DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 2164 times.

rayjay

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 3
DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??
« on: 7 May 2004, 02:23 am »
Hi Hugh/Tinker,

how do the DAKSA "jitter immunity/reduction" mechanisms compare to

http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/appnotes-d/whyultralock.asp

This has been getting favourable comment in some forums (At $1000 USD)so I wondered what the comparison from a technical viewpoint was ?,

I don't pretend to understand to any great degree the technical aspects of jitter and  anti-aliasing filters but from an Engineering viewpoint the  "buffering" concept in the DAKSA seems to actually solve most (all ? ) of the issues with jitter, so just wondering .

cheers and regards,
Ray

Tinker

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 138
    • http://web.access.net.au/~bwilliam/macam
Re: DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??
« Reply #1 on: 7 May 2004, 04:43 am »
Quote from: rayjay
Hi Hugh/Tinker,

how do the DAKSA "jitter immunity/reduction" mechanisms compare to

http://www.benchmarkmedia.com/appnotes-d/whyultralock.asp

This has been getting favourable comment in some forums (At $1000 USD)so I wondered what the comparison from a technical viewpoint was ?,

I don't pretend to understand to any great degree the technical aspects of jitter and  anti-aliasing filters but from an Engineering viewpoint the  "buffering" concept in the DAKSA seems to actually solve most (all ? ) of the issues with jitter, so just wondering .

cheers and regards,
Ray


In short, I am not sure precisely what in happening inside one of these things. I do not want to create any friction by second-guessing a manufacturer or making claims about products I haven't acutally measured and tested myself.  So this is a hypothetical discussion abot jitter reduction methods. The URL you posted had a description saying the conversion clock is not phase-locked to a reference clock (ie not a PLL), rather the converter oversampling-ratio is varied  achieve phase-lock to the reference clock.

What this sounds like is a high precision master clock on the DA with an asyncrhonous samplerate convertor probably a polyphase digital filter. I could be wrong. Maybe someone with one of these could open it up and tell us? In fact there was a thread about benchmark in pro-audio-digest. With permission I may try and post their results here.

Resampling or polyphsae filtering This is a workable approach to jitter reduction, and is a standard method of interfacing systems without having to actually synchronise clocks.  If you want to read more about how these work, go to the analog device home page
http://www.analog.com
and get the data sheet for the AD1896 asynchronous samplerate convertor. Document 71654447AD1896_a.pdf, I think. Let me kow what you think.

The DAKSA does not do any filtering of this kind. It uses a buffer and a predictive algorithm to decouple the transport and DAC clocks down to very low frequencies.  If you like a "loose" PLL without the limitations of a low pass filter on the PLL loop filter. It is hoped (still subject to testing phase III!) that we can reduce jitter very close to the limits of the DAC master clock.

More later.

T.

rayjay

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 3
DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??
« Reply #2 on: 7 May 2004, 05:58 am »
"In short, I am not sure precisely what in happening inside one of these things. I do not want to create any friction by second-guessing a manufacturer or making claims about products I haven't acutally measured and tested myself. So this is a hypothetical discussion abot jitter reduction methods."

Hi Tinker,

I fully understand why you need to preface your comments with this  :)

Thanks for the reply, there is *more* than enough reading for me in the links provided,

cheers,
Ray

Tinker

  • Jr. Member
  • Posts: 138
    • http://web.access.net.au/~bwilliam/macam
DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??
« Reply #3 on: 8 May 2004, 02:03 am »
Quote from: rayjay

I fully understand why you need to preface your comments with this  :)

Thanks for the reply, there is *more* than enough reading for me in the links provided,


Cheers Rayjay.

That's my best guess, and it meshes with the graphs shown. I am still chasing up the previous article/review on this particular DAC (and A/D). Another company taking similar apporaches in high-end and pro is
http://www.weiss.ch/

Serious gear here!

T.

kyrill

DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??
« Reply #4 on: 9 May 2004, 12:02 pm »
well, well

If the DAKSA is matching the attitudes of the Weiss engineers behind the Medea, if you even like to design something comparable, Tinker you and your supporting context indeed aim high and I take my hat of for you.

Maybe your DAKSA will be too good for Aspen. If you succeed Aspen will overthrow the existing high end paradigm equilibrium between performance and cost.

I would do almost anything for a musical Dac with such soundstage and transparency.  A DAKSA like that will make many many music lovers with a normal income very very happy and challenges what  the AKSA's and the GK-1's are capable of.

I would be willing to pay up front and so help the R&D a litlle bit.
I also will, when my housing of the AKSA is ready and all the upgrades in place offer it to Dutch hifi  on-the-net-publications for review.

JohnR

DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??
« Reply #5 on: 9 May 2004, 12:07 pm »
Quote from: kyrill
If you succeed Aspen will overthrow the existing high end paradigm equilibrium between performance and cost.


I thought they already did that with the amp ;)

kyrill

DAKSA jitter immunity vs ??
« Reply #6 on: 9 May 2004, 12:22 pm »
paradigms are stubborn and firm. It needs diverse attacks in order to transcend and I completely agree with you.