mswlogo;197289 Wrote: > After seeing Sean Adams post that power supply (on his setup anyway) > made no difference in jitter. And the fact that all that matters is > jitter, since the SqueezeBox as far as I tested is bitperfect. > > I don't want to bother doing mods that are based on just folks opinions > on listening because most have been discredited by measurement and make > no sense. Like folks saying Optical is better than coax (maybe some > folks ears like a little jitter). OK, you sound like someone who's not interested in doing any mods if they don't make an audible improvement. So before you expend a great deal of effort to reduce the jitter of the SB3's digital output, you need to verify that whatever levels of jitter are already present are indeed audible.
There have been a number of well-conducted blind listening tests that seem to suggest that the effects of jitter do not become audible until the jitter is very high. For example, Benjamin & Gannon's AES paper (preprint 4826) "Theoretical and Audible Effects of Jitter on Digital Audio Quality" concluded that jitter becomes audible at about 10 ns for a 20kHz frequency, and about 100 ns at 4kHz. They found that jitter below 20 ns was undetectable on any music material they tried. 20 ns is massively greater than the jitter levels of the SB3. Food for thought. -- cliveb Performers -> dozens of mixers and effects -> clipped/hypercompressed mastering -> you think a few extra ps of jitter matters? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ cliveb's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=348 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34749 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
