• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Coax vs optical...

AudioAvarice said:
Google says early CD players had errors in the 10-100 nanoseconds range, which makes more sense, because that's one of the reasons they continued to develop the technology.
Click to expand...
well if Google says it then it must be true. Guessing you mean an 'AI' search. You realise that only draws its answer from what people have written on the internet, much of which will be incorrect?

Happily we have jitter tests of some early players. In any case, timing errors in nanoseconds would still only be audible with test tones, not music, so even in those cases it's still not an issue. Tape and vinyl do have audible jitter levels, people still use them quite happily.
 
Mart Mccall said:
well if Google says it then it must be true. Guessing you mean an 'AI' search. You realise that only draws its answer from what people have written on the internet, much of which will be incorrect?

Happily we have jitter tests of some early players. In any case, timing errors in nanoseconds would still only be audible with test tones, not music, so even in those cases it's still not an issue. Tape and vinyl do have audible jitter levels, people still use them quite happily.
Click to expand...

Jitter is exclusive digital term ;) There is no analog jitter. You can not hear digital jitter of course but it affect DAC and sound after DAC.
 
radiokom said:
It is not and can not be true :) Jitter is not related to wow

Jitter explained - Part 1.3 [English]

Jitter explained, Part 1 on TNT-Audio - Internet HiFi magazine
www.tnt-audio.com
Click to expand...
Agree there is not the same cause but I'm suggesting the effect in analogue domain is the same. Although Bill is correct the distortion effect is more similar to flutter than wow. This isn't an issue anyway in any competent digital player.

Unless some new evidence comes to light I'll maintain my position that it has never been an issue worth any concern. :)
 
Mart Mccall said:
well if Google says it then it must be true. Guessing you mean an 'AI' search. You realise that only draws its answer from what people have written on the internet, much of which will be incorrect?

Happily we have jitter tests of some early players. In any case, timing errors in nanoseconds would still only be audible with test tones, not music, so even in those cases it's still not an issue. Tape and vinyl do have audible jitter levels, people still use them quite happily.
Click to expand...
I know, still not sure I like this new feature of Google search tbh, my point was that if there wasn't an issue with jitter in early equipment, they wouldn't have needed to develop the technology, for example, my mid 90's Deltec DAC/transport uses an exclusive optical link to connect the two clocks.
 
AudioAvarice said:
It probably just syncs the clocks of the two units, there's not a lot of information about these older DACs.
Click to expand...

Clocks can not be "synchronized". One should always be a master clock for all devices. If particular devices works on their own clock you will get jitter (clock ticks). On consumer devices commonly DAC is locked to input and output device (like CD player) acts as master clock. If they are original "pair". Otherwise it depends.
 
Like I said there's not a lot of information left about the company, all I know is their transports and DACs have this optional optical connection that is separate from the signal connection.
 
Of course two clocks can be synchronized. How do you think clocks all over the world are coordinated? The only question is the degree to which they are identical.

Hardwiring a clock signal between two devices generally gives better sync than recovering timing from a data stream. But even in a single device with a "single clock" there is not perfect agreement of the clock signal at all points in the circuit.
 
audiotemp said:
Of course two clocks can be synchronized. How do you think clocks all over the world are coordinated? The only question is the degree to which they are identical.

Hardwiring a clock signal between two devices generally gives better sync than recovering timing from a data stream. But even in a single device with a "single clock" there is not perfect agreement of the clock signal at all points in the circuit.
Click to expand...

You are talking about clocks at train station. It is something different :)

Word clock - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

 
You
audiotemp said:
No, I'm not.

Did you read my whole post? I don't see any point to your links.
Click to expand...
You wrote: "Of course two clocks can be synchronized."

Wrong. 2 internal clocks can not be synchronized. Do not even try ;)

Particular audio devices are synchronized by using only one clock for all (however - the same principle as in railway stations :))

For example, I commonly use my Universal Audio 2192 as master clock and Lynx AES16e sound card, for example, is slaved. But if there is a source what can not be slaved to UA because has no this option, UA should be slaved to that using one of the clock source options (S/PDIF input for example).
 
audiotemp said:
I think you must be just here to argue.
Click to expand...

I don't want to argue, I simply explain basic principle of clocking. :) Sometimes people try to copy DAT tapes, for example. They connect their DAT deck S/PDIF out to sound card what works on internal clock S/PDIF input and then wonder why there are ticks and pops in result. They simply do not know that sound card should be switched to "slave", to synchronize DAT and sound card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom