jlmatrat;193091 Wrote: > Regarding the Lavry dispute, one sure could expect some perfect plot > from any digital output, if the product was really and totally immune > to jitter. What amount of jitter can be left in order to be recognized > as immune to jitter? I don't know.
Well, from the description in his whitepaper, if I understood correctly, the DAC is supposed to buffer the data for a second or fraction of a second, and then start playing it out using a local crystal oscillator (which can have very low jitter and in any case is totally independent of the input). Of course the trick is that the output rate won't quite equal the input rate, but that was supposed to be handled by periodically checking the buffer level and then slightly adjusting the clock rate as needed (typically once every 10 seconds or so, IIRC). That design sounds like it should work, but I don't think the results of your test are consistent with it. And evidently someone else has found that the crystal lock part of the DAC doesn't function - you can lift out the oscillator and it still works, indicating the DA10 functions in Narrow mode even when set to Crystal Lock. I'm not saying this means it won't sound good - a well-designed PLL is probably more than good enough to remove audible jitter effects, and a lot depends on the analogue stages. > > And from what I can see, no other manufacturer seems to be willing to > compete with Dan Lavry on the grounds of jitter rejection. > Not even the Benchmark? I thought they also claimed to be immune to jitter. -- opaqueice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34132 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
