Phil Leigh;549305 Wrote: > There is nothing truly "voodoo" about their approach. >
I believe thats the entire sentiment of my last couple of posts. Phil Leigh;549305 Wrote: > > ...And I don't agree with your analysis. S/PDIF is problematic ONLY > because of the practical difficulty of accurately extracting an > ultra-precise clock signal from the "analogue" representation of the > bitstream. Assuming a good transport signal, with proper cabling and a > good enough S/PDIF receiver (+ PSU design) this can be tackled > effectively. > But its practical difficulty created by the shortcomings of the protocol. Why create a problem and then go to great lenghts to solve it, when there are known solutions that avoid it in the first place? Phil Leigh;549305 Wrote: > > But you are only looking at transport-induced jitter. There is still > intrinisc DAC jitter to consider. Sure. But thats orthogonal to the issues discussed in the last couple of posts. -- bhaagensen ------------------------------------------------------------------------ bhaagensen's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=7418 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=78790 _______________________________________________ audiophiles mailing list audiophiles@lists.slimdevices.com http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/audiophiles
