man either you are stupid or you playing being stupid or you like trolling around.
Asked for some reliable evidence to support your (false) claims and info, you first posted marketing BS and since then nothing but more false info and insults like this one.
I already explained to you few post ago what jitter means.
You did indeed, wrongly! You keep going on about phase noise and jitter, when in fact they are the same thing, which has been explained to you by several different people and references provided to reliable evidence.
A place for a clock is where synchronous audio data stream is created. In terms of traditional audio interfaces like S/PDIF or I2S it is at the source, not DAC.
Great, so you’ve falsely claimed I don’t know/understand what a PLL is, but here you’re demonstrating that you don’t, so thanks for that! You don’t even know where the PLL is, lol.
No more jitter, just more noise, remember what I am saying.
Why would anyone want to remember what you are saying when it’s wrong? Jitter is timing deviations/inaccuracies in a periodic signal (such as a digital data stream, inc. Digital audio). Up to the point of conversion there is always jitter, it’s just a question of how much. After conversion there can be no jitter because the analogue output signal is not periodic, it’s continuous. So all we’re left with after conversion is the artefacts caused by jitter, which is more noise AND more distortion spurs, as the objective evidence demonstrates!
Regarding measurements, there is always factor of error, adding extra ground interference, it happens not first time.
So you’re saying this “
extra ground interference” is only being measured when measuring the output with an external clock?
A quality clock do not generate such anomalies.
All clocks generate such anomalies, there’s no such thing as a perfect clock/clock signal. The only question is the amount/level of these anomalies (noise/distortion) after conversion.
First, please post a link to prove the source if you claiming something.
Oh the irony. Links have already been posted to proven sources but when you’ve been asked for reliable evidence to support your claims your only response has been marketing and insults!
Noise floor below -140 db is not even audible, so you can even hear the harmonics at -140db.
Exactly! In fact, noise/distortion (or anything else) at -140dB can’t even be reproduced, so obviously there can be no question audibility. Yet you’ve (falsely) claimed you can hear a difference, so now you’re even arguing against yourself! Now that’s funny.
An external clock always outweighs the harmonics below -140db
“
First, post a link to prove the source if you claim something”, these are your own words, yet here you are making yet another (false) claim with no link at all, let alone “First”! And, it’s even more ridiculous because evidence/links have been provided demonstrating the opposite, that external clocks cause at best the same and typically more noise/distortion/harmonics.
Remember: if it measures poorly but sounds good, you're taking the wrong measurement.
The measurement is the output of the DAC/s. So unless you’re trying to listen to the clock signal itself, instead of a DAC’s output, what do you think would be the right measurement? Additionally, what you’re telling us to “Remember” is false anyway, because there are many cases where sounds/signals “
measure poorly but sounds good” and are not the “
wrong measurement”. Euphonic distortion is an obvious example but there are various others.
G
(btw. Dont get me wrong, his claim comes from the music production industry which indeed are not false, because master clock were used to synchronise multiple ADC, but he is pulling the same claim over modern DACs which have nothing in common with ADC)
