One for Leo's Bullshit Detector.

[Deleted]

www.playbackdesigns.com/index.html

www.playbackdesigns.com/technology.html

[Deleted]

Miguel
See the 2nd and 3rd last comments at the link.
Alex
P.S.
I think that Leo's BS Detector Warning Light would be flashing red !
Alex

www.computeraudiophile.com/content/How-immune-jitter-are-modern-dacs

[rickcr42]

as long as we have "multibox" digial audio we will have jitter with only the degree of beinbg the meaningful spec and that measurement ONLY meaningful if the conditions and test equipment are to a single standard making the comparisons even possible

where the pro arena "superdacs" get it right over just about any consumer grade products is in the "tweener box"-the reclocking/upsampling/ data transmission method conversion device between the source and the the actual DAC itself which both of BTW also pay (if all 3 from the same company anyway) the same attentention to both the transmission and receiving ends of the data stream so we have in effect

1-Clean low jitter,hopefully transformer isolated digital output
2-the 'tweener box to clean up the jitter even more,upsample if desired,then send the cleaned up data steam via the best method determined by actual NEED which means it can be glass optical or balanced for very long runs,coax spdif or firewire for intermediate runs and I2S for very short runs though even with this limitation of cable run length a preferred option due to its reconstitution of the formerly multiplexed data and clock line into a single data stream BACK into individual data and clock lines maintaing the integrity brought about by the reclocker.
3-Proper reception and demuxing (unless I2S of course) of the data stream /back into the individual data and cloc streams

ALL of which can be shot to hell ith a thing as simples as not having a clean and stable ac and dc power source feeding each stage.

Multichanne DACs

clock source with clock distribution so /each DAC is locked into each of the other DACs thus maintaining proper timing between the channels,something VERY important when say you have 16 channels of data ready for mix down into a single stereo channel.

that each stage is dependant on the other thus must be of equal quality is a given (or why bother at all ?).That NON OS is more preffered in the final consumer playback system but is NEVER seen in any so called pro digital systems is also a given the two really having not a whole lot in common as to needs (or hell,we would ALL have to have studio monitors in our homes right ?)

That most of the preffered top end DACs use open loop discrete IV stages unless voltage output DACs are used (mostly) and then it is mostly class-a single ended OPEN LOOP is also a given because lets face it,open loop means ONE WAY so the signal gets OUT but nothing gets IN because it has no path other than through the input side where it is easily blocked or the line cord where it is less easily blocked.

you want to see proper DACs ?

Look to the areas where a persons reputation for good sonics and good reliability are EVERYTHING and not to some fly by night "new kid on the block" using bullsh*t to sell a product to uneducated (in how things really work) consumer who while not understanding a damn thing they just read beleive it anyway on the theory that the guy selling the device just HAS TO BE a straight shooter even if there is no record of achievement to back it up

At least that is ny personal opinion as a "gadget" maker with a few years of listening in both studio and home settings.I may not know everything but I know what I like and if you want to aim high do the read job of audio art-homework on the technical aspects before tackling the bullcrap or if it isn't at least having a foundation of understanding

[Will]

Dec 16, 2009 3:33:50 GMT @sandyk said:

I think that Leo's BS Detector Warning Light would be flashing red !

Perhaps like this?

[Deleted]

Rick
These guys claim to have eliminated jitter coming from as far back as the source. e.g. The ripping CD ROM,and HDDs.That seems highly unlikely, and appears to be bourne out by one of the posts referred to. Benchmark appeared to be making similar claims with the Benchmark USB DAC. It did make USB sound virtually identical to their SPDIF input, but did nothing for jitter from the Optical reading device, HDDs etc. Yes, you can have 2 .wav files with identical check sums, but one sounding quite different from the other due to jitter. This is now no longer disputed in Computer Audiophile, after the lead designer of XXHE software player, and a Mastering Engineer from Germany heard the differences between uploaded files for themselves.
Alex

[leo]

Sorry, the BS cloud must have been too much for my eyes making me blind

Nothing really technical on there to chew on as far as I can see, If half of these manufacturers calmed down with the tripe it would do them the world of good, I start reading these sort of things and tend to get bored muttering to myself heard it all before

[rickcr42]

Dec 16, 2009 9:05:42 GMT @sandyk said:

Rick
These guys claim to have eliminated jitter coming from as far back as the source. e.g. The ripping CD ROM,and HDDs.That seems highly unlikely, and appears to be bourne out by one of the posts referred to. Benchmark appeared to be making similar claims with the Benchmark USB DAC. It did make USB sound virtually identical to their SPDIF input, but did nothing for jitter from the Optical reading device, HDDs etc. Yes, you can have 2 .wav files with identical check sums, but one sounding quite different from the other due to jitter. This is now no longer disputed in Computer Audiophile, after the lead designer of XXHE software player, and a Mastering Engineer from Germany heard the differences between uploaded files for themselves.
Alex

seems like they maybe need some better test gear ?

"I can't measure it thus it isn't there"

the other "possible" for the claim,and this can be considered valid even if poorly described,is that the jitter measurement is so fasr below the threshold where WE HUMANS can hear it,in effect it is zero as far as the context of playback goes even if it CAN be measured.

[rowuk]

I am not convinced that it is jitter. I think what we are hearing is either phase, intermodulation or frequency response. Jitter is an easier argument to sell because the average joe on the street can remember the word and it sounds bad!

The only real test would be to take the best possible source and introduce jitter leaving everything else the same. I know of no tests done this way. Maybe nobody wants to publish the results...............

[PinkFloyd]

Jitter is an easier argument to sell because the average joe on the street can remember the word and it sounds bad!

It sounds "terrible"...... it Rhymes with "Glitter"





Do you know..... Gary Glitter has made it into Cockney rhyming slang?

"I'd like to do her up the Gary"

Meaning...... Gary Glitter = Shitter

(ie: do her up the arse)

So, yes..... "Jitter" does sound bad

[PinkFloyd]

Do ya wanna be in my gang?



Oh NO!

[rowuk]

Guys with their hands in their pants are to be treated with great caution. Insecurity, or greed makes you want to count your change constantly.

[Deleted]

...OR,

into pocket billiards, i.e wan@#$!