arnyk wrote: > As usual, a deflection. The question was for reliable reports of cases > where asych made an improvement. Furthermore most of those kinds of > problems happen on PCs with other discernable and correctible software > and hardware problems. Making them go away without hardware upgrades or > asynch DACs is a common topic of discussion which often leads to > success. > > > > Still no examples, just an unsupported assertion. > > > > The Regen home page and some blog entries paint a picture that can be > reasonably translated into "panacea". I think there is actually one Blog > article that admits that there are some problems it can't help, but even > then it quibbles. > > > > I agree with his numerical results and then see that most of his charts > are labelled in parts per Billion, not dB. Quick conversion chart > Thousand: = -60 dB, Million: = -120 dB Billion = -180 db. > > I know this JL guy from way back and he is very careful about his claims > for audibility. He seems to make none in this article. If you read the > rest of the cite, JL is a measurist on steroids. The thought of JK > citing him can only be explained if JK didn't really know what this guy > was saying and not saying. > > Yet another case like yesterday (the upsampled ABX) where jkeny brings > in evidence that actually hurts his general position because he does not > understand the data. > > Methinks understanding measurements would be a big help to him. That > would be a life change, no? ;-)
In response, let me just quote from the linked Jim LeSurf's article which again you obviously didn't read (a well known habit of yours, Arny). As you are such a bad reader I have outlined the relevant text for you > Looking at the vertical scales of Figures 2 and 4 you may also have > noticed that the units are ppm (Parts Per Million). The periodic changes > in rate are quite small. Only about 1 ppm for 44·1k and 8 ppm for 48k. > This form of analysis isnt directly comparable with the conventional > J-Test, but to get some idea of the possible relative significance we > can consider Figure 4 as an example. Here the rate jumps down about 8 > ppm for around 2 seconds at a time. Now an 8 ppm change in rate > accumulates to > _a_timing_error_of_16_microseconds_over_two_seconds._i.e._a_jitter_over_this_period_of_16__-_million_picoseconds!_This_is_many_orders_of_magnitude__-_greater_than_the_kinds_of_values_reported_for_J-Test_measurements_on_shorter_timescales_! > -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ jkeny's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35192 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=103684
_______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
