[nick_charles]

   
This pos has sidebands 88 dB down, because the signal was at -70 dB. If the signal was at 0 dB, would the most noticeable sidebands be at -18 dB and the rest of them at -30 dB? If so, these would be clearly audible!
 
Update: Please disregard. I went and read the original article and the signal was actually at -6 dBFS, that graph is very misleading since it starts at -70 dBFS (i.e., lying with statistics).

 
LOL - JA cut the graph off at that point and expanded it to make the result more dramatic I guess. Owners of that device by and large love it and it received good subjective reviews in several places - what can we tell from this  - shrug !

 

[SharpEars]

With everyone and their grandma using USB outs from computer to DAC, I wonder how bad the USB jitter is. Have there been any articles that looked at USB jitter, or jitter present in Asynchronous USB implementations - the latest fad.

 

[esldude]

http://www.stereophile.com/content/case-jitters-less-cd-quality
 
Well this was the article I actually had in mind.  Had something of a hall of shame for high jitter levels with the McIntosh being worst. The Pioneer, Playstation and others are in this list.

 

[bigshot]

Of course, even the worst there most likely has inaudible jitter in normal use.

 

[cjl]

   
This pos has sidebands 88 dB down, because the signal was at -70 dB. If the signal was at 0 dB, would the most noticeable sidebands be at -18 dB and the rest of them at -30 dB? If so, these would be clearly audible!
 
Update: Please disregard. I went and read the original article and the signal was actually at -6 dBFS, that graph is very misleading since it starts at -70 dBFS (i.e., lying with statistics).

The graph cuts off at -70 because in the vast majority of cases, if you showed the full scale from -120dB or so up to 0dB, you wouldn't really be able to see the effects of jitter in the graph at all. You have to zoom in on the quiet areas to see any significant difference at all between most modern pieces of equipment. Admittedly, that isn't the case with this rather appalling example, but they probably want to keep their graphs consistent between reviews. They're pretty clear what the signal is in the caption too, so it doesn't seem like they're intentionally trying to deceive.

 

[bigshot]

Most people don't know what -70dB (doesn't) sound like.

 

[esldude]

  Most people don't know what -70dB (doesn't) sound like.

Well everyone knows jitter is responsible for most audiophile problems.  Clearly audible.  -70 db is about 40 db more than jitter so we are talking about a serious issue there don't ya think?  

 

[castleofargh]

 

  Most people don't know what -70dB (doesn't) sound like.

Well everyone knows jitter is responsible for most audiophile problems.  Clearly audible.  -70 db is about 40 db more than jitter so we are talking about a serious issue there don't ya think?  

hirez sounds better !
so obviously sounds from -96 to -144db are clearly audible, being a good deal of the "better" part.
so -70DB is super loud!  QED

 

[blades]

 
Well everyone knows jitter is responsible for most audiophile problems.  Clearly audible.  -70 db is about 40 db more than jitter so we are talking about a serious issue there don't ya think?  

 
No I think hearing bias is responsible for most audiophile problems.

 

[esldude]

   
No I think hearing bias is responsible for most audiophile problems.

Surely if that were true there would be lots of audiophile products available to fix hearing bias.  As I don't see such products in the important magazines your premise would appear to be quite faulty. 

 

[bigshot]

 
Surely if that were true there would be lots of audiophile products available to fix hearing bias. 

 
Booze makes every system sound better!

 

[castleofargh]

I use an avant garde concept that says: if there isn't a problem stop trying to solve it!
but booze works fine too.

 

[blades]

 
Surely if that were true there would be lots of audiophile products available to fix hearing bias.  As I don't see such products in the important magazines your premise would appear to be quite faulty. 

 
Two problems with that concept.  The first is that hearing bias occurs inside the brain.  The only products that affect what goes on inside the brain are illegal without a prescription.  The second is that audiophiles don't accept the existence of hearing bias or are unaware of it.

 

[bigshot]

If they don't realize they have bias, and it's in their brain... that means we have to slip them a mickey while they aren't looking.

 

[esldude]

   
Two problems with that concept.  The first is that hearing bias occurs inside the brain.  The only products that affect what goes on inside the brain are illegal without a prescription.  The second is that audiophiles don't accept the existence of hearing bias or are unaware of it.

Au contraire, there are many products that effect what goes on inside the brain while being outside of it.  Thick anodized front plate, expensive brand name engraved upon it for one.  Literature to pre-condition the brain when listening occurs.  Mutual brain biasing camaraderie amongst audiophile groups.  Not even a scratch upon a scratch of the list of such things.