Jitter the killer of digital audio

seafire

GV#27 wrote: »

But both can suffer from the shortcomings of the SP/DIF transmitter /reciever inferface.

So what would be the answer?(Besides me forking out the cash for these units)

steveinaz

I think GV is saying a better quality DAC and/or CDP would have better quality interfaces--thus, less of a concern. This is what the extra cash buys I would imagine; not to mention beefier/better isolated power supplies.

In other words, there's no free ride in audio.

My personal belief---and I WILL catch hell for this--if you're not spending at least $1000 on an external DAC, you are wasting your time. That's just my experience talking. There are quite a few sub $1000 CD Players that will perform every bit as well as any sub $1000 DAC hooked to a mediocre transport. The Rotel RCD-1072 is 1 example.

ben62670

GV#27 wrote: »

Im betting the difference was the power supply:)

Don't get me going. I will end up modding my CDP's PS next:eek: If from what I have seen in the DAC project I received from you the Toslink converion is the same signal as the optical, but at the jack it is converted to optical? A simple mod to convert to coax?

seafire

GV#27 wrote: »

Im betting the difference was the power supply:)

I hear you I wouldnt know but it really did sound much better;)

seafire

LOL I just got this vision reading Bens reply.We must all have very understanding wives (well mine thinks I am crazy).It's like..what are you doing? you just bought that cd player last week.Why is it all in pieces?I have had it with you It's always this tinkering or you are on that bloody pc on some or other forum.Then late at night when me and the kids are sleeping you play the music until wee hours of the morning:oSound familiar guys?:D

steveinaz

ben62670 wrote: »

Don't get me going. I will end up modding my CDP's PS next:eek: If from what I have seen in the DAC project I received from you the Toslink converion is the same signal as the optical, but at the jack it is converted to optical? A simple mod to convert to coax?

Ben, there is white-paper on Benchmark Medias website that shows how to covert a Toslink output to coaxial. http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/appnotes-d/cdjeep.html

steveinaz

seafire wrote: »

LOL I just got this vision reading Bens reply.We must all have very understanding wives (well mine thinks I am crazy).It's like..what are you doing? you just bought that cd player last week.Why is it all in pieces?I have had it with you It's always this tinkering or you are on that bloody pc on some or other forum.Then late at night when me and the kids are sleeping you play the music until wee hours of the morning:oSound familiar guys?:D

My wife never asks me how much something cost (I think she is scared to ask) but she finds out later by asking the question "so how much are you selling the Placette for?" When I told her $685, she said "holy ****, how much was it new? It's just a black box with a switch thingy on it" I took out the trash immediately.

seafire

Oh yes I have more to add.Wife ... do you perhaps now what happened to all the blu tack? the kids need it for a school project? Me no:rolleyes:Wife : That's odd cause I bought about ten packs a week ago...somebody is stealing our blu tack out of our house.Can only be one of your crazy hi fi buddies:cool:

seafire

steveinaz wrote: »

my wife never asks me how much something cost (i think she is scared to ask) but she finds out later by asking the question "so how much are you selling the placette for?" when i told her $685, she said "holy ****, how much was it new? It's just a black box with a switch thingy on it" i took out the trash immediately. :d

lol:d

seafire

Hey Steve aren't you supposed to be glued in front of you gear tonight ?:)

Systems

seafire wrote: »

So what would be the answer?(Besides me forking out the cash for these units)

The better DAC's like Benchmarks DAC1 varitants and Bryston's BDA 1 use a sample rate convereter IC's at there inputs which reduce jitter to very low levels.Basically the chip rewrites the data and has it's own internal clock, so is independant from the transports clock.
CDP's have less issues with jitter because the data and clock's are always kept separate(except at the digital outputs).

seafire

GV#27 wrote: »

The better DAC's like Benchmarks DAC1 varitants and Bryston's BDA 1 or the use a sample rate convereter IC's at there inputs which reduce jitter to very low levels.Basically the chip rewrites the data and has it's own internal clock, so is independant from the transports clock.
CDP's have less issues with jitter because the data and clock's are always kept separate(except at the digital outputs).

Interesting makes some sense as the listening I did was with CDP'S using their coaxial outs;)

Systems

ben62670 wrote: »

If from what I have seen in the DAC project I received from you the Toslink converion is the same signal as the optical, but at the jack it is converted to optical?

Toslink is optical.The Tos comes from it being a Toshiba development.

Systems

heiney9 wrote: »

Jitter is a real issue not to be taken lightly. That's one of the differences between a good DAC and a great DAC.

The link you posted while old (as in seen it before a while ago and posted it myself here several years ago) is still a good explanation. I wouldn't buy any of his products......a Monarchy DIP (digital interphase processor) is a great little unit you put between a transport and an outboard dac to reduce clock induced jitter. There are many kinds of jitter with clock induced being the most damaging, (ie; most audible) IMHO.

H9

+1 on the Monarchy DIP. A great piece of gear at a reasonable price. The classic or the 48/96 upsampler are both great pieces.

BlueFox

This is what Benchmark does for jitter with the Dac1.

"The DAC1 is a reference-quality, 2-channel 192-kHz 24-bit audio digital-to-analog converter featuring Benchmark’s UltraLock™ technology."

"The Benchmark UltraLock™ system is 100% jitter immune. The D/A conversion clock is totally isolated from the AES/EBU digital audio clocks in a topology that outperforms two-stage PLL designs. In fact, no jitter-induced artifacts can be detected using an Audio Precision System 2 Cascade test set. Measurement limits include detection of artifacts as low as -140 dBFS, application of jitter amplitudes as high as 12.75 unit intervals (UI) and application of jitter over a frequency range of 2 Hz to 200 kHz. Any AES/EBU signal that can be decoded by the AES/EBU receiver will be reproduced without the addition of any measurable jitter artifacts. In addition, the receiver IC has been selected for its ability to decode AES/EBU signals in the presence of very high levels of jitter."

http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/system1/files/documents/DAC1_-_Manual_-_Rev_L.pdf

steveinaz

seafire wrote: »

Hey Steve aren't you supposed to be glued in front of you gear tonight ?:)

It's playing as we speak...Diana Krall Live in Paris at the moment.

seafire

GV I have a self built music server Intel motherboard etc etc.I use the coaxial out into a Denon 3805 so using the Denons dacs.I discovered a audio program called ASIO 4 ALL .Wow what a difference in sound quality.You really have to try hard now to hear the diff between music server and systems cd player (Marantz cd 7300).Ever heard of it ? ASIO SOFTWARE

seafire

steveinaz wrote: »

It's playing as we speak...Diana Krall Live in Paris at the moment.

Cool Me and the missus enjoy her music;) Enjoy I'm actually jealous ..there is nothing nicer than introducing new gear to the rig especially if it's good stuff like in this case:p

seafire

Gv this is not my 2 channel rig but I sometimes use it too for 2 channel use.I think ASIO corrects jitter (jitter correlation ) or something of the sorts:rolleyes:

seafire

seafire wrote: »

Cool Me and the missus enjoy her music;) Enjoy I'm actually jealous ..there is nothing nicer than introducing new gear to the rig especially if it's good stuff like in this case:p

What are you using as your Cd drive?

Systems

seafire wrote: »

.Ever heard of it ? ASIO SOFTWARE

No I have not ,I have'nt made the step into PC music server territory yet.You have given me a research assignment.

seafire

GV#27 wrote: »

No I have not ,I have'nt made the step into PC music server territory yet.You have given me a research assignment.

Good .I have x2 terrabyte hds so all my music is HQ wav format;)I dont use mp3;)

seafire

BlueFox wrote: »

This is what Benchmark does for jitter with the Dac1.

"The DAC1 is a reference-quality, 2-channel 192-kHz 24-bit audio digital-to-analog converter featuring Benchmark’s UltraLock™ technology."

"The Benchmark UltraLock™ system is 100% jitter immune. The D/A conversion clock is totally isolated from the AES/EBU digital audio clocks in a topology that outperforms two-stage PLL designs. In fact, no jitter-induced artifacts can be detected using an Audio Precision System 2 Cascade test set. Measurement limits include detection of artifacts as low as -140 dBFS, application of jitter amplitudes as high as 12.75 unit intervals (UI) and application of jitter over a frequency range of 2 Hz to 200 kHz. Any AES/EBU signal that can be decoded by the AES/EBU receiver will be reproduced without the addition of any measurable jitter artifacts. In addition, the receiver IC has been selected for its ability to decode AES/EBU signals in the presence of very high levels of jitter."

http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/system1/files/documents/DAC1_-_Manual_-_Rev_L.pdf

WOW that's amazing now even more jealous:o

steveinaz

seafire wrote: »

What are you using as your Cd drive?

C.E.C. CD-3300 CD Player.

madmax

I notice a lot more jitter after the second cup. So, do you get less or no jitter when you read a hard drive, vs a CD?
madmax

LuSh

I'm not sure about Benchmark's claim. I've used a Museatex Transport and a Blu Ray player both as transports and the Museatex was miles head of the Blu Ray, both used the same 75 Ohm Cable from Stereovox. Both transports were fed into a Benchmark, the differences were not subtle. The first and most obvious difference would be in the power supply's of the two units however I suspect there is less jitter coming out of the old Meitner transport.

UHF magazine has done tests on jitter via SPDIF connections, they've measured differences by the same brand in different lengths. Their conclusion was 1.5 meters was ideal if I remember correctly. This length was tested with a number of competing manufactures and always sounded best and measured the best.

TECHNOKID

ben62670 wrote: »

Jitter is why I prefer coax over toslink. Two less conversions is two less areas that can throw timing off.

+1 on your comment.

TECHNOKID

steveinaz wrote: »

Think of jitter as an unfocused camera; because of timing errors the signal is smeared, so to speak.

I like the comparision. Timing and synchronisation can greatly improve a signal but can also be a nightmare when it breaks loose.

TECHNOKID

steveinaz wrote: »

True. Is the extra conversion a factor? I don't know...

From learning any type of conversion has drawbacks. I think conversion should be done only when necessary and avoided when possible. While coax is considered as analogue cabling, its ability to process digital signals is very interesting.

TECHNOKID

GV#27 wrote: »

Im betting the difference was the power supply:)

Who knows, it could have acted as an effective dielectric?