Triode Wrote: > For reference one of the after market clock guys claims 3ps rms jitter > (3sigma rather than 1sigma) [taken from www.tentlabs.com]. So perhaps > there is potential to futher improve with expensive after market > clocks, but we are already getting low jitter in comparison to lots of > digital gear. > > Adrian
Thanks for the measurements! Be careful with installing internal clocks (and superregulators), they don't always bring an improvement. Watch out noise, EMI/RF. Imo proper implementation is difficult and has to be tuned to each device, otherwise it's a lucky shot. Measuring is important, but jitter is more than a number, jitter spectrum/patterns are extremely complex, it's difficult to predict the sound. Always compare with your ears too (if you want do to serious modifications you need at least 2 units, don't fool yourself, I've heard way too many theoretically good looking but bad sounding modifications). Often we get better results by simply changing the layout of the standard clock: move the X-tal as close as possible to the DSP pins (you can hear an improvement with the smallest changes, less than 0.5mm), also relocate the 2 caps as close as possible and symmetrically. Use a good decoupling cap for the supply, as close as possible to the supply pin and ground. (I haven't checked the SB2 yet.) Sean, what kind of power supply configuration are you using for the MAS35x9F? To lower noise and jitter I'd like to get rid off all switching converters, especially the internal ones. I guess the performance will improve a lot just putting a small 3pin regulator with good cap on each supply pin. -- void _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
