Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 08:59:53 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 08:06:54 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

OTOH, he's correct.

fx: shakes head

You really dont believe I play something other than mp3s then?

I believe you often consider them 'adequate'. No doubt this is why
you're also not bothered about jitter.............
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 14:18:24 +0000, Kurt Hamster
wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:53:57 +0000, Ian Molton used
to say...

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 13:26:26 +0000
Kurt Hamster wrote:

You really dont believe I play something other than mp3s then?

CDs created from MP3s?

dickhead.

Once you get away from technobabble you don't have much of a vocabulary
range do you?

Sure I do. just very little of it applies to you.

Ahh, so your range is more limited than I had expected then.

It also looks like your capitalisation and/or punctuation needs a little
work too.

So does his technobabble............

Actually, that needs a *lot* of work!
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

In message , Stewart Pinkerton
writes
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:15:07 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:11:37 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

jitter should be *irrelevant* on any well designed system. Even quite
large amounts of it.

At the point of conversion, it's absolutely critical. That's the main
problem with standalone DACs for CD.

The point being, of course, that any *WELL* designed system will use a
good PLL and thus eliminate the problem.

Unfortunately, these are thin on the ground in high-end audio........

Heck, some of those clowns don't even put in the reconstruction
filter! No, really, check out AudioNote.....................

BTW, a PLL *reduces* the jitter problem, only a synchronous master
clock can *eliminate* jitter.

A proper dual PLL will render it totally harmless. A PLL with a short
loop time constant for the data receiver clock, and then a PLL with a
long time constant to produce the DAC clock should do it.
--
Chris Morriss

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

In message , Stewart Pinkerton
writes
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:15:07 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:11:37 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

jitter should be *irrelevant* on any well designed system. Even quite
large amounts of it.

At the point of conversion, it's absolutely critical. That's the main
problem with standalone DACs for CD.

The point being, of course, that any *WELL* designed system will use a
good PLL and thus eliminate the problem.

Unfortunately, these are thin on the ground in high-end audio........

Heck, some of those clowns don't even put in the reconstruction
filter! No, really, check out AudioNote.....................

BTW, a PLL *reduces* the jitter problem, only a synchronous master
clock can *eliminate* jitter.

Provided that the jitter is less than (say) 25% of the data bit period,
then a two-loop PLL with a fast loop feeding a clock to the data
receiver, and a slow PLL then feeding a clean clock to the DAC, will
eliminate any problem.

Of course, if the short term jitter is greater than 50% of the bit
period then there's no chance!

I use the CS8414 data receiver and CS4396 DAC at work at the moment, and
have no jitter problem. The SPDIF signal from the CD sources at work,
and my own CD63 and CD52SE have jitter less than 25% of the bit period.
(That's checked by looking at the eye diagram of the data stream.)
--
Chris Morriss

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

In message , Chris Morriss
writes
In message , Stewart Pinkerton
writes
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:15:07 +0000, Ian Molton wrote:

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 08:11:37 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

jitter should be *irrelevant* on any well designed system. Even quite
large amounts of it.

At the point of conversion, it's absolutely critical. That's the main
problem with standalone DACs for CD.

The point being, of course, that any *WELL* designed system will use a
good PLL and thus eliminate the problem.

Unfortunately, these are thin on the ground in high-end audio........

Heck, some of those clowns don't even put in the reconstruction
filter! No, really, check out AudioNote.....................

BTW, a PLL *reduces* the jitter problem, only a synchronous master
clock can *eliminate* jitter.

A proper dual PLL will render it totally harmless. A PLL with a short
loop time constant for the data receiver clock, and then a PLL with a
long time constant to produce the DAC clock should do it.

Ignore this post. (Sent too early!) See my other post for what I meant
to say.
--
Chris Morriss

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:01:20 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

I believe you often consider them 'adequate'. No doubt this is why
you're also not bothered about jitter.............

Im not convinced jitter makes a significantly audible difference
(obviously within reasonable limits), in most cases anyway, but no, I
dont think jitter is desireable in anycase.

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:00:31 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

the PLL bandwidth is relevant to jitter elimination, but the whole
point of a PLL is that long-term it tracks the host clock.

So what? That has *nothing* to do with short-term errors, aka jitter.

Just to be clear here...

If you agree the PLL allows one to reconstruct a local frequency that
follows the host clock, then surely you must also agree that a
buffer long enough to hold 2, maybe 3 samples, would allow one to
re-latch the digital output locked to the local frequency.

Given that, why can you not see that if your local clock *source* has a
negligible jitter, the output will be nominally jitter free?

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 21:48:44 +0000
Chris Morriss wrote:


Provided that the jitter is less than (say) 25% of the data bit period,
then a two-loop PLL with a fast loop feeding a clock to the data
receiver, and a slow PLL then feeding a clean clock to the DAC, will
eliminate any problem.

Of course, if the short term jitter is greater than 50% of the bit
period then there's no chance!

Ah, the voice of reason.

Hey Stewart... time for the *second* retraction of the day?

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

Hard Disc Player Sound Quality
 

On Thu, 22 Jan 2004 18:03:45 +0000 (UTC)
(Stewart Pinkerton) wrote:

So does his technobabble............

Actually, that needs a *lot* of work!

I wasnt going to say anything but didnt you just admit to being wrong
*despite* your technobabble in a certain other thread?

I guess mine isnt the only one...

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with
ketchup.

Views wanted on M Audio Delta 66 (Was Hard Disc Player Sound Quality)
 

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 21:15:36 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

:)"pmailkeey" wrote in message

:) On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 06:13:35 -0500, "Arny Krueger"
:) wrote:
:)
:) :)"pmailkeey" wrote in message
:)
:) :) On Thu, 15 Jan 2004 13:33:36 -0000, "Keith G"
:) :) wrote:
:) :)
:) :) :)
:) :) :)
:) :) :)(How *topical* can this group be - I've got to hook my DAC up
:) to my :) :)soundcard this very afternoon - and this is not the first
:) time this :) has :)happened by a long chalk!!)
:) :) :)
:) :)
:) :) I've a M Audio Delta 66 sound card and wonder what you experts
:) think :) of it quality of sound wise on its analogue outs. I have
:) noticed the :) mains hum is quieter than the CPU fan !
:) :)
:) :)Please see:
:) :)
:) :)http://www.pcavtech.com/soundcards/delta-66/index.htm

Up and running now - although the page's header above the red
writing/grey bar and the buttons and graphics just below that bar
don't show.

:) :)
:) :)Compare that to a similar report for a good CD player:
:) :)
:) :)http://www.pcavtech.com/play-rec/cd67se/index.htm

"Action canceled" appears at the top of this one, but the graphics
below the header bar do show on this page.

I think now I'd need to compare data with an average unit !

Your "notes" on the 66 puzzles me - doesn't help with "signal signal"
in the text !
--
Comm again, Mike.