Does high quality digital cables matter?
Comments
-
Ask him if you would like. Amir is a genuine guy from all accounts I've seen. I enjoy his write ups, though most of them can speak above my technical knowledge.
Mr Nugent has another write up in relation to Computer vs CD Players
http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue22/nugent.htm
Items of note that I spoke to prior in this thread:
5. Tune the buffer sizes in the players options
7. Insure a large RAM size for data caching
8. Specify fast seek-time and fast spindle rate hard disk drive*
*He wrote this in 2005 before SSD existed. -
So using an ethernet between a computer/whatever to the DAC is using the cable in the same capacity as any other digital cable, right?
Could you flesh this out for me as to where your train of thought is going?I mean, the music (regardless of form) is being sent from the source to the DAC, where it then gets processed. I don't see how the interface changes the nature of the transfer. Just because the cable is ethernet doesn't mean its acting in its traditional sense, no? Its just a digital cable. For this to be true, you would also have to argue that HDMI's are all the same once they meet spec since its the same cable.
I'm not talking about HDMI in this thread. There is another thread where its been well hashed out. HDMI is based on TDMS and Ethernet is based on systems such as MLT-3. These are very complex hardware/software and very different stacks.There is nothing that states HOW an ethernet must be used (some people even use them for speaker cable), so I could see an opening in the argument depending on the application.
You could use it to tow your car. It's just not its' intended use and I don't have any interest in speaking to anyone about that. Safe to say that ZLTFUL and myself have agreed in a particular instance to test it as it was intended and designed for use: Computer networks. -
Mr. Nugent references this thread for USB connected devices:
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/pcaudio/messages/7719.html -
Habanero Monk wrote: »From the article YOU (Bluefox) linked:
Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue.
Feel free to point out my error as to the article that you linked to about jitter.
Bingo.
Man Dark night and blufox have been awfully quiet...
..Ironic after they called me out earlier in this thread for "Being quiet" and not answering questions.
So am I, still waiting...for answers to these easy questions! All it takes is a simple yes or no...And so we ask again...
Q: Where does this audible distortion exist in the digital music file, if each bit as verified by the CRC remains correct?
Q: Does or does not jitter exist in a file? On a stored file?
Q: Does jitter exist in a file within storage mediums?
Looks like this debate is over boys! Thanks for the laughs BlueFox and DK!Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo.
-
Habanero Monk wrote: »Remember that both ZLTFUL and myself have agreed to terms. I have publicly asked for technical comments as it pertains to the testing structure, the testing apparatus, and the testing protocol.
Keep in mind the testing has actually been changed per ZLTFUL's request that it include an A/B/C choice.
FYI the domain in your sig isn't resolving.
Having read most of the posts in this thread, I do realize that the particulars have been agreed to by both parties.
I just have a feeling that it will be all buildup and no outcome, that's all. I am curious as to what will happen after all this back and forth, but I have my doubts that the results will be anything close to conclusive. JMHO, that's all.
Yeah, I've been meaning to change that to Audiomilitias' URL, just haven't gotten to it yet :O, thanks for the reminder!So, are you willing to put forth a little effort or are you happy sitting in your skeptical poo pile?
http://audiomilitia.proboards.com/ -
Having read most of the posts in this thread, I do realize that the particulars have been agreed to by both parties.
I just have a feeling that it will be all buildup and no outcome, that's all. I am curious as to what will happen after all this back and forth, but I have my doubts that the results will be anything close to conclusive. JMHO, that's all.
The testing has no conclusion other then what the outcome is. It's going to be a data driven event.
How do you define conclusive? -
Monk, remind me how you guys are setting it up. This thread is too long to go digging.
This video should give the pertinents:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOp3WtOeDnEIf the Ethernet is used to transmit sacd to a receiver, like the denon interface does, does the Ethernet cable still not matter?
I don't know. If Denon is using a custom signalling method then it's not Ethernet. Again you can separate water once it is mixed. It's just a CAT5/6/7 cable at that point.
I don't want you to think I'm splitting hairs either. Google the OSI model and you will see that as a whole the cable or wireless PHY sits at the bottom of the stack. It has to be view holistically.If a computer is hooked up via sod if, USB, or Ethernet to a dac, does the cable still not matter?
Not sure what sod is. If you have a DAC with Ethernet it is it's own end point device there is not computer outside of file storage servicing it.Regardless of which cable is used, if one makes a difference transmitting the same signal from the same point A to the same point B, then shouldn't they all?
In short it's not the same signal. See the links to Steven Nugents write ups. Read them in their entirety. If you attempt to try to cherry pick it won't make much sense because his writing style is on of building up to a point in my estimation.My main point stems back to this being an argument about networking vs. a final step in the audio chain. Is the application of the Ethernet important, and if not, then why would other digital cables have varying sonic attributes?
Ethernet is not involved in the audio data chain. It's involved in the computer data chain. Steven Nugent in the linked articles goes into this point rather eloquently.
The main take away from his articles is that he makes specific mention of audio digital data and computer digital data. He places a very stark emphasis on this. -
Habanero Monk wrote: »The testing has no conclusion other then what the outcome is. It's going to be a data driven event.
How do you define conclusive?
Not the actual test results; sure, there will be one who is correct and one who is not. But I think most people will probably still want to decide with their own ears whether cables, any cables, make a difference in their systems.
So yes, it should be conclusive, one of you will be $1600 richer, and the other $1600 poorer. Much ado about nothing?
My link is fixed now.
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVSo, are you willing to put forth a little effort or are you happy sitting in your skeptical poo pile?
http://audiomilitia.proboards.com/ -
Not the actual test results; sure, there will be one who is correct and one who is not. But I think most people will probably still want to decide with their own ears whether cables, any cables, make a difference in their systems.
Why would my testing methodology rule this out? It won't influence what you hear.So yes, it should be conclusive, one of you will be $1600 richer, and the other $1600 poorer. Much ado about nothing?
That data will be conclusive. -
Man Dark night and blufox have been awfully quiet...
Don't take it personally. I have reached my monthly allotment for forum troll interaction and entertainment.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »Don't take it personally. I have reached my monthly allotment for forum troll interaction and entertainment.
Exactly. After a while you get tired of trolls. They have both already hung themselves. Now let them twist in the wind and tighten the noose. It is fun to watch them demonstrate their lack of reading comprehension skills.
DK, I don't know if you are familiar with this umbilical for your pre, but I have one on order. It should be here tomorrow, or Thursday. I read about it on another forum where the poster was very happy with it. I figured what-the-heck, why not try it.
http://www.revelationaudiolabs.com/cables-power/#PassageDB-25Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
Know what I find hilarious ?
27 pages of back and forth, semantics....even a "test" subscribed to. That "test"....amounts to letting one's own ears be the judge.
Well frickin' HELLO.....didn't we say that from the git-go ?HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
Exactly. After a while you get tired of trolls. They have both already hung themselves. Now let them twist in the wind and tighten the noose. It is fun to watch them demonstrate their lack of reading comprehension skills.
That begs the question why, when I take your own referenced links and simply expose your gross misunderstanding with them, all we hear is the sound of crickets.
You can't sweep this under the rug by ignoring it.
1. You didn't understand that Amir was talking about PLL induced jitter on the S/PDIF interface as it re-clocked the incoming data.
2. You didn't understand that Mr Nugent made purposeful distinction between Digital Audio Data and Computer Packet Data
3. You failed to realize the Mr Nugent pointed out there there is cumulative jitter or system jitter for a CDP but there isn't cumulative jitter for a computer based playback system and only the final end point device matters
4. There is no jitter on a file stored in a hard drive or a RAM buffer with 6/10/20 seconds of hold time or even a 1GB buffer
You certainly thought you were bringing a noose to the party, you just didn't realize you were hanging yourself with it.
I warned you to stop digging the hole you were. It finally collapsed in on you with your own linked articles. Your reading comprehension is poor, your understanding of Ethernet delivered audio is poor.
Feel free to bring up anything of merit either out of Amir's thread or Steve Nugents write ups. It's interesting that you posted in the WBF forum about linking here for Amir but DIDN'T. It's interesting that you didn't pose a single question about whether Amir could deduce the source of the audiodata based on the jitter measurement.
All your name calling is simply that of someone that has no leg to stand on technically or factually. -
DK, I don't know if you are familiar with this umbilical for your pre, but I have one on order. It should be here tomorrow, or Thursday. I read about it on another forum where the poster was very happy with it. I figured what-the-heck, why not try it.
http://www.revelationaudiolabs.com/cables-power/#PassageDB-25
Thanks for the tip. I didn't know about this. I'll run this by Pass Labs first and see if they have done any studies with different DB-25 cables.
Please send a link to the forum thread.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Is the application of the Ethernet important, and if not, then why would other digital cables have varying sonic attributes?
Because of the electrical noise (And other junk from outside sources) that gets carried along with those cables. Not within the digital signal that's being transmitted (Or in any which way effecting it..as it still results in a 1:1 carbon copy of the original), but overlying and creeping alongside the digital signal. It's the exact same reason that a couple .99c Ferrite Cores snapped on each end of any cable (Power, data, digital or analog) will get rid of amp hum and many other things.
It's very similar to the same reason speakers were originally built with magnetic shielding..not to improve the speakers quality, but to prevent interference with your tube tv set from the driver magnets!
I appreciate the honest questions DSkip..very refreshing to say the least!!Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
DarqueKnight wrote: »Don't take it personally. I have reached my monthly allotment for forum troll interaction and entertainment.Exactly
Right, because it's not like I've got 27 pages stating otherwise...
Excuses, excuses. You fools ever going to answer these simple questions????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
And so we ask again...
(For the 4th time now, yes or no answers will suffice)
Q: Where does this audible distortion exist in the digital music file, if each bit as verified by the CRC remains correct?
Q: Does or does not jitter exist in a file? On a stored file?
Q: Does jitter exist in a file within storage mediums?
You and DK are nothing more than frauds when it comes to the digital domain. Trying to pass off rumors as facts based off past performance in an unrelated field..and calling others "Trolls" when they prove you wrong (Soundly prove you wrong at that). Nice try.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
You and DK are nothing more than frauds when it comes to the digital domain. Trying to pass off rumors as facts based off past performance in an unrelated field..and calling others "Trolls" when they prove you wrong (Soundly prove you wrong at that). Nice try.
Your PhD in douchebaggery doesn't make you an expert.
DK's PhD in electrical engineering carries far more weight than your internet cowboy routine.
Haven't you figured out that yet?
How many professional papers have you published on the topic...well...any topic really? (We will exclude your obvious "10 Tips for the Professional Internet Douchebag" paper)
Fact is, Monk is willing to put the proverbial (literal) money where his mouth is while you do nothing but spew the "nana nana boo boo stick your head in doo doo" vitriol that your kind is known for. Your "contributions" to this thread and this forum in general have been nothing more than arguing for arguments sake.
I have noticed that while you are calling others out as having "no response" when you, yourself are called out, you say intelligent things like "You're lucky I don't have a banhammer" or "My internet **** is almost as impotent as my arguments are!"
I like your
but only because of how ignorant it is. Amp hums? Why find the cause of the problem when you can mask it! How ignorant are you, really? Are you and djwest hanging out at the same methadone clinic waiting for the staff to unlock the internet for a while? You obviously have some type of DTs going on there...It's the exact same reason that a couple .99c Ferrite Cores snapped on each end of any cable (Power, data, digital or analog) will get rid of amp hum and many other things."Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
Easy on the name calling and character bruising or this thread will be closed down. Keep it friendly!
-
He started it. Literally...he did. Really. I mean it. No...seriously...read through all 27 pages and you will see.
Love you Ken. :cheesygrin:
I've tried to ignore him but people keep quoting him. :evil:"Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
Habanero Monk wrote: »That begs the question why, when I take your own referenced links and simply expose your gross misunderstanding with them, all we hear is the sound of crickets.
You can't sweep this under the rug by ignoring it.
Nothing is being ignored. As has been pointed out many times, and in the referenced links, every link in the digital audio path has the potential to introduce jitter into the file being transferred. Whether it does or does not is another story, most likely dependent on the equipment and network topology. For whatever reason, you and your buddy simply quote sentences out of context in order to try and prove your point.
So, back on point for the lurkers. As has been pointed out, every link in the digital chain has the potential to introduce jitter into the data. If so then this can then be audible to the listener.
All that has been written is simply to propose some possible scenarios or reasons where this is technically possible, even if unlikely. Since an Ethernet cable, like any other cable, will attenuate the signal, or be subject to interference from outside sources, it certainly seems reasonable that the signal can be degraded enough to result in the receiver circuitry adding jitter as the musical data is reconstructed. The question is can this jitter make it to the DAC, or will it be eliminated as it travels through the rest of the circuit.
My assumption is, it depends. It depends on the topology used, and the ancillary equipment, but is possible. If so then it is also possible a different Ethernet cable can result in a different audible sound.
Why you and your buddy have this irrational obsession with always being right, and anybody else is wrong is beyond me. After a while when dealing with zealots it does become pointless in trying to have a discussion. Personally, I like to have an open mind, and realize there is a lot I don't know. As I learn more every day at work, or reading, I realize there is still a lot to be discovered. So, for now, even though at this point in time I am not dealing with network audio, I have to side with those who say they hear a difference between Ethernet cables. There simply is not enough data to outright dismiss those claims.Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
DK, I don't know if you are familiar with this umbilical for your pre, but I have one on order. It should be here tomorrow, or Thursday. I read about it on another forum where the poster was very happy with it. I figured what-the-heck, why not try it.
http://www.revelationaudiolabs.com/cables-power/#PassageDB-25
This is the response I received from Pass Labs:
"We played with a few different DB25 cables but never noticed much of a difference. The only signals that travel over those cables are DC voltages and logic signals for the relays.
I don't remember trying the cables you are looking at so who knows they may make a difference. This is audio and the only way to know for sure it to listen."Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: ». This is audio and the only way to know for sure it to listen."[/I][/COLOR]
......and here we have it yet again.HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
DarqueKnight wrote: »This is the response I received from Pass Labs:
"We played with a few different DB25 cables but never noticed much of a difference. The only signals that travel over those cables are DC voltages and logic signals for the relays.
I don't remember trying the cables you are looking at so who knows they may make a difference. This is audio and the only way to know for sure it to listen."
Well, "much of a difference" implies a difference. Cleaning up the voltages has the potential to improve the sound. Rather than listening, I think I will just quote somebody from the Internet that says 5 volts is 5 volts.
It arrived right as I was leaving for work, so I hooked it up to make sure the pre didn't go up in flames. Since the pre is always on it will get a bit of settle time during the day, and I will be able to listen tonight. However, I can't get critical until this weekend. It is very nice and rugged with Mil-Spec DB25 metal connectors, and a solid cable as compared to the cheapo plastic Pass cable and connectors. Whether it makes a difference or not, time will tell. I wish it had the thumb screw type screws Pass uses, versus the little screws that require a screwdriver, but it wasn't too hard to move it around to be able to see the screws and use a screwdriver.
This is the thread where I found out about it. Sorry for the off-topic derail, but, then again, this thread went off topic a while ago.
http://audioshark.org/pass-labs-71/pass-labs-xp-20-a-4987.htmlLumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
Nothing is being ignored. As has been pointed out many times, and in the referenced links, every link in the digital audio path has the potential to introduce jitter into the file being transferred. Whether it does or does not is another story, most likely dependent on the equipment and network topology. For whatever reason, you and your buddy simply quote sentences out of context in order to try and prove your point.
I'm a fan of merit based debate. So I want to discuss this part of your post:
and in the referenced links, every link in the digital audio path has the potential to introduce jitter into the file being transferred
Lets frame a unique question to a computer that is the client media device outputting to a USB, S/PDIF, FireWire, PCIe device:
You use a popular media streamer. You have the buffer set to 6/10/20 seconds. (JRiver is 6 seconds as default) for WASAPI/ASIO.
You start your play back for a few seconds and then pause it, pull the Ethernet connection . You leave the Ethernet cable unplugged and you hit the play button. It plays for a second, you pause it. You hit the play button it plays, you pause it. You hit the play button, you pause it.
Where is the jitter?
There is no cable based Jitter 'introduced' into the file being transferred. You seem to be disregarding the possibilities of absolutes.
Now I know you don't like this next part and undeservedly think it unfair. This is a quote direct from a supporting document that you linked to. One that you thought you were going to tie together and put around my neck:
Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue.
Now lets see what the same author says in issue 22:
When the computer sends the audio stream to an output port, such as USB, the CPU first reads the data in a "burst" fashion from the hard disk and caches blocks of the data in memory. It is then spooled from memory to the output port in a continuous stream. Successive disk accesses are made to keep the memory cache buffer full and the stream running without interruption. The player and driver software often have options to select the cache buffer sizes.
It doesn't matter if this disk access is local or on a server somewhere. It's played back out of cache.
And
In an outboard USB converter, the data is received from the sending computer and precise timing information is added. The jitter from the computer clock can be effectively eliminated.
Another point of distinction that he makes:
All synchronous digital systems have both data and timing attributes. In certain systems, such as computers where most transactions require only that the data arrive intact, jitter in the clock is actually not important, assuming that the timing requirements of the chips are met. The clock is only used to move the data from point A to point B, and the arrival time of each individual data word can vary to some extent without impacting the function. This is described as non-real-time.
And this provides the distinction he is making:
Digital audio systems however are different because they use both the data and the timing of the clock to reproduce the original recording. The data stream is transferred "real-time." The timing must match the original sample-rate used when the recording was made to accurately re-create the analog signal. The data words are clocked into the D/A converter at this constant rate. Both the frequency and the jitter of the clock can affect the accuracy of the reproduction.
So we go back to my example of playing a music selection, pausing the play, pulling the Ethernet cable and the repeatedly being able to play and pause with no network connectivity present.
The buffer is static at that point until some software event flushes it.every link in the digital chain has the potential to introduce jitter into the data.
Impossibilities do exist. No jitter is being introduced into the data. It's buffered, complete, data lacking any jitter.
You have to consider in the light of both Amir and Steven that static data can contain no jitter.
You have to consider that the packet data rate of GB Ethernet, which is in common usage is ~400-450 times quicker than actual audio data in human time.All that has been written is simply to propose some possible scenarios or reasons where this is technically possible, even if unlikely. ... If so then it is also possible a different Ethernet cable can result in a different audible sound.
'has been written' By whom? Steven Nugent? Amir?
If so is a conditional statement. It doesn't preclude the realm of 'not possible'Why you have this irrational obsession with always being right
So it's irrational to seek out knowledge, to understand how Ethernet standards work and packet data is sent and processed?
It's irrational to have a fullness in understanding?, and anybody else is wrong is beyond me.
Some one doesn't have to be wrong for me to be right or correct. You are projecting.After a while when dealing with zealots it does become pointless in trying to have a discussion.
Feeling is mutual but I'm a zealot that has beyond any doubt presented facts pertinent to the matter. I have asked again and again for a merit based approach that backs your premise that there is 'Jitter in the data'.
You have dug in so deep that you can't even acknowledge Mr. Nugents and Amir's points as it pertains to computer data and no jitter being contain therein.
That is not a sign of an open mind. It is a sign of someone too prideful to come to terms with what has been presented and re-align their thinking on the matter.There simply is not enough data to outright dismiss those claims.
There isn't any accepted data to support those claims. And in light of that missing data I have to rely on how packet data works. That it's not real time. That audio isn't stream off the Ethernet cable but that it played out of a computers data buffer that has no associated audio clock attached to it. It's hurry up and then wait.
While it takes the DAC 20 seconds to deplete a computers buffer Ethernet can replenish it in ~0.047 seconds. And then it sits there and waits. -
and in the referenced links, every link in the digital audio path has the potential to introduce jitter into the file being transferred.
Something we can agree on the digital audio path. Can you agree to these points made in the articles you brought to the table:
Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue.
And
The only clock that is important is the one in the end-point device
Can you agree that there is a difference in the digital computer data path (Ethernet) and the digital audio path?
Can you agree that Mr Nugent has made an effort to make a distinction?
I agree with your assessment about the digital audio path. Amir's write up confirms this is a possibility, especially with synchronous clocked systems vs a-sync, to introduce re-clocking induced errors where cost and little engineering effort is concerned. -
Habanero Monk wrote: »Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue.
And
The only clock that is important is the one in the end-point device
I've made this point several times now, along with you...but DK and Bluefox simply choose to ignore it and press on with more internet ball swinging and fruitless talk. DK and Bluefox do not seem to understand that at every END point where digital data enters non-real time ANY and ALL jitter introduced is ELIMINATED by re-entry to non-real time (Hence the reason that most things along that line do NOT attempt to specifically correct jitter..there is no need). Therefore, the final Digital to Analog conversion is the ONLY one that can introduce jitter.Nothing is being ignored.
Really? Then why am I asking this question for the 5th time? I have yet to receive any answer. Not even an evasive one! Lets hear it Mr. Nothing is being ignored! Enlighten us misguided fools with whom you know nothing about! I could have a degree from MIT for all you know!
And so we ask again...
(For the 5th time now, yes or no answers will suffice)
Q: Where does jitter (Or any audio distortion that varies from the original recording) exist in a digital music file? Can you provide an example of a binary code showing this?
Q: Does exist (Other than the original recording jitter) in a digital file with a matching CRC?
Q: Does jitter exist on a file in RAM or in a buffer?
Q: Does jitter exist in a file within any computer storage device (Storage medium)?
Q: Does jitter exist in a stored file?Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
It arrived right as I was leaving for work, so I hooked it up to make sure the pre didn't go up in flames. Since the pre is always on it will get a bit of settle time during the day, and I will be able to listen tonight. However, I can't get critical until this weekend. It is very nice and rugged with Mil-Spec DB25 metal connectors, and a solid cable as compared to the cheapo plastic Pass cable and connectors. Whether it makes a difference or not, time will tell. I wish it had the thumb screw type screws Pass uses, versus the little screws that require a screwdriver, but it wasn't too hard to move it around to be able to see the screws and use a screwdriver.
I will need three 1 meter power cords, two for the XP-30 preamp and one for the XP-25 phono stage. Revelation audio offers a 30 day trial, so all I will be out of is shipping and evaluation time if they don't work out. Previous tweaks (PS Audio AC-12 power cords, HiFi Tuning power line fuses, and Dynamat Xtreme vibration damping) on the XP-30 and XP-25 brought some improvements, so this is worth a try.Sorry for the off-topic derail, but, then again, this thread went off topic a while ago.
The Pass DB25 umbilicals pass digital control signals and this is a digital cable thread, so we are not off topic.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Still waiting for an answer from DarqueKnight and Bluefox to post #813..which was the 5th time I had asked a question that they are intentionally ignoring..even though they are the ones who made unsubstantiated claims about what is being questioned (That jitter exists in a file within some storage mediums..IE: RAM, buffers, etc).Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo.
-
"Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."
"Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip -
So you, DK, and fox will all call people out for making claims and not substantiating them. Yet, you all refuse to do the same. How hard can a few yes or no answers be..unless you know you're wrong?
Back to my original point of you being a complete and total hypocrite. Prove me wrong and answer the questions.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo.
![[Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/83b82048d67877ca27bbc25d5d38f9d3_100.png)
This discussion has been closed.