The Analog DAC

[Soundproof]

From here: http://www.regonaudio.com/Jitter.html
So, Tom, instead of thinking in the frequency domain, the answer to your understanding jitter might instead lie in the time domain?

The crucial bits are at the bottom of your link.
Point one, spot on, but now we're actually amping up to femtosecond. One one-thousandth of a picosecond!

Point 2 - extremely amusing.

1 One nanosecond = one one-thousandth of a millionth of a second; a pico second = one one-thousandth of a nanosecond.

2 In detail, for the CO standard: If a tone of frequency f, is jittered at frequency f2, producing sidebands at f1+f2 and f1-f2 frequencies, then both sidebands are larger in frequency size than 22 kHz if f2 is larger than 44.1 kHz while f1 is between 0 and 22 kHz.

 

[jkeny]

The crucial bits are at the bottom of your link.
Point one, spot on, but now we're actually amping up to femtosecond. One one-thousandth of a picosecond!

Point 2 - extremely amusing.

1 One nanosecond = one one-thousandth of a millionth of a second; a pico second = one one-thousandth of a nanosecond.

2 In detail, for the CO standard: If a tone of frequency f, is jittered at frequency f2, producing sidebands at f1+f2 and f1-f2 frequencies, then both sidebands are larger in frequency size than 22 kHz if f2 is larger than 44.1 kHz while f1 is between 0 and 22 kHz.

Soundproof, I'm not defending the femtosecond jitter audibility as I too believe it is ridiculous (& practically unachievable where it matters) but I was trying to correct your statements based on my understanding of jitter.

But what do you find amusing in point 2?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Yes, in theory, but in reality show me a valid analysis using music as the source! For instance how are you going to compare the two analogue waveforms, convert them to digital?

Heck, I don't know, John. I'm just a music lover. I thought I'd leave that to the guys who've built a business model on the audible significance of a few picoseconds.

Tim

 

[jkeny]

Heck, I don't know, John. I'm just a music lover. I thought I'd leave that to the guys who've built a business model on the audible significance of a few picoseconds.

Tim

That's what I'm telling you, Tim - there is no measurement "proof" at the moment, (that I know of) so the ears have to be the instrument of choice, for now!

 

[Soundproof]

Soundproof, I'm not defending the femtosecond jitter audibility as I too believe it is ridiculous (& practically unachievable where it matters) but I was trying to correct your statements based on my understanding of jitter.

But what do you find amusing in point 2?

What I find amusing in Point 2.

It's a sequence of If's, without any grounding in theory. If a tone - and it's an if whether it produces sidebands, another if whether f2 is larger than 44.1kHz.

Iffy - and funny.

If a manufacturer tells me they have found measures against variations in sound propagation due to pressure/temperature variations, with an added bonus for the gravitational pull of the moon, with a full moon setting - then I'd find that more relevant than reg's iffy-chain. If we're going to be discussing variations at the femtosecond level, then we have to begin worrying about stochastic interference due to gravitational variations, I'd think.

Here's a field that's been too long ignored by manufacturers. Get to it!

 

[jkeny]

Let's look at what you are saying is a "sequence of ifs"

In detail, for the CO standard: If a tone of frequency f, is jittered at frequency f2, producing sidebands at f1+f2 and f1-f2 frequencies, then both sidebands are larger in frequency size than 22 kHz if f2 is larger than 44.1 kHz while f1 is between 0 and 22 kHz.

I have highlighted the two ifs - hardly a sequence. It's not an if whether it produces sidebands - that's what jitter does!! Jitter is composed of many frequencies - jitter greater than 44.1KH is almost a certainty. Your laughing is hollow & born of a lack of knowledge in the matter. I'm afraid your following remarks betray your shallow understanding. Hope you find your preferred distortion!

 

[Soundproof]

Let's look at what you are saying is a "sequence of ifs" I have highlighted the two ifs - hardly a sequence. It's not an if whether it produces sidebands - that's what jitter does!! Jitter is composed of many frequencies - jitter greater than 44.1KH is almost a certainty. Your laughing is hollow & born of a lack of knowledge in the matter. I'm afraid your following remarks betray your shallow understanding. Hope you find your preferred distortion!

Oh, I've listened to proper induced jitter, in the nanosecond range, and can vouch for the sidebands of which you speak, wise man of much depth.
We then need to ask ourselves whether we can transpose the issue to the picosecond and femtosecond levels - and I can assure you that we were talking number of nanoseconds that are beyond "this product is not ready for market."

 

[jkeny]

What I find amusing in Point 2.

It's a sequence of If's, without any grounding in theory. If a tone - and it's an if whether it produces sidebands, another if whether f2 is larger than 44.1kHz.

Oh, I've listened to proper induced jitter, in the nanosecond range, and can vouch for the sidebands of which you speak, wise man of much depth.

You talk in riddles & strawman arguments. So now you know of the sidebands that you sneered at just a post ago. So tell me how you can vouch for them? You heard them, measured them, what?
I already said Femtoseconds was ridiculous so who are you addressing? BTW, are you a manufacturer with your comment "this product is not ready for market."?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

I guess I am trying to understand the audibility of these tiny amounts of jitter. Experts have saind you have to be below a certain threshold, or you can hear the stuff. I feel, that redbook digital, at the higher frequencies, is messing up as far as missing harmonics compared to say an LP, which despite the RIAA curve the cartridge is adding a lot of harmonics and "filling in" the sound thusly. Redbook seems to me to have some issues with either NOT getting it right as far as the middle to upper harmonics or IS getting it right by not adding in those, or it is adding in its own junk that is dissonant......I dont know, but we all can hear the difference...now accuracy, thats the million dollar question (oh yeah, forgot, preference rules not accuracy). So, someday somebody will clearly be able to tell us what the heck the difference is we are hearing between the LP and redbook CD. you might say between analog and dgital in general.

Tom

We're often in agreement, Tom, but I'm not even sure I'm following you this time. Redbook is "messing up" by missing the harmonics vinyl is adding? If vinyl is, indeed, adding these harmonics (and that sure seems to be the case), isn't it the vinyl that is messing up? Whether or not you subjectively like what it adds is, of course, another question. But we're talking about reproduction, not production. That much is pretty simple.

Tim

 

[Soundproof]

jkeny - the riddler here is you, with your aggressive hyperbole.

We are, literally, talking of listening acuity that not only challenges that of bats, it totally supersedes it, by many factors.

Here's an interesting study where jitter actually mattered - where bats were claimed to be able to detect alterations down to ten nanoseconds (one one-thousandth for pico; one one-thousand of that again for femto, mind you). Ordinarily, bats can't go below several hundred nanoseconds, but in ideal conditions ...

Kristian Beedholm had to deem what bats are claimed to do by some incredible, for physiological reasons. Too bad for the bats that they don't have the hearing any audiophile can display at will. Personally, I enjoy walking about in the busiest of cities with my eyes closed, solely relying on my hearing for navigation.

The transfer function of a target limits the jitter detection threshold with signals of echolocating FM-bats
Received: 25 October 2004 / Revised: 20 November 2005 / Accepted: 3 December 2005 O? Springer-Verlag 2005
Abstract The delay jitter discrimination threshold in bats is a disputed subject. Some investigators have obtained results indicating that bats are able to discriminate alternations in delay down to 10 ns, which appears incredible for purely physical reasons. Using actual bat echolocation sequences recorded during an easy detec- tion task to measure simulated delay jitter, it is shown here that jitter detection thresholds in the order of some tens of nanoseconds are actually physically realizable. However, if the transfer function of the target simulating apparatus is not perfect, the lowest thresholds are in the order of hundreds of nanoseconds and variable between individual bats. This phenomenon is shown to arise as a consequence of the variation in signal parameters from call to call. When the transfer function from a real jitter experiment was artificially applied to the echoes, the jitter detection thresholds again were several hundred nanoseconds. This is the first study to point out a lim- iting role of the transfer function of a system faced with variations in echolocation signal parameters, something that should be considered in evaluating all sonar systems with variable signal structure.

Enjoy the full study - PDF link: http://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j..._Zy5Aw&usg=AFQjCNFMgr-Wdx8B1KHTIJmNo32pEqMHQg

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Bats. Literally. That's rich.

Tim

 

[jkeny]

jkeny - the riddler here is you, with your aggressive hyperbole.

We are, literally, talking of listening acuity that not only challenges that of bats, it totally supersedes it, by many factors.

Here's an interesting study where jitter actually mattered - where bats were claimed to be able to detect alterations down to ten nanoseconds (one one-thousandth for pico; one one-thousand of that again for femto, mind you). Ordinarily, bats can't go below several hundred nanoseconds, but in ideal conditions ...

Kristian Beedholm had to deem what bats are claimed to do by some incredible, for physiological reasons. Too bad for the bats that they don't have the hearing any audiophile can display at will. Personally, I enjoy walking about in the busiest of cities with my eyes closed, solely relying on my hearing for navigation.

You really do bring up some irrelevancies. Surely you've seen this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLziFMF4DHA&feature=relmfu

The transfer function of a target limits the jitter detection threshold with signals of echolocating FM-bats
Received: 25 October 2004 / Revised: 20 November 2005 / Accepted: 3 December 2005 O? Springer-Verlag 2005
Abstract The delay jitter discrimination threshold in bats is a disputed subject. Some investigators have obtained results indicating that bats are able to discriminate alternations in delay down to 10 ns, which appears incredible for purely physical reasons. Using actual bat echolocation sequences recorded during an easy detec- tion task to measure simulated delay jitter, it is shown here that jitter detection thresholds in the order of some tens of nanoseconds are actually physically realizable. However, if the transfer function of the target simulating apparatus is not perfect, the lowest thresholds are in the order of hundreds of nanoseconds and variable between individual bats. This phenomenon is shown to arise as a consequence of the variation in signal parameters from call to call. When the transfer function from a real jitter experiment was artificially applied to the echoes, the jitter detection thresholds again were several hundred nanoseconds. This is the first study to point out a lim- iting role of the transfer function of a system faced with variations in echolocation signal parameters, something that should be considered in evaluating all sonar systems with variable signal structure.

Enjoy the full study - PDF link: http://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j..._Zy5Aw&usg=AFQjCNFMgr-Wdx8B1KHTIJmNo32pEqMHQg

Yes & bats can't hear the illusion of a performance that humans do every time they listen to stereo playback - so what?

Look you are still clinging to your misunderstanding that jitter is all about hearing the difference in timing between two sounds - I've explained your mistake already - I'm not feeding your trolling any more!

 

[Keith_W]

Enjoy the full study - PDF link: http://www.google.no/url?sa=t&rct=j..._Zy5Aw&usg=AFQjCNFMgr-Wdx8B1KHTIJmNo32pEqMHQg

Thanks for posting the study. I read it and I enjoyed it. However, I can only understand the biomedical terms of the study and not the actual arguments about jitter. Can you please comment on what they were actually measuring in simple layman's terms? Were they varying the amount of jitter in a digital signal or was it analog jitter that they were measuring?

 

[JackD201]

"The analog DAC." I wonder. If i created "The digital Turntable," would objectivists....no, never mind. They'd just laugh.

Tim

It's been done and yes they did. LOL.

 

[dallasjustice]

Is this MSB outerspace clock a master clock or a word clock?

 

[MylesBAstor]

We all hear the difference between lp and redbook. I do enjoy what lp does/adds to the signal. I guess I ws just muttering on about my personal serach for the true things that are happening in lp that make it sound the way it does. I still have a sneaky suspicion about the higher frequencies in redbook as far as the higher and thus smaller harmonics as disappearing too fast into the silence but thats jjust me.. Don't take that post too seriously mates.

How do you explain the added harmonics you are referring to are actually on the master tape and missing on the digital copy? How great is digital if it's subtracting those qualities?

 

[Lee]

The most analog DAC I have heard is from EAR.

 

[docvale]

So cool, this new DAC from MSB has probably not been listened by anyone around. Notwithstanding, in an Italian forum a number of digital/computer geeks have already defined it as "universe's best"

I'm too lazy to go through the entire objectivist/subjectivist thread, but, as a guy who cares about technology, build quality and specs, I think that computer audio (which is something that I love for its absolute comfort) brought such an obsession for numbers, such as bit resolution, femptoseconds of jitter, S/N ratio and whatever, that many geeks forgot about the music...

 

[wizard]

A French preview here

 

[rockitman]

English trans via google
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=fr&tl=en&u=http://www.evmag.fr/site.php?page=audio292