forums/dig...itter-crystal-oscillator-151.html#post5073292
The best way is using a separate box for each device, one for the oscillator and one for each frequency doubler.
In any case don't mix devices operating at different frequencies.
No, the schematics you are pointing out are for the old versions (Colpitts-Clapp, Emitter coupled and old Pierce).
Some pictures about the best way to shield and connect oscillator and frequency doublers.
The longer box is the oscillator, the shorter boxes are the frequency doublers.
Semi-rigid 50 ohm RF cables SMA terminated have been used to connect the devices.
Attachments
When are they published? So a man could think/consider for ordering... 😀
Will start soon with an ADC 5572 ADC HW and need an jitter free 512x 44.1 or 48kHz reference clock..
Hp
The schematics of the new devices will not be published, sorry but my co-developer does not agree to publish them so I must respect his will.
I will publish soon all the BOMs (for bare boards and semi-finished boards assembly) and assembly intrsuctions.
All the BOMs are in xls format fully compatible to be loaded on Mouser website, just a few click to order.
I will publish soon all the BOMs (for bare boards and semi-finished boards assembly) and assembly intrsuctions.
All the BOMs are in xls format fully compatible to be loaded on Mouser website, just a few click to order.
Hello Andrea!
Hi Andrea!
Goodness...it's been a while since the last time I was here (2016) & I see a lot of fantastic new stuff: measurements and developments - Bravo.
Very interesting (for me personally) was the PN measurement-results above of the Pierce oscillator.
As you know, I personally favor the Pierce osc. due to its simplicity and incredible performance, something your measurements clearly show.
Although Timepod/stable is a great plattform, but it's far out of reach for most diy:ers (expensive
)
Very nice of you to share the measurements 🙂
Keep up the good work!
Best regards: Alex
Hi Andrea!
Goodness...it's been a while since the last time I was here (2016) & I see a lot of fantastic new stuff: measurements and developments - Bravo.
Very interesting (for me personally) was the PN measurement-results above of the Pierce oscillator.
As you know, I personally favor the Pierce osc. due to its simplicity and incredible performance, something your measurements clearly show.
Although Timepod/stable is a great plattform, but it's far out of reach for most diy:ers (expensive
)Very nice of you to share the measurements 🙂
Keep up the good work!
Best regards: Alex
Last edited:
Hi Alex,
glad to hear you!
Yes, we did a hard work but in the end it was worth.
And now the new challenges .....
cheers
Andrea
glad to hear you!
Yes, we did a hard work but in the end it was worth.
And now the new challenges .....
cheers
Andrea
Hi Andrea.
It is a VERY much appreciated that you make PN measurements and show the results here - thanx again.
Building high performance oscillators without measurements is like walking around with a blind-fold.
But as mentioned earlier, PN equipments are expensive toys, even the wonderful Timepod :-(
Will you be making an updated version of Pierce Oscillator in the near future?
//Alex
It is a VERY much appreciated that you make PN measurements and show the results here - thanx again.
Building high performance oscillators without measurements is like walking around with a blind-fold.
But as mentioned earlier, PN equipments are expensive toys, even the wonderful Timepod :-(
Will you be making an updated version of Pierce Oscillator in the near future?
//Alex
- Status
- Not open for further replies.