|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
66.85.148.53
In Reply to: RE: Stereophile reviewer thrown under the bus posted by John Atkinson on August 16, 2015 at 07:18:25
Ok, then, Moot Point, since it will be taken care of by the Forum Gods. Regardless of any validity.Then, permit me, if I am may, to ask a question about the Jitterbug. I have not seen your review yet. I have ordered on to use on the output of my Bryston BDP-2.
I noted you say your measurements did not correlate to the improvement in sound quality. I am not surprised, as it seems not everything is measurable, especially in digital audio.
How did you use the Jitterbug? Multiple units in series? In parallel? At the host and receiver side? I'm starting with one and will move on from there.
Edits: 08/16/15Follow Ups:
> How did you use the Jitterbug? Multiple units in series? In parallel? At
> the host and receiver side?
First with a single J'Bug at the host end of the USB cable, then with a
second J'Bug plugged into a second port on the same USB bus. (AudioQuest
does not recommended using more than 2 in parallel on the same bus.)
I did find some measurable differences between one or two JitterBugs and
no JitterBugs, but as I explain in the review they were smaller than the
difference I found between powering my MacBook Pro as the host from its
battery or from its AC adapter.
For the measurements I was using a very short USB cable. One thing that
emerged after the review had been printed was that Gordon Rankin suggests
using a very long USB cable to bring the measurable difference out from
the DAC's noise floor. That's something I will try when I get a respite
from preparing the next issue.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Thank you. So if I understand correctly, Rankin only recommends the use of a long USB cable for measurement purposes, but not for use in general?
You may find it amusing, that despite AQ's suggestion of using no more than 2 Jitterbugs, of course there are out there posters on various hardcore computer audio forums claiming the use of 4 and even 6 Jitterbugs improves performance.
> So if I understand correctly, Rankin only recommends the use of a long USB
> cable for measurement purposes, but not for use in general?That's correct. The long cable will marginalize the USB transmission to
the point that the effect of the JitterBug will be more easily measurable.
IIRC, Gordon told me that he used a 5-meter USB cable when working on the
JitterBug's design.> You may find it amusing, that despite AQ's suggestion of using no more
> than 2 Jitterbugs, of course there are out there posters on various
> hardcore computer audio forums claiming the use of 4 and even 6 Jitterbugs
> improves performance.Not so much amusing as puzzling. As I understand it, the JitterBug
filters the balanced data lines, so adding additional JitterBugs will
eventually reduce the cable's bandwidth below that necessary to optimally
transmit the data.
John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile
Edits: 08/16/15
Thanks for the additional information. Of course, there is much hysteria that develops around all new computer audio tweaks.
There is much discussion on CA about the fact if these add ons work so effectively, like the Jitterbug, the Schit Wyred, or the UpTone REGEN, it
provides little confidence in the USB transmission system.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: