Digital Drive

RE: Just strip the clock and regenerate

67.169.141.86

John Swenson

In Reply to: RE: Just strip the clock and regenerate posted by fmak on October 25, 2009 at 04:30:41

But how do you regenerate a clock and achieve jitter as low as a good low jitter fixed frequency oscillator?

John S.

Follow Ups:

RE: Just strip the clock and regenerate - fmak 23:41:27 10/25/09 (4)
There are many excellent examples going back 20 years. These have been ignored in the search for new PC solutions (commercial hype?)
We start with the Digital Lens and Meridian 518. We have had many solutions since by high/mid end companies as Charles indicated.
Please read my response to audioengr at the top of the thread.
There is also no such thing as a 'best' low jitter clock. Even some of the ones with very low claimed phase noise have very poor waveform outputs (shape, symmetry and band limitations) and don't sound very 'spectacular'. They can cost as much as a reasonable dac as well, relying on hype to market them within a boxed solution.
Ironically. many of the people who make 'better and better' clocked solutions appear to listen to rbcd or at best 96k material.
How can one claim to make best 'audio' solution PC product using sub standard and not very good sounding music software ie RBCD with massive phase anomalies and high low level distortions?

Edits: 10/26/09
- RE: Just strip the clock and regenerate - audioengr 11:38:53 10/26/09 (1)
  "There are many excellent examples going back 20 years. These have been ignored in the search for new PC solutions (commercial hype?)"
  
  I think you are a bit out of touch. These have not been ignored, they have been improved upon.
  
  Steve N.
  - RE: Just strip the clock and regenerate-Clarification - fmak 11:51:07 10/26/09 (0)
    Ignored by some posters in this Board (not others). Of course there has been progress over 20 years.
- Fred a fixed clock will always kick the crap out of variable one. - Gordon Rankin 05:16:01 10/26/09 (1)
  Fred,
  
  Any clock that is variable is in a sense adding jitter. Not to mention that is so much easier to make a fixed oscillator with low jitter as compared to a moving one.
  
  Take a look at some of the great discrete VCXO's and they are lucky to get below 10ps of jitter which would equate to at least 158ps of jitter on the Word Clock.
  
  Heck you can get fixed clocks for less than a $1 that have really good jitter below 10hz that are at least 10x better than any VCXO.
  
  If you talk frequency synthesizers then they are even worse... but remember a lot of the best VCXO's don't have the pull range required for audio.
  
  Thanks
  Gordon
  J. Gordon Rankin
  - RE: Fred a fixed clock will always kick the crap out of variable one. - fmak 07:50:31 10/26/09 (0)
    When did I say VCXO? Some have multiple XOs.
    Why have ultra low jitter spec and then use a tube and trandormer output with high distortion?
    
    Edits: 10/26/09

Post a Followup:

FAQ

Post a Message!

Forgot Password?

Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
	Remember my Moniker & Password (What's this?) Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:

Message:	(Posts are subject to Content Rules)

Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:	Automagically notify you when someone responds.

To view your new posting or follow-up, click on the RELOAD or REFRESH button on your browser.

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Atma-Sphere Music Systems, Inc.