It seems to me that with higher sampling rates the bit duration is shorter and so the jitter would be inherently less. But I just calculated that bit durations are us whereas jitter of ns can be heard apparently, so I suspect that transports that can do 192 kHz do not necessarily have less jitter?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Jitter vs sampling rate. - sbrians 12:47:26 07/27/12 (22)
- RE: Jitter vs sampling rate. - 13th Duke of Wymbourne 17:55:26 07/31/12 (0)
- These threads are awesome... - Tromatic 16:56:28 07/30/12 (10)
- RE: These threads are awesome... - Todd Krieger 09:42:29 08/01/12 (8)
- I don't think that makes any sense - bwb 14:03:34 08/02/12 (0)
- Can that be done? - sbrians 12:55:53 08/01/12 (6)
- Not Completely...... But........... - Todd Krieger 15:40:43 08/01/12 (5)
- Actually... - audioengr 10:57:59 08/02/12 (4)
- you're making a joke right? /nt - bwb 14:08:03 08/02/12 (3)
- RE: you're making a joke right? /nt - Tony Lauck 21:29:53 08/02/12 (2)
- RE: you're making a joke right? /nt - Crazy Dave 10:34:41 08/03/12 (0)
- unfortunately we live in the real world - bwb 08:47:38 08/03/12 (0)
- it is not really "something as fundamental as jitter" - bwb 06:49:18 07/31/12 (0)
- RE: Jitter vs sampling rate. - Gordon Rankin 08:08:16 07/30/12 (7)
- RE: Jitter vs sampling rate. - audioengr 10:20:58 07/30/12 (6)
- Jitter is often expressed as a percentage of clock period ... - slider 11:27:25 07/30/12 (5)
- RE: Jitter is often expressed as a percentage of clock period ... - audioengr 14:00:20 07/30/12 (4)
- RE: Jitter is often expressed as a percentage of clock period ... - Tony Lauck 17:35:14 07/30/12 (2)
- Remember - Gordon Rankin 07:28:12 07/31/12 (1)
- RE: Remember - Tony Lauck 07:42:26 07/31/12 (0)
- Agreed ... to an extent - slider 16:25:57 07/30/12 (0)
- RE: Jitter vs sampling rate. - audioengr 10:39:58 07/28/12 (1)
- RE: Jitter vs sampling rate. - Bromo33333 17:56:33 07/28/12 (0)