opaqueice;331723 Wrote: > You didn't understand the point. > > I wasn't claiming there is anything inherently superior about the SB > architecture as a -transport-. You want the lowest possible jitter at > the dac (because that's the only place it makes any difference at all). > It's useless to remove jitter with a reclocker somewhere in the middle > of a digital audio chain if you just reintroduce it at the next S/PDIF > cable. > > One way to achieve low jitter at the dac is to use data stored in a > local buffer and clocked out with a local clock. If you have a faster > than real time way to fill the buffer on demand, there's no problem > with clock mismatch. But that's precisely what the SB does. > > The relevant measurement to evaluate my claim is jitter at the SB DAC > and/or jitter artifacts in the analogue output, not jitter at the SB > digital outs.
I see your point. I guess I misunderstood where you were coming from. I assumed you were claiming the SB3 had inaudible jitter on it's digital outputs. How I wish it were so. I love my SB3 but it's digital outs sound inferior to those on my CEC transport, I assume because of jitter mainly (the CEC has very low jitter on it's outputs). Still looking for the best solution to the problem so I can sell the transport. -- SatoriGFX ------------------------------------------------------------------------ SatoriGFX's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=8852 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=50147 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
