|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
85.19.92.6
In Reply to: RE: I would buy one if... posted by flood2 on June 26, 2015 at 00:31:36
Thanks a lot again !
I have read mixed opinion on reclockers. Not 100% positive.
However as i said i am believer in AES connection. More than in spdif.
The task is now to get a good AES out of the pc.
I am sure it can be done ... i am not sure about the best way to do it.
Usb to AES is extremely handy for the portability ...
PCI to AES could have maybe an advantage ?
For now i am stuck on usb to aes and trying to improve it to see what i can get in terms of sound.
Clearly i am not looking for the high end ...
Thanks again.
Kind regards,
bg
Follow Ups:
..to the cheaper reclockers. The reason for the mixed reviews is because the cheaper devices often rely on SRC as the "reclock".
I own the original Perpetual Technologies P-1A and the GWLabs DSP (identical to the Monarchy DIP as it was designed by the same engineer under a different company name). They all used the CS8420 SRC to the upsampling and used a VCXO to "reclock" the input data if you chose not to upsample. They "work" up to a point and can certainly effectively buffer a low end DVD player for example to become "almost" listenable on your reference system. However, the intrinsic jitter is still quite high (typically > 200ps) also partly due to the limitations of the transmitter.
The Wyred4SOund Remedy is another such device - they are careful to market this product for comparitvely low end devices like the Logitech Squeezebox. The "femtoclock" doesn't actually tell you much about the final output quality since it depends on the jitter immunity of the input receiver. The output is fixed at 96kHz irrespective of the input sample rate so they obviously rely on SRC and the "femtoclock" is presumably the clock reference for the SRC. If you already have a good transport, you may hear no benefit, and very possibly the output will be worse because if your DAC upsamples, you will be doing the process twice - NOT GOOD!
Big Ben uses DDS to generate an ultra clean reference clock which is used to reclock the input sample rate to the SAME sample rate.
The USB to SPDIF devices are still limited by the capabilities of the TAS1020B (very common in many low cost devices). The newer replacement is a DSP, but these still are limited by the PLL intrinsic jitter. Big Ben will still improve these outputs.
Put it this way, Big Ben rendered my reference transport redundant and could turn an Oppo 103 SPDIF output into something indistinguishable!
Computers are very noisy (electrically), so PCI (soundcards) with an SPDIF output are likely to be much worse than USB (using asynchronous mode).
I own a Benchmark DAC1 HDR which they claim is jitter immune. Similarly, the NAD M51 is advertised similarly due to the conversion from PCM to PWM to a completely uncorrelated clock (108MHz). However, the effect of Big Ben and the Grimm CC1 are still audible (in a positive way) which suggests that they still benefit from an ultra clean input data stream.
See if you can find a pro-audio shop that will let you try Big Ben before you spend additional on a new source or DAC - I would be surprised if you are underwhelmed by the result! :)
Regards Anthony
"Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty.." Keats
Hi Anthony thanks again.
So it is really something this Big Ben.
Actualy i am using the Rosetta 200 from the same brand.
It has a clock input.
I doubt that they allow me to try before buy.
I will think about it.
Thanks again for the very interesting advice.
Kind regards,
bg
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: