Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Jitter Correlation to Audibility
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jitter Correlation to Audibility - Page 17

post #241 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digitalchkn View Post
 

 

These effects are real (analytically and physically), and only reason majority may not perceive it is because somebody understood the problem and has addressed it (or most of it) already.

 

If it's been addressed, it doesn't matter any more because it's been reduced to inaudible levels.

post #242 of 361

Wow! Lots of graphs comparing lots of things.  Love it.

 

Questions:

1. Why 300ns sinusoidal jitter (what frequency?) ?  Real crystals/oscillators don't really do that.

2. Clock jitter vs turntable wow/flutter/mechanical vibrations is an interesting comparison. If the point is that a mechanical device is going to have more distortion than an electrical one -- that's probably true.  But if you look an analog solid state devices in a constant environment than those can be manufacture to extreme tolerance (or not). Again, all relative.

post #243 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digitalchkn View Post
 

 

Conversely, those claims that it doesn't matter should be subjected to the same listening tests before their proponents make announcements that it doesn't matter.

 

I'd be happy if you can tell me how to prove a negative! How can someone prove something DOESN'T exist. You can't. You can only prove that it does. Show me the proof that there are people who can hear jitter in the levels it occurs in home audio components.

post #244 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

 

I'd be happy if you can tell me how to prove a negative! How can someone prove something DOESN'T exist. You can't. You can only prove that it does. Show me the proof that there are people who can hear jitter in the levels it occurs in home audio components.

 

In principle, take your home equipment, take out the on-board clock sources and replace them with your precision "jitter-free" clocks. Then compare.

post #245 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digitalchkn View Post
 

Wow! Lots of graphs comparing lots of things.  Love it.

 

Questions:

1. Why 300ns sinusoidal jitter (what frequency?) 

 

B and G tried several amounts ranging from 1ns upwards , the paper also shows the effect of differing amounts, the jitter frequency was 16Khz

 

 

?  Real crystals/oscillators don't really do that.

2. Clock jitter vs turntable wow/flutter/mechanical vibrations is an interesting comparison. If the point is that a mechanical device is going to have more distortion than an electrical one -- that's probably true.  But if you look an analog solid state devices in a constant environment than those can be manufacture to extreme tolerance (or not). Again, all relative.

 

In this context though we are focused on the nature, magnitude and effect of timing related distortions, agreed that analog amps indeed can have very low distortion certainly inaudible in many cases, and should not materially alter the pitch of a musical signal, with TTs and tape machines there is more potential for playback speed variations causing audible issues...

 

post #246 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digitalchkn View Post
 

 

In principle, take your home equipment, take out the on-board clock sources and replace them with your precision "jitter-free" clocks. Then compare.

 

Shall I ask you again to provide evidence that this would make a difference, or do we just have to take your word for it?

post #247 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

 

Shall I ask you again to provide evidence that this would make a difference, or do we just have to take your word for it?


Well there was that dude on the video the other day, said he could hear it at 200 femtoseconds.  And this one guy at a well known high end company Dr. KJ who says they have employees that clearly hear its effect down to below 20 picoseconds.  So yeah, any reason we can't just take their word for it?  I mean why would they hear such stuff 3 or 4 orders of magnitude below the lowest amount blind tested if it wasn't true?

post #248 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digitalchkn View Post ...

Questions:

1. Why 300ns sinusoidal jitter (what frequency?) ?  Real crystals/oscillators don't really do that.

 ...

 

Real DACs do that, and many other jitter forms too. Sinusoidal jitter is typically more audible than a comparable amount of oscillator phase noise.

post #249 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by esldude View Post


Well there was that dude on the video the other day...

You are not referring to "The Dude?" As in "The Dude shall abide?" He's stoned most of the time so I am sure he's hearing more than jitter.
post #250 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mambosenior View Post


You are not referring to "The Dude?" As in "The Dude shall abide?" He's stoned most of the time so I am sure he's hearing more than jitter.


Oh no!  Not The Dude.  I wrote that dude.  Totally different dude you know Dude. 

post #251 of 361
Oh, sorry, dude. THAT dude is over in the stoners' thread claiming jitter made hair grow on the palms of his hands. Peace, man.
post #252 of 361
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post
 

 

I'd be happy if you can tell me how to prove a negative! How can someone prove something DOESN'T exist. You can't. You can only prove that it does. Show me the proof that there are people who can hear jitter in the levels it occurs in home audio components.

 

 

Have you not tried the test for yourself? Why not?

 

Step 1: Hook up DAC with an outboard USB/Spdif converter using a spdif cable.

Step 2: Hook up a different outboard USB/Spdif converter using the same usb and spdif cable, and observe the differences.

 

 

This is indeed a controlled test.

 

 

There has got to be literally thousands of people who will testify in favor of audible jitter. For a good laugh, go and post this same proof request on Computer Audiophile, Audio Circle, or Audiogon, and count the number of skeptics.  There is absolutely no need to get into highly technical arguments. And the only person here who has demonstrated any kind of technical knack on this particular subject is Digitalchkn.


Edited by robertsong - 5/4/14 at 5:08am
post #253 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertsong View Post


Have you not tried the test for yourself? Why not?

Step 1: Hook up DAC with an outboard USB/Spdif converter using a spdif cable.
Step 2: Hook up a different outboard USB/Spdif converter using the same usb and spdif cable, and observe the differences.


This is indeed a controlled test.

If you think that's a controlled test, you're in the wrong forum.

se
post #254 of 361
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Eddy View Post


If you think that's a controlled test, you're in the wrong forum.

se

 

 

Utter nonsense.

post #255 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by robertsong View Post


Utter nonsense.

Then using your criteria, putting photographs of yourself in your freezer also improves the sound of your audio system as well as any other audio system you might be listening to. Have you any photographs of yourself in your freezer? If not, why not?

se
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Jitter Correlation to Audibility