[James Tanner]

By the way I am going to post the Stereophile review of the Bryston BCD-1 CD Player next week and the measurements made by John Atkinson are part of that review. They state that the Bryston CD Player's jitter was at the residual measuring level of their analyzer - 150 picoseconds.

Other measurements indicate 117 picosconds of jitter in the BCD-1

james

[fly_fish_nz]

Logitech/SlimDevices? Give me a break, that is utter junk. I had squeezebox, its performance is horrible, and corresponds exactly to what measurements show, Toslink being especially poor.

The SB3 is an innovative product that has provided me hours of musical enjoyment! IMHO, to label it as "utter junk" is quite a bold and sweeping statement. I own the Quad 77 CDP and have auditioned quite expensive CDPs, including the Rega Apollo, and still prefer my stock SB3 (with Paul Hynes' PSU) any time, any day! While measurements can be important, I think it is your ears that should be the final arbiter of whether something sounds good and will satisfy you in the long run!

As far as measurments, several sources have confirmed that the SB3 outputs bit perfect digital to outboard DACs, and a device that does so with the convenience of wireless can hardly be considered junk by any reasonable or reasoning person.

As for the DAC1, I compared it in the same system and same room to several others (not including the Bryston), and prefered the Benchmark by a pretty good margin; and will just note that a friend of mine  carefully compared it to the Cambridge used as a dac, and preferred the DAC1 pretty clearly.  Of course we all have different systems, rooms, and ears and I can understand why others might prefer another over the DAC1.

[fly_fish_nz]

Thanks James.  I was wondering about precisely that issue, i.e., whether implementations sometimes allow for a percentage reduction and see your point.  On the other hand, if there is 99.5% reduction, the differences between residuals from different sources may be inconsequential.

I am not an engineer and it might be great to get a qualified opinion on this but I believe the percentage of reduction is no where near high percentages. The lower the source jitter the better.

james

Thanks James.  You are probably right and a lot closer to an engineer than I am  - I was using an extreme just to make the point that the higher the percentage, the less the differences in residuals will matter. 

[werd]

By the way I am going to post the Stereophile review of the Bryston BCD-1 CD Player next week and the measurements made by John Atkinson are part of that review. They state that the Bryston CD Player's jitter was at the residual measuring level of their analyzer - 150 picoseconds.

Other measurements indicate 117 picosconds of jitter in the BCD-1

james

Hey James, does the Bcd-1 use some unique type of fifo buffering system and reclock for jitter reduction, because those r some pretty good numbers.

[mcgsxr]

I love my junk - I own a Bolder modded SB3 that I use as my only source via the analog outputs.

I am aware that there are other excellent options out there, but am happy with what I have, for the investment I have made.

I can clearly see why others, with other gear they are happy with, would not necessarily agree with my position.

As the unit I have is fully modded, I am pleased to try other DAC's, but to date have not heard one I like better.  Nor have I tried all the available DAC's.

From the original post, it would appear that others hear good things in the 2 units under consideration.  Which one is ultimately better, might be very subjective to the balance of the system in question, let alone the ears in the room!

[James Tanner]

By the way I am going to post the Stereophile review of the Bryston BCD-1 CD Player next week and the measurements made by John Atkinson are part of that review. They state that the Bryston CD Player's jitter was at the residual measuring level of their analyzer - 150 picoseconds.

Other measurements indicate 117 picosconds of jitter in the BCD-1

james

Hey James, does the Bcd-1 use some unique type of fifo buffering system and reclock for jitter reduction, because those r some pretty good numbers.

Hi werd

No we do not use any kind of FIFO buffering.  FIFO is typically used when you have to resample and reclock the input like in an external DAC.

james

[Sasha]

I still think Sasha u dont have a clue what jitter sounds like, and u just keep talkin out your ass

I fart out of my ass, and you are welcome to hear the jitter (variation in arrival time of each fart).
Would that convince you?

[Sasha]

Logitech/SlimDevices? Give me a break, that is utter junk. I had squeezebox, its performance is horrible, and corresponds exactly to what measurements show, Toslink being especially poor.

The SB3 is an innovative product that has provided me hours of musical enjoyment! IMHO, to label it as "utter junk" is quite a bold and sweeping statement. I own the Quad 77 CDP and have auditioned quite expensive CDPs, including the Rega Apollo, and still prefer my stock SB3 (with Paul Hynes' PSU) any time, any day! While measurements can be important, I think it is your ears that should be the final arbiter of whether something sounds good and will satisfy you in the long run!

As far as measurments, several sources have confirmed that the SB3 outputs bit perfect digital to outboard DACs, and a device that does so with the convenience of wireless can hardly be considered junk by any reasonable or reasoning person.

As for the DAC1, I compared it in the same system and same room to several others (not including the Bryston), and prefered the Benchmark by a pretty good margin; and will just note that a friend of mine  carefully compared it to the Cambridge used as a dac, and preferred the DAC1 pretty clearly.  Of course we all have different systems, rooms, and ears and I can understand why others might prefer another over the DAC1.

The issue is not bit perfect, the issue is jitter! Hello?
Let me say again, SB is utter junk, Toslink outputs 800ps jitter, and that is very very audible.
If you like it, then you like the sound of jitter, you have no first clue what the original signal was and how it should sound.

[werd]

SASHA, ARE YOU F#$#%# STUPID?............ THAT'S A SERIOUS QUESTION. You r like a rambling robot that spews out everything that he's heard about jitter. Give it up. Why dont u go over to the vinyl forum and peddle your bs over there about jitter ...enough said

[mcgsxr]

I am a little less assertive, but no less confused than some of the other posters.

Sasha, are you suggesting that jitter affects the analog outputs of the SB3 itself, or only the digital output when the DAC is offboard?

Maybe I do like the sound of jitter - I sold off 2K in front end gear when I got the modded SB3 - preamp, transport, DAC, Monarchy SuperDIP etc.

[Sasha]

SASHA, ARE YOU F#$#%# STUPID?............ THAT'S A SERIOUS QUESTION. You r like a rambling robot that spews out everything that he's heard about jitter. Give it up. Why dont u go over to the vinyl forum and peddle your bs over there about jitter ...enough said

What is a serious question?
Throughout this discussion you kept making derogatory comments and failed attempts to be funny.
And since you introduced the concept of ass into the discussion, I offered you jitter demonstration in terms that would be easily understood by you.

[werd]

I am a little less assertive, but no less confused than some of the other posters.

Sasha, are you suggesting that jitter affects the analog outputs of the SB3 itself, or only the digital output when the DAC is offboard?

Maybe I do like the sound of jitter - I sold off 2K in front end gear when I got the modded SB3 - preamp, transport, DAC, Monarchy SuperDIP etc.

MCG u r bang on.... u can get good quality digital front end cheap now...... Bryston is about as much as i would pay for a dac now and these other more expensive manufactures better take a good look at their prices to stay competitive.

[Sasha]

I am a little less assertive, but no less confused than some of the other posters.

Sasha, are you suggesting that jitter affects the analog outputs of the SB3 itself, or only the digital output when the DAC is offboard?

Maybe I do like the sound of jitter - I sold off 2K in front end gear when I got the modded SB3 - preamp, transport, DAC, Monarchy SuperDIP etc.

I could not say much about analog outs on SB3, I did try it but liked it the least out of all combinations I had at the time. And I believe it was the execution of power and analog section of SB3 that resulted in poor performance of analog output from SB3. I tried a linear regulated lab PSU in place of PSU that came with SB3, still did not like it. Did not want to sink money into modifications, my take was that to make it work well would cost more than simply selling it and looking into other options.
I then focused on digital outputs to see if an external DAC would make it sing, but jitter was too high, what I heard corresponded to the measurements; it was obvious that jitter being higher on SB3 Toslink resulted in worse sound from an external DAC. This kind of correlation I have seen in every device that had multiple digital inputs and output, higher jitter figure resulted in worse sound.
In regard to liking the sound of jitter, it is quite possible, I have been playing a lot with different PC platforms using Lynx sound card and professional editing tools, in general the more spinning things (fans, drives) you have in PC, the more devices you have enabled, the more processes are running, the higher footprint of OS you have, the more jitter your sound card will produce on its digital output. But, it does not always sound offensive. I arrived to a few configurations where the consequence of jitter was soft and diffused sound, nothing bothersome and quite pleasing, but still wrong.
Kind of like euphonic tube amplifier sound versa SS if you will, in general terms of course.

[wkatzir]

To All-

     I think that Sasha's point has merit in the sense that jitter is the issue that plagues digital material when transported from one source to another.  I also think that this all comes down to personal taste.  After all, tube gear adds plenty of distortion, but it is harmonically pleasing to the ear, which is why so many people use it and love the warmth that distortion portrays.  The same is applicable here where some might like the effect of subtle amounts of audible jitter.  Everyone hears something different.

-Wes

[werd]

To All-

     I think that Sasha's point has merit in the sense that jitter is the issue that plagues digital material when transported from one source to another.  I also think that this all comes down to personal taste.  After all, tube gear adds plenty of distortion, but it is harmonically pleasing to the ear, which is why so many people use it and love the warmth that distortion portrays.  The same is applicable here where some might like the effect of subtle amounts of audible jitter.  Everyone hears something different.

-Wes

Sasha's point is that he likes to ramble on and insult people as he goes... He's like the Rainman of Jitter... I have to admit though the one about farting and hearing the jitter was pretty good..

[Sasha]

To All-

     I think that Sasha's point has merit in the sense that jitter is the issue that plagues digital material when transported from one source to another.  I also think that this all comes down to personal taste.  After all, tube gear adds plenty of distortion, but it is harmonically pleasing to the ear, which is why so many people use it and love the warmth that distortion portrays.  The same is applicable here where some might like the effect of subtle amounts of audible jitter.  Everyone hears something different.

-Wes

Sasha's point is that he likes to ramble on and insult people as he goes... He's like the Rainman of Jitter... I have to admit though the one about farting and hearing the jitter was pretty good..

Insults result in insults, can we now put it behind us, agree that we disagree, without harsh words and wisecracks?

[Panelman]

You can expect DAC to remove various levels of jitter to some degree, but not to eliminate it.
The problem is that Benchmark made claims that are bordering with science fiction, complete removal of jitter below audible threshold, what is the reason they claim all the sources and all the inputs sound the same.
This is as far as I am concerned marketing BS.
It is not bad DAC at all, do not get me wrong, but please, do not insult my intelligence by making such statements.
First of all, it is not true it all sounds the same on DAC1, it sounds similar, and the reason for it is colorations, through their filtering they did nothing else but change spectra, jitter became imbedded in signal. They in fact harmed the signal, DAC1 does not speak truth as much as BDA-1.
DAC1 may sound pleasing, again jitter can be manifested in many ways, but the fact remains that what they did was not complete removal of jitter.

Sasha,

Personally I think it's bad form to go on and on about a competitor's product in the Bryston circle, so this is my last post, however I can't let your statements above go without one last post so... If Benchmark made claims that they removed jitter to inaudible levels and did not provide measurements that proved it , that have been validated by multiple sources, such as Stereophile or Peter Aczel then I would agree their claims of all inputs sounding the same would be suspect. But that is not what has happened and your protestations to the contrary and unsupported accusations don't change that.  If anything all evidence supports the claim that the Benchmark does very little if anything to the signal. Stereophile's tests show the same level of jitter reduction on all inputs, this is not a matter of uninformed opinion but verifiable tests that have  been repeated by many other reviewers.

It is true that the output  from all  inputs sound the same, it's been demonstrated with data and many many reports from users.  See the the data at the link http://www.stereophile.com/digitalprocessors/108bench/index4.html If the signal has been harmed support your claim with some data, and not just your opinion

You will also find in this month's Stereophile data that shows the output section of the DAC1 Pre is about as distortion free as any preamp available. Since I listen to mine through Magnepan 1.6s I think I am in position to validate my claims that all inputs given the same data resolution sound  the same and its not because the Benchmark colors the sound. You may not like the sound of the products and that is your opinion and is certainly valid for you but these claims you make that you expect others to accept with no support other than your opinion are ridiculous. Actually the Benchmark measurements are science, but not fiction.  Have a nice weekend.

[jethro]

Insults result in insults, can we now put it behind us, agree that we disagree, without harsh words and wisecracks?

We all need to follow Sasha's plea. Thank you.

[NewBuyer]

...There is absolute and undeniable correlation between the subjective quality of sound and jitter measurements...

Hi Sasha,

If it's absolute and undeniable, then it's not subjective.   

About jitter: It is real, but whatever the "sound" of jitter may objectively be, the fact is that not even the engineers themselves can normally agree on it (including those accused in this thread of "marketing BS" ).  Not to mention, that jitter would apparently "sound" different depending upon the particular spectra of the jitter as well.  Any user who claims they can somehow magically listen with golden ears and tell the cause, flavor and specific vintage of the sound of "jitter" that enters their ears, is going to have a very tough time supporting this claim.  In fact, I have to doubt it is even that easy to somehow establish that whatever differences may be heard, are even necessarily and objectively tied to jitter instead of some other system variable (e.g. the different DAC output stages, etc).  This in spite of some people's view that they personally have the ultimate and most revealing system (and ears) for the task.

About the Benchmark DAC1 unit: From what I understand, Benchmark obviously doesn't claim to completely eliminate jitter, but claims to instead have a great processing method (UltraLock) that minimizes interface jitter to the point of inaudibility.  For instance, for the DAC1 PRE, they say "Even in the presence of extremely high input jitter, no jitter-induced artifacts can be detected on the outputs of the DAC1 PRE (using state-of-the-art testing equipment by Audio Precision)."  So readers should be careful of anybody's statements that try to distort that claim.

In my view, ideally a DAC may sound different based on the input and source used, but that is the fault of the input and source, not the DAC.  The DAC ideally should (electronically) perform equally well no matter what, faithfully reproducing the quality of the source recording.  I doubt that either the Benchmark or the Bryston DACs would fail this test.

By the way Wes, nice review!  Out of interest, did you have a chance to try the DAC1 PRE?  It has some upgrades over the earlier DAC1 iterations, including using LM4562's throughout the analog section (instead of 5532's).  Also, since you used the onboard volume control of the DAC1, did you try different attenuation pads within the DAC1?  For the variable output, the 30db pad somehow seems to be optimal to my ears, and has the best output impedance as well.  Just worth a listen, if you are interested and get a chance to try! 

I am very interested in doing a head-to-head comparison between the DAC1 PRE and the Bryston unit myself, and will be doing so shortly.  Can hardly wait! 

[wkatzir]

NewBuyer-

     I was very interested in the DAC1 PRE, although I already have a preamplifier and felt that keeping the DAC strictly as "source" as possible would be better in my situation.  I demoed the units with that in mind, and only tested the variable volume adjustment on the Benchmark to see what effect it had on its sound quality.  I found that it sounded best under the calibrated setting which bypasses the volume potentiometer.  I also wasn't allowed to open the unit up, so I was not able to play with the attenuation pads.  That could be a reason for its low volume. 
     I didn't know that there were significant changes in the analog output, and I am anxious to read what you have to say when you compare it with the Bryston.  As I believe, every unit is subject to the listeners ear and your statement, that the "DAC ideally should (electronically) perform equally well no matter what, faithfully reproducing the quality of the source recording...I doubt that either the Benchmark or the Bryston DACs would fail this test", is spot on.  Both are amazing, each has a wonderful character of its own, and listening to them both is the only way to decide which way to go.

-Wes