In Reply to: RE: Not true for async systems posted by cfmsp on January 6, 2011 at 09:30:37:
We have to define jitter as both a timing issue and a signal quality issue. Based on my experience with AC quality affecting the sound quality, digital signal quality is very important. I haven't tried other high end DACs, but how clean the signal is has to affect the performance of most DACs, since it is an analog electrical signal. This is where digital becomes as tweakable as a vinyl rig...
I just got Ubuntu Studio 9 running last night (10 would hang on install). When the rt kernel would hang playing video, I did a brief test comparing the real time kernel with the stock "low latency" kernel and the stock kernel actually sounded a bit better, but it was very close. It sounds better than my Win7 and Mac systems ever did.
I think Macs already have the timing/prat (macro jitter) issue nailed, but in my experience, the ability to undervolt is key to getting max SQ, and that's where Linux gets you great timing and the ability to undervolt and underclock. Anyone here have a Hackintosh?
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Not true for async systems - AstroD 13:26:23 01/06/11 (26)
- I installed a hackintosh for comparison reasons - hfavandepas 04:09:55 01/07/11 (2)
- RE: I installed a hackintosh for comparison reasons - AstroD 01:16:10 01/08/11 (1)
- in my setup amd too my ears, Linux Mint sounded 'darker', 'browner'. - hfavandepas 11:41:36 01/10/11 (0)
- It's the fault of the DAC designers. They haven't done their job. - Tony Lauck 19:07:11 01/06/11 (22)
- RE: It's the fault of the Programmers. They haven't done their job. - fmak 21:58:13 01/06/11 (4)
- RE: It's the fault of the Programmers. They haven't done their job. - Tony Lauck 09:55:45 01/07/11 (3)
- this proves my point - fmak 03:24:15 01/08/11 (2)
- RE: this proves my point - Tony Lauck 06:47:51 01/08/11 (0)
- No, No, No. It's because no-one knows what "optimize" means . . . - Ryelands 04:24:11 01/08/11 (0)
- Baloney - Ted Smith 19:45:07 01/06/11 (16)
- RE: Baloney - Tony Lauck 21:06:39 01/06/11 (15)
- RE: Baloney - Ted Smith 11:26:16 01/09/11 (11)
- RE: Baloney - Tony Lauck 11:38:49 01/09/11 (10)
- Thanks for the good wishes. - Ted Smith 12:46:12 01/09/11 (9)
- RE: Thanks for the good wishes. - Tony Lauck 09:04:46 01/12/11 (3)
- RE: Thanks for the good wishes. - Ted Smith 22:56:26 01/15/11 (2)
- RE: Thanks for the good wishes. - Tony Lauck 07:12:26 01/16/11 (1)
- RE: Thanks for the good wishes. - Ted Smith 14:06:21 01/16/11 (0)
- Nice post... - rick_m 14:47:49 01/09/11 (4)
- Thanks - Ted Smith 16:06:33 01/09/11 (3)
- RE: Thanks - rick_m 17:36:11 01/09/11 (2)
- RE: Thanks - Ted Smith 19:41:51 01/09/11 (1)
- RE: Thanks - rick_m 09:42:09 01/10/11 (0)
- RE: Baloney- a lot - fmak 22:02:37 01/06/11 (2)
- RE: Baloney- a lot - Tony Lauck 10:02:33 01/07/11 (1)
- RE: Baloney- a lot - fmak 22:13:44 01/07/11 (0)