[JoshK]

As for jitter reduction, I don't know why someone doesn't think Wayne is doing something about it.  What do you think all these different PS's and isolations are for?  I also have a modified SB3 with a reclocker and it resolves more details than my Statement SB2 but this may also have something to do with my 3k DAC that I use.  I think there are different ways to reduce jitter.  Wayne has gone with prevention rather than reclocking before a DAC.  I like the reclocking idea but Wayne may have cleaned up so much that there may not be that much improvement even if reclocking is added in the future. 

Can jitter be reduced via power supply mods?   My limited knowledge on this subject has led me to believe that jitter is caused by timing imperfections in the digital stream that can only be reduced by modifications to the clock.   I'm not trying to be a smart a** here, I'm simply asking a question that I don't know the answer to.

thanks

I am not an expert on these matters either, but I do know that jitter can be caused from timing errors AND from power supply noise, the two are in fact often intertwined.  Working on the power supply is always job #1 to reducing jitter, otherwise you are polishing a turd.  I can't speak to whether reclocking is needed to fix timing errors, but realize there is no SPDIF inside the player, only for tranmitting outside to an external DAC which would be pointless in this case.  The reclocking would be for the raw digital feed, likely I2S or similar format.  Usually reclocking is a feat used to reduce the jitter caused by the SPDIF transmission process which is a jitter monster.

[Folsom]

In my experience Wayne knows what he is talking about. He is usually very fair and generous.

Do I know that not re-clocking and doing everthing else possible is the best option over re-clocking and doing little else? Not a clue. I do know if you get the SqueezeBox Re-Box you will be getting a real good deal on something designed with those parts compared to anyone else. You ever look at other things in that range? You pay more for engineering than you do parts at least 100x. The parts suck in comparrison in other things in that price range. The markup is simply higher on other products.

Now there are a lot of different opinions. I think the DAC in the SB2/3 is pretty good, but maybe not the sound for me at the same time (at least price effective wise). You have to remember this is all subjective, no one knows anything until they hear it.

[cruz123]

[/quote]
I am not an expert on these matters either, but I do know that jitter can be caused from timing errors AND from power supply noise, the two are in fact often intertwined.  Working on the power supply is always job #1 to reducing jitter, otherwise you are polishing a turd.  I can't speak to whether reclocking is needed to fix timing errors, but realize there is no SPDIF inside the player, only for tranmitting outside to an external DAC which would be pointless in this case.  The reclocking would be for the raw digital feed, likely I2S or similar format.  Usually reclocking is a feat used to reduce the jitter caused by the SPDIF transmission process which is a jitter monster.

[/quote]

First off, I think there are some subtle differences in the terminology that you are using.   The term "jitter" is not equivalent to the term "noise".   Jitter is not caused by timing errors, but rather jitter IS timing errors.   The result of the timing errors is noise/distortion.   On the other hand, power supply noise is not "jitter" at all, but is, well, power supply noise.   While a good power supply can certainly reduce noise in playback, it cannot - in my opinion - correct jitter and it is my understanding that only modifications to the clock can correct jitter (i.e. timing errors).     In any event, I am certainly open to the possibility that Waynes power supply mods to the SB3 are more beneficial than alternative mods aimed at reducing jitter and I have no opinion one way or the other.

I do agree with your point about SPDIF as the primary source of jitter and that the issue of jitter - in the context of this discussion - is mostly important when using an outboard DAC with the SB3.   So, does the rebox offer a digital out?  The original description describes upgrades to the power supply of the digital dac, so I assumed so.   

[JoshK]

The point I was trying to make was that PSU noise causes jitter in digital circuitry.

[tanchiro58]

The point I was trying to make was that PSU noise causes jitter in digital circuitry.

I totally agreed with JoshK.

[jman66]

Anything with "SqueezeBox" in the name is going to draw major criticisms with such a high price tag.

By not having "SqueezeBox" in the name, people will look at it for its features and functionality, rather than think of it as a ridiculously expensive SB.

George

Wouldn't using the Squeezebox name constitute a trademark infringement against Slim Devices/Logitech ?

[Bob in St. Louis]

I wouldn't think so. It's the same as "hot-rodding" your BMW, then sellings it as a "hot-rodded BMW".

[woodsyi]

As for jitter reduction, I don't know why someone doesn't think Wayne is doing something about it.  What do you think all these different PS's and isolations are for?  I also have a modified SB3 with a reclocker and it resolves more details than my Statement SB2 but this may also have something to do with my 3k DAC that I use.  I think there are different ways to reduce jitter.  Wayne has gone with prevention rather than reclocking before a DAC.  I like the reclocking idea but Wayne may have cleaned up so much that there may not be that much improvement even if reclocking is added in the future. 

Can jitter be reduced via power supply mods?   My limited knowledge on this subject has led me to believe that jitter is caused by timing imperfections in the digital stream that can only be reduced by modifications to the clock.   I'm not trying to be a smart a** here, I'm simply asking a question that I don't know the answer to.

thanks

I really am not an EE or anything -- I am just a consumer who wants to know how things work.  I ususally listen to what I like and then try to understand what make it so.  Sometime, it's the other way.  What I know is that clean PS inside and outside the box gives more resolution.  I personally have gone way away from SPDIF as possible.  I believe you are right that intrinsic jitter level from the SB receiver/buffer/dac circuitry cannot be reduced by cleaning things out, but the musical output may just be fine by not adding much to this intrinsic level.  I have heard a reclocked and what I believe is as clean a Redbook standard digital stream as there is and it's not a panacea in terms of music.  I get more spacial cues but tonality while accurate is not robust.  I like the tube output rebox the best from Wayne's line up.

Anyway, I think the problem lies in the digital format where analog to digital conversion with decimation filters emasculates all tonal harmonies and no DAC process puts the flesh back on.  I have been on a vinyl kick lately because of this but I am working my way back to get as best a digital playback as I can.  You just can't ignore the convenience it offers.  Wayne's rebox is a contender.

[JEaton]

I'll leave out the comments about whether or not a $6k Squeezebox makes any sense. If you can sell them, then more power to you.

The only question I have is why wouldn't you begin with the much better sounding Transporter for such a product?

[Papajin]

I'll leave out the comments about whether or not a $6k Squeezebox makes any sense. If you can sell them, then more power to you.

The only question I have is why wouldn't you begin with the much better sounding Transporter for such a product?

Because then you'd have an $8000 squeezebox?

[Wayne1]

I'll leave out the comments about whether or not a $6k Squeezebox makes any sense. If you can sell them, then more power to you.

The only question I have is why wouldn't you begin with the much better sounding Transporter for such a product?

Because then you'd have an $8000 squeezebox?

Papajin is mostly correct. I feel the main areas which can be improved on both the Squeezebox and the Transporter are in the power supply and the analog sections. If I started with the Transporter, I would bypass the main things that make the differences between it and the SB. Thus the base cost of the starting platform would be a lot higher without a great deal of improvement in the end sound quality.

The DAC chip used in the Transporter and the improved network memory do allow the Transporter to play true 24/96 files. At this time I do not feel that is a feature that can be fully used for most people. Within the next couple of years that may be different.

I think the people that heard the Re-Box at RMAF would agree it sounds nothing like either a SqueezeBox or a Transporter. The proof is in the listening, not the measurements.

[woodsyi]

I had a stock transporter in my house for about 3 months.  I listen to 24/96 files and I did not think the improvement was that great.  From all this, what I got is that the output section of a DAC is more important for me (a tone hound) than the DSP aspect of the DAC that would give more resolution.  I really thought about modding a transporter but it just seems like a total waste to rip all the expensive parts Slim folks put in to make a transporter what it is at 2k.  If I don't need 24/96, why pay $1500 more for parts that will be replaced?

[boead]

Isn't this effectively a $5700 power supply for a $300 digital device?    And it doesn't re-clock?      Should sell well in this economy.

LOL!! Yeah, lots of disposable cash out there these days.   

[audioengr]

Wayne - It looks like one of my Pace-Car reclocker boards would fit inside.  This was designed specifically for reducing jitter for WiFi servers.  I may be able to even do a special unpopulated OEM version just for SB3 to reduce cost.

If you are interested, I have one that I can ship you with a modded SB3 for audition.  The only thing the SB3 needs is a slave-clock input, no other mods.  It is designed to use with the digital output of the SB3. 

Therefore, if you are using the D/A in the SB3 and not your own D/A, this will not work.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

[Wayne1]

Thank you for the offer, Steve.

At this time I am using the internal DAC of the SB3.

At some point I may investigate using a different DAC system. I will then get in touch with you about that audition of your Pace-Car.

Cheers,

Wayne