No, not quite.
Phase noise and jitter are different metrics for the same variations of the clock, but what effect those variations have depends a lot on whether they are fast or slow variations. Phase noise is specified as a function of offset frequency while jitter is a number that doesn't show clearly whether the variations are fast or slow. Hence my preference for phase noise.
Whether the audio noise floor is affected much by far-off phase noise/the phase noise floor depends a lot on the type of DAC. Multibit DACs with no noise shaping are not particularly sensitive to it, while single-bit sigma-delta modulators with a single return-to-zero DAC are quite sensitive. Other types, such as multibit sigma-delta DACs or sigma-delta modulators with a switched capacitor DAC or a big FIRDAC, are somewhere in between.
Close-in phase noise produces the same skirts around the spectral peaks of the desired signal no matter what type of DAC you use, but those skirts are so small they will be very hard to measure (see post #4218). They are also so small I wouldn't worry about them. Still, they do get smaller when the close-in phase noise is reduced, so if you want to be perfectionistic about it or simply don't agree with me, use Andrea's clock generators.
Are you AudioPolice representative? We are able to make our own minds and there is no need to "defend" us. I see no laws broken, as nobody forces no one to buy anything.
Its diy afterall and nobody expects any warranties and im sure understand the risks.
Im just not getting your efforts..
But it is not your money either. At the very worst one is paying for a device that vastly overperforms. For a bit of perspective consider the Tice Clock.
Hi Eduard,
my philosophical approach is very simple: I could take an uncertain path that could give me advantages or not, will I take it?
Definitely yes, no doubt, even if the benefit will be very small.
This is my own opinion, nothing more.
Andrea
Hello Andrea,
A few more post and you are back at square one defending why you decided to do things the way you have done that.
Vibrations are not much of a problem.
Maybe because you are not selling anything that solves this problem.
Wlowes has done more than the rest of us and he claims it is worth the investment.
Dry sand is cheap and easy.
Of course after the 6 boxes are placed into a bigger box and kind of fixed by a few centimeters of dry sand and/or lead shot it will rather easy to cover the boxes completely with dry sand..
6 boxes in one bigger box will be more effective than each box in its own " vibration absorption unit" Being in one box will reduce vibrations to a greater extent and when there is a vibration all 6 boxes will be exposed in the same way which will be a good thing.
Greetings,Eduard
A few more post and you are back at square one defending why you decided to do things the way you have done that.
Vibrations are not much of a problem.
Maybe because you are not selling anything that solves this problem.
Wlowes has done more than the rest of us and he claims it is worth the investment.
Dry sand is cheap and easy.
Of course after the 6 boxes are placed into a bigger box and kind of fixed by a few centimeters of dry sand and/or lead shot it will rather easy to cover the boxes completely with dry sand..
6 boxes in one bigger box will be more effective than each box in its own " vibration absorption unit" Being in one box will reduce vibrations to a greater extent and when there is a vibration all 6 boxes will be exposed in the same way which will be a good thing.
Greetings,Eduard
Sure, don't forget to add a pair of Wavac mono block power amplifiers in your systems: https://www.wavac-audio.jp/pics/SH-833.jpg Will definitely improve your audio experience, by adding a new dimension to the soundstage.
I think you missed the point. *This* thread and the value proposition from the merchandiser is about close-in phase noise - all the way from post #1. It has been so a long time before you entered it.
//
Last edited:
Hi Eduard,
that's not quite the case.
We have chosen a way to shield and isolate the oscillators from the vibrations and we have followed this way.
Finally we have measured the difference and we were satisfied with the result.
There would be several other ways to dampen the oscillators and shield them, but this would involve a lot of time to build and measure different solutions.
It's really difficult for us because our free time is very little and we still have several designs to be completed.
Please, keep in mind that from Monday to Friday (sometimes Saturday too) we have our real job, the job which pays the bill.
And moreover the designs we are currently developing are very complex.
The hardware and the firmware of the FIFO Lite are almost ready, but we have to test it with several DACs, which will involve long time.
I still have to develop the Windows software to manage the settings of the FIFO Lite, it will take several days, maybe weeks.
So I believe everyone could make their experiments and drawn their conclusions, just like Walter and the other members who have shared their way to shield and isolate the oscillators from the vibrations.
Andrea
thanks for sharing this piece of real knowledge.
i am so skeptical because if phase noise does affect audio noise to some good extent, it should have been well specified in the DACs datasheets, but so far none i am aware of.
i will keep this in mind and check this out in practice against theory sometime.
and yes, i think like many others here, i am a perfectionist in the quest for best possible sound and loved to push things to its limit, so thats why i am in.
sometimes something not measurable does not mean its not audible, and sometimes you just cant really be sure if something will work or not until you actually tried it.
this is part of the hobby, and i wouldnt mind to try something even better than Andrea's, if any.
Subjective auditioning isn't solid experience. Why? Because bias and level mismatch haven't been controlled.
Fact is they don't. Phillips laid out TDA1541a datasheet and offered reference design. 1000's of CDP were then sold by dozens of consumer audio mfg all with same basic design. Most all with mediocre performance.
Pedja Rogic, Thotsten Loesch, Lesha all found better ways to implement it. John ecdesigns has 100's of pages of research on diyaudio radically improving the implementation and (percieved) sound pleasure.
Consumer audio is full of same lazy designers dashing to a target cost and release date.
Perhaps it wasn't for you. There are many "silent" readers of this forum who are looking for helpful info on getting the most of their hard earned money, like I was.
You need to brush your understanding of "research". The DIYAudio forum is not striking me as a "research" forum. Neither does ASR, FWIW.
Hi Mark,
Trying to make this easily understood by the masses. I had earlier been specific and said what you did.
Either way, Andrea needs to answer his own questions. I can't believe he undertook such a development without knowing anything about the problem as he saw it.
It is entirely possible that if you have good equipment, Andrea's efforts are a solution looking for a problem.
-Chris
Trying to make this easily understood by the masses. I had earlier been specific and said what you did.
Either way, Andrea needs to answer his own questions. I can't believe he undertook such a development without knowing anything about the problem as he saw it.
It is entirely possible that if you have good equipment, Andrea's efforts are a solution looking for a problem.
-Chris
Sorry but our free time is very limited, so we have to spend our free time developing the current projects.
I have already explain the way we would measure at the output of the DAC if will ever find the time.
Please, see post #4234
The Well Tempered Master Clock - Building a low phase noise/jitter crystal oscillator
No chance in the next months, sorry.
I have already explain the way we would measure at the output of the DAC if will ever find the time.
Please, see post #4234
The Well Tempered Master Clock - Building a low phase noise/jitter crystal oscillator
No chance in the next months, sorry.
Hi Andrea,
I'm not explaining anything. You're the one who claimed improvements. You have not convinced me (not that you have to) or anyone else that you understand what you were trying to do. You don't have any metrics on the performance of the systems you are encouraging people to hack into at all. With that in mind, I see you as a dangerous influence for DIYers who wish to improve their systems. I think you should be responsible in your approach and figure these things out.
For your future ventures, please attempt to understand what you are improving and the impact of changes you are recommending. This is both for your own good, and the benefit of anyone who emulates what you had done. Your free time is far more wisely spent when you have defined the problem you are solving and other basic questions.
For systems where the clock is a problem, there are likely other more dominant problems with the design. Your clock improvement likely does not result in any real sonic gain, but when people make changes they will tend to hear a positive difference. That is how the expensive cable industry operates for example.
Good luck to you, but you do owe it to people who do business with you to have relevant information as to how what you do is improving anything. Yes, you are in a kind of business as soon as money is exchanged for goods or information.
No more rocks to hide under it seems.
-Chris
I'm not explaining anything. You're the one who claimed improvements. You have not convinced me (not that you have to) or anyone else that you understand what you were trying to do. You don't have any metrics on the performance of the systems you are encouraging people to hack into at all. With that in mind, I see you as a dangerous influence for DIYers who wish to improve their systems. I think you should be responsible in your approach and figure these things out.
For your future ventures, please attempt to understand what you are improving and the impact of changes you are recommending. This is both for your own good, and the benefit of anyone who emulates what you had done. Your free time is far more wisely spent when you have defined the problem you are solving and other basic questions.
For systems where the clock is a problem, there are likely other more dominant problems with the design. Your clock improvement likely does not result in any real sonic gain, but when people make changes they will tend to hear a positive difference. That is how the expensive cable industry operates for example.
Good luck to you, but you do owe it to people who do business with you to have relevant information as to how what you do is improving anything. Yes, you are in a kind of business as soon as money is exchanged for goods or information.
No more rocks to hide under it seems.
-Chris
What is theoretical maximum performance of system considering transducer distortion? it often swamps even the most poorly measuring amps, dacs etc.
Are you saying you cant differentiate between any different amps and/or dacs from listening?
Surely not, so can you explain this?
- Status
- Not open for further replies.