Yes it strange that it seems so hard. The only one I know of was a Mark Levinson DAC that did just that. Do some calculation and take the maximum clock offset allowed on s/pdif and also take into consideration that there migth be a single 75 minute track on a CD - in a bad combo of DAC/Drive klock difference one get into akward delays pushing the Play button (thats what I recall on top of my head anyway - it was 15 years since i did that math). Add that one need a good oscilator in the DAC also.
opaqueice;194705 Wrote: > Sorry - I typed that early in the morning and mixed pico with nano, as > several have pointed out. > > It's not at all equivalent to a lamp with a long wire... What I said > was not that there are no reflections, just that the S/PDIF frequencies > are far below the transmission frequency and therefore reflections and > impedance matching should be far less important than they are for > transmission lines. There may still be a effect, but it should be > quite small - and ps or even ns of jitter is a tiny effect in a 5 MHz > signal. > > In any case, I really don't understand why it's so difficult to deal > with these levels of jitter (which shouldn't come anywhere near to > causing bit errors). It's trivial to design a DAC that is completely > immune to input jitter - just record the bits in a buffer for however > long you need to in order to deal with slight differences in average > clock rates, and then play them out later, using a local clock. That > might not be a convenient solution all the time, but it's a clear > proof-of-principle. Why is it so hard to implement practically? -- jonte0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ jonte0's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=11065 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=34406 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
