Phil Leigh wrote:
> With all this hypothesising about clock degradation, jitter etc making
> digital transports "sound" different - why can't we really prove this?

What, apply science and engineering to audiophollio?

I personally don't believe most of this jitter stuff. At least I don't 
see that minor/small amounts matter.

> What would it take to progressively introduce noise or other spuriae
> onto a SPDIF connection and see (or rather listen to) what happens?
> 
> What happens if we slap an RC network across a SPDIF, thus messing up
> the clock waveform recovery ?

I don't think your RCL network will work, but one could do a controlled 
sample by feeding the SPDIF in, and having a micro-controller drive
a random number generator to delay or speed up the edges.

Just adding a constant delay should make no difference. Note I say 
"should" rather than "does".

This opens up more bags-o-worms, are some DACs more susceptible to delay 
and others to leads? What distribution of timing delays are important?
What is important? (see my measurement thread, or threadlette.)

 > What happens if we hit a toslink with a big hammer?

I expect that on this, it is digital, it works or fails.



> Is it possible to devise controlled tests for these scenarios?

Of course, and for less than the cost of a Super Conducting Super Collider.

But who would want to know? who would pay?

_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles

Reply via email to