Phil Leigh;230122 Wrote:
> Wordclock was not invented to treat jitter!
> It was designed to eliminate the need for debate over who was the
> "clock master" in a studio environment where every digital device is
> potentially a having to generate/recover embedded clocks. This allows
> buffer under/overruns to be avoided and perfect synchronisation at
> sample level of multiple devices.
> Anyone who has tried to use a digital mixing desk with digital synths,
> FX and recorders knows that wordclock is essential - remember that
> these devices are invariably using a mixture of SPDIF, Toslink, AES,
> TDIF, ADAT LP etc etc...
>
> I agree that having a transport driven by a wordclock master in the DAC
> is good general practice. However, I don't think that the benefit is
> lower overall jitter at the DAC. Benchmark, SD (in the TP) et al have
> proven that WC is NOT essential for that purpose.
I realise ezkcdude is able to defend himself and don't mean to
patronize you people, but that's probably not why he said that
("Because there aren't enough of you guys?"), just that if there were
more people like me, that audiophile Squeezebox to replace one's
CD-transport (without DAC and output stage, but a WC input and the
relevant digital outputs) might already be a reality. Needless to say,
this is where I started this thread from: reading through forums here
and elsewhere, I got the impression I'm not alone in wanting this.
Greetings from Switzerland, David.
--
acousticsguru
------------------------------------------------------------------------
acousticsguru's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=13298
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=38637
_______________________________________________
audiophiles mailing list
audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com
http://lists.slimdevices.com/lists/listinfo/audiophiles
