Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
It makes the audio sound better. Just like tubes and oxygen free speaker cables. Darn he has 8 offers already. Must say the front panel is much nicer then what I build. Regards Paul On Sun, May 6, 2012 at 10:39 PM, Jim Palfreyman wrote: > > http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 > > Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. > > My chuckle for the day. > > Jim Palfreyman > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
For the 'Golden Ear' crowd An Audiophool and his money are easily parted by a good sales pitch. The same suckers buy $250,000 turntables and solid silver speaker wires. YMMV, -John > http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 > > Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. > > My chuckle for the day. > > Jim Palfreyman > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Swiss-made? FEI 5660? PRS10? US $5,995? Oh, dear indeed. Nice to know the fiscal predators have predators to bite 'em. Bill Hawkins -Original Message- From: Jim Palfreyman Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 9:40 PM To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Cloc k-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. My chuckle for the day. Jim Palfreyman ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Instead of making fun of the web site, we all need to be more entrepreneurial so that we can fleece, errr, that is, offer a superior product to the audiophiles out there. Think of the add copy: "You don't want to rely on a drifty, low accuracy, secondary rubidium standard for your audio recording and playback needs. Upgrade to our new Chip Scale Cesium Frequency Standard and hear the improved (insert audio buzz words here) that this new cutting edge technology provides." And, you won't need to darken the edges of your CDs with a black felt tipped pen any longer. --- On Sun, 5/6/12, Jim Palfreyman wrote: From: Jim Palfreyman Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" Date: Sunday, May 6, 2012, 7:39 PM http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. My chuckle for the day. Jim Palfreyman ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
It could not be any good if it were any cheaper! Didier KO4BB Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless thingy while I do other things... -Original Message- From: Jim Palfreyman Sender: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 12:39:48 To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Reply-To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. My chuckle for the day. Jim Palfreyman ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Use 12AT7 tubes for the crystal oscillator and distribution amplifier. On Sun, 6 May 2012 20:39:32 -0700 (PDT), Tom Curlee wrote: >Instead of making fun of the web site, we all need to be more entrepreneurial >so that we can fleece, errr, that is, offer a superior product to the >audiophiles out there. Think of the add copy: > >"You don't want to rely on a drifty, low accuracy, secondary rubidium standard >for your audio recording and playback needs. Upgrade to our new Chip Scale >Cesium Frequency Standard and hear the improved (insert audio buzz words here) >that this new cutting edge technology provides." > >And, you won't need to darken the edges of your CDs with a black felt tipped >pen any longer. > >--- On Sun, 5/6/12, Jim Palfreyman wrote: > >From: Jim Palfreyman >Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear >To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" >Date: Sunday, May 6, 2012, 7:39 PM > >http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 > >Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. > >My chuckle for the day. > >Jim Palfreyman ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Anyone remember the Tice Clocks? http://www.stereophile.com/miscellaneous/784/index.html Nine pages of audiophile phun... Dave > -Original Message- > From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com > [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Tom Curlee > Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 8:40 PM > To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > Instead of making fun of the web site, we all need to be more > entrepreneurial so that we can fleece, errr, that is, offer a > superior product to the audiophiles out there. Think of the add copy: > > "You don't want to rely on a drifty, low accuracy, secondary > rubidium standard for your audio recording and playback > needs. Upgrade to our new Chip Scale Cesium Frequency > Standard and hear the improved (insert audio buzz words here) > that this new cutting edge technology provides." > > And, you won't need to darken the edges of your CDs with a > black felt tipped pen any longer. > > > --- On Sun, 5/6/12, Jim Palfreyman wrote: > > From: Jim Palfreyman > Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear > To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement" > > Date: Sunday, May 6, 2012, 7:39 PM > > http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidi > um-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3 > f0d8248a8 > > Make sure you read the description to discover what it's > being sold for. > > My chuckle for the day. > > Jim Palfreyman > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
These people are amazing. They refuse to do any kind of double-blind A/B testing. My favorite thing is that they are trying to extract the maximum "fidelity" from an album or CD that was recorded in a studio with little or no AC power conditioning, whose recording consoles were wired with the cheapest solid and stranded copper wire and whose monitor speakers were probably a pair of cheap Yamaha NS-10's (if you can make something sound good on an NS-10, it will sound good on anything). They claim to like the "warm" sound of their tube equipment but all they are doing is getting second-order distortion from running their tubes into a non-linear region. Tubes distort based on octaves and the distortion product is pleasant. Transistors distort on odd-order harmonics -- 3rds, 5ths, etc... And this sounds very clangerous. FETs are even order and so are often used for audiophile power amplification. The phrase "Placebo Effect" was coined for a reason. Dave > -Original Message- > From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com > [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of J. Forster > Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2012 7:49 PM > To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > For the 'Golden Ear' crowd > > An Audiophool and his money are easily parted by a good sales pitch. > > The same suckers buy $250,000 turntables and solid silver > speaker wires. > > YMMV, > > -John > > > > > > > > > > http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidi > um-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3 > f0d8248a8 > > > > Make sure you read the description to discover what it's > being sold for. > > > > My chuckle for the day. > > > > Jim Palfreyman > > ___ > > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > > To unsubscribe, go to > > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > > and follow the instructions there. > > > > > > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
I once did a test with a "audio expert" and compared a CD and a digital copy. He confirmed that the copy was the original and when I showed him which was which he still refused to believe.. I know a local guy who gold plated the PCBs for his home brewed amp! Raj At 07-05-2012, you wrote: >These people are amazing. > >They refuse to do any kind of double-blind A/B testing. > >My favorite thing is that they are trying to extract the maximum "fidelity" >from an album or CD that was recorded in a studio with little or no AC power >conditioning, whose recording consoles were wired with the cheapest solid >and stranded copper wire and whose monitor speakers were probably a pair of >cheap Yamaha NS-10's (if you can make something sound good on an NS-10, it >will sound good on anything). > >They claim to like the "warm" sound of their tube equipment but all they are >doing is getting second-order distortion from running their tubes into a >non-linear region. Tubes distort based on octaves and the distortion product >is pleasant. Transistors distort on odd-order harmonics -- 3rds, 5ths, >etc... And this sounds very clangerous. FETs are even order and so are >often used for audiophile power amplification. > >The phrase "Placebo Effect" was coined for a reason. > >Dave ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, 07 May 2012 13:40:15 +0530 Raj wrote: > I once did a test with a "audio expert" and compared a CD and a digital copy. > He confirmed that the copy was the original and when I showed him which was > which > he still refused to believe.. I know a local guy who gold plated the PCBs for > his home brewed amp! Well.. there is lots of bogus information going around in the audiophile scene... Probably mostly because todays audio technology is so advanced, that Clarke's 3rd Law applies... But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html It's an MP3 player with high precision timing. It does not only use two TCXOs with <5ps Jitter.. No! It also employes a technique known as "Jitter Kill" for the ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Let's expect the ultimate portable MP3 player with atomic clock reference... >:] Also funny are the offerings with RbO CD-clocks... usually "tweaked" FE-5680s, which are not exactly famous for a clean jitter/spurious free output signal... The only reason is the easiness of output frequency adjustment (for the DDS models) to that of the standard CD clock, which promptly places a premium on the price tag. A good XO is way better and cheaper, with the notable exception of temperature, and long term stability - still waiting for the golden ears capable of hearing that one... On 5/7/2012 12:20 PM, Attila Kinali wrote: On Mon, 07 May 2012 13:40:15 +0530 Raj wrote: I once did a test with a "audio expert" and compared a CD and a digital copy. He confirmed that the copy was the original and when I showed him which was which he still refused to believe.. I know a local guy who gold plated the PCBs for his home brewed amp! Well.. there is lots of bogus information going around in the audiophile scene... Probably mostly because todays audio technology is so advanced, that Clarke's 3rd Law applies... But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html It's an MP3 player with high precision timing. It does not only use two TCXOs with<5ps Jitter.. No! It also employes a technique known as "Jitter Kill" for the ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) Attila Kinali ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
El 07/05/2012 11:20, Attila Kinali escribió: But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html It's an MP3 player with high precision timing. It does not only use two TCXOs with <5ps Jitter.. No! It also employes a technique known as "Jitter Kill" for the ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) Attila Kinali It plays MP3 or uncompressed audio? ;). And the sliding potentiotemer... prone to all kinds of noises and imbalance, and the nice wood enclosure, hand engraved, of course manufactured in a controlled temperature and humidity environment, that no doubt has a very positive effect on the sound, probably as good as the EMC shielding that provides. Also I love this paragraph "On month day of year, the technique of circuit named Jitter Kill was registered as a patent for the other special technique of the Pocket HIFI player". When was/will be month day of year? excellent accuracy :) I imagine Steve Wan and his team laughing out loud everytime their get a purchase order. Regards, Javier ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
An old saying: "a fool and his money are often parted". Sums things up nicely I feel. Rob Kimberley -Original Message- From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Javier Herrero Sent: 07 May 2012 11:30 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear El 07/05/2012 11:20, Attila Kinali escribió: > But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at > http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html It's an MP3 player with high > precision timing. It does not only use two TCXOs with <5ps Jitter.. > No! It also employes a technique known as "Jitter Kill" for the > ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) Attila Kinali It plays MP3 or uncompressed audio? ;). And the sliding potentiotemer... prone to all kinds of noises and imbalance, and the nice wood enclosure, hand engraved, of course manufactured in a controlled temperature and humidity environment, that no doubt has a very positive effect on the sound, probably as good as the EMC shielding that provides. Also I love this paragraph "On month day of year, the technique of circuit named Jitter Kill was registered as a patent for the other special technique of the Pocket HIFI player". When was/will be month day of year? excellent accuracy :) I imagine Steve Wan and his team laughing out loud everytime their get a purchase order. Regards, Javier ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
How does the fool get his money? Chris Stake > -Original Message- > From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On > Behalf Of Rob Kimberley > Sent: 07 May 2012 11:55 > To: 'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement' > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > An old saying: "a fool and his money are often parted". > > Sums things up nicely I feel. > > Rob Kimberley > > -Original Message- > From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On > Behalf Of Javier Herrero > Sent: 07 May 2012 11:30 > To: time-nuts@febo.com > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > El 07/05/2012 11:20, Attila Kinali escribió: > > But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at > > http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html It's an MP3 player with high > > precision timing. It does not only use two TCXOs with <5ps Jitter.. > > No! It also employes a technique known as "Jitter Kill" for the > > ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) Attila Kinali > > It plays MP3 or uncompressed audio? ;). And the sliding potentiotemer... > prone to all kinds of noises and imbalance, and the nice wood enclosure, > hand engraved, of course manufactured in a controlled temperature and > humidity environment, that no doubt has a very positive effect on the > sound, > probably as good as the EMC shielding that provides. Also I love this > paragraph "On month day of year, the technique of circuit named Jitter > Kill > was registered as a patent for the other special technique of the Pocket > HIFI player". When was/will be month day of year? > excellent accuracy :) > > I imagine Steve Wan and his team laughing out loud everytime their get a > purchase order. > > Regards, > > Javier > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time- > nuts > and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
>But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at >http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html >It's an MP3 player with high precision timing. It does not only use >two TCXOs with <5ps Jitter.. No! It also employes a technique known >as "Jitter Kill" for the ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) > >Attila Kinali Very interesting gadget, I quote: "In 1877, Edison invented a kind of recording installment which recorded 8 seconds sounds for the first time in the world. " Installment ?? Raj ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
I must get one of their line cords to see if it will improve my timing system!! You just have to laugh at this nonsense. Rob K -Original Message- From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Burt I. Weiner Sent: 07 May 2012 15:39 To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear A friend of mine signed me up for a catalog from the "Audio Advisor". He said I deserved this - I was afraid to ask what he meant by that! Spend a few minutes looking over this site: http://www.audioadvisor.com/ Be sure to check out their "Power cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords Burt, K6OQK >From: "Rob Kimberley" >To: "'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'" > >Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > >An old saying: "a fool and his money are often parted". > >Sums things up nicely I feel. > >Rob Kimberley Burt I. Weiner Associates Broadcast Technical Services Glendale, California U.S.A. b...@att.net www.biwa.cc K6OQK ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message <226574.14407...@smtp104.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com>, "Burt I. Weiner" w rites: > Be sure to check out their >"Power cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords I always wondered how the distortion could stop right at the power outlet, but I see that somebody has cornered that market now. Next step will be to try to sell them electricity produced on turbogenerators aligned to the earths magnetic field in order to deliver minimal low unharmonic distotion... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Nope. Any Audiophool knows green electricity sounds much better, without any artifacts produced by those annoying carbon atoms in coal, oil, or natural gas, rattling around producing annoying distractions. -John > In message <226574.14407...@smtp104.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com>, "Burt I. > Weiner" w > rites: > >> Be sure to check out their >>"Power cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords > > I always wondered how the distortion could stop right at the power > outlet, but I see that somebody has cornered that market now. > > Next step will be to try to sell them electricity produced on > turbogenerators aligned to the earths magnetic field in order > to deliver minimal low unharmonic distotion... > > > > -- > Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 > p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 > FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe > Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by > incompetence. > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On 5/7/12 7:39 AM, Burt I. Weiner wrote: A friend of mine signed me up for a catalog from the "Audio Advisor". He said I deserved this - I was afraid to ask what he meant by that! Spend a few minutes looking over this site: http://www.audioadvisor.com/ Be sure to check out their "Power cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords Burt, K6OQK Well.. this is where folks on this list can do the world a service.. The whole thing about timing, stability, phase noise, Allan deviations, etc. *is* complex, and it's tricky to come up with easy to understand, short, descriptions of "why using a Rb for your CD player is BS". We've all had to learn this stuff, and we do it in different ways, so maybe the collective hive-mind is a good way to come up with decent responses (after the initial wave of "can you believe it") It's like explaining RF exposure limits. There's a certain amount of physics you have to know in order to understand how the limits work. Most people do understand what's BS and what's not, once they understand why. -> the recent GPS filtering thing.. it took a YEAR for someone in the PNT community to finally come up with a good, simple explanation of why L^2 arguments were invalid. And it comes down to the fact that GPS isn't a communication link, so you can't use that conceptual model to analyze it. Once you get that, then people go "oh! That's why we can't do that and have it still work" And, on a more technically sophisticated level, there's lots of engineers who are still wrapping their heads around the duality of time domain (ADEV) and frequency domain (Phase noise) measurements, and when you might use one or the other. I've found a lot of good stuff on this list for explaining it (and improving my own understanding.. nothing like needing to explain it to someone else to test your own conceptual understanding) Interestingly, setting someone up with a counter, timelab, and a not so hot function generator and letting them record and play for a couple days (or over the weekend) is a great way. You see things like diurnal variation, the HVAC cycling on and off, the sun shining through the window. The spectrum analyzer does the phase noise thing fairly well (although not for "close in"), and concepts like reciprocal mixing from a noisy LO gunking up your narrow band signal are pretty obvious. After that it's practical applications.. Just how bad can the noise be for a particular application? Are you interested in integrated jitter? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
And for those who want a good debunking article to show to their non-technical friends: http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/power-cables On 5/7/2012 8:01 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: In message<226574.14407...@smtp104.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com>, "Burt I. Weiner" w rites: Be sure to check out their "Power cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords I always wondered how the distortion could stop right at the power outlet, but I see that somebody has cornered that market now. Next step will be to try to sell them electricity produced on turbogenerators aligned to the earths magnetic field in order to deliver minimal low unharmonic distotion... ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message <52252.12.6.201.2.1336403114.squir...@popaccts.quikus.com>, "J. Fors ter" writes: >Any Audiophool knows green electricity sounds much better, without any >artifacts produced by those annoying carbon atoms in coal, oil, or natural >gas, rattling around producing annoying distractions. Unless, of course, you burn pure diamonds... -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
All this kerfuffle about that Rubidium Clock kind of misses the point. This is not some "Audiophool" thing but a serious piece of gear used for recording studios. I am not going to get into the pricing of it, but if you add up the cost of a /new/ Rb unit, distribution amp, power supply and back up batteries built into a case, it starts to add up. I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the Master Clock for your master recordings. My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to believe him. What could be more "time nuts" than wanting a precise clock? Dan ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message <4fa7e639.9090...@earthlink.net>, Jim Lux writes: >Well.. this is where folks on this list can do the world a service.. > >The whole thing about timing, stability, phase noise, Allan deviations, >etc. *is* complex, and it's tricky to come up with easy to understand, >short, descriptions of "why using a Rb for your CD player is BS". You seem to be working under the assumption that they care about the measurable reality. They do not. This is about bling and about being better than the brother-in-law at something, it has nothing to do with sound. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
This is the most ridiculous discussion in the history of this group. If anyone could sympathize with the need for super-timing on audio it should be those of you who think you need cesium clocks in your homes. -RL --- Robert Lutwak | SymmetricomR, Inc. Chief Scientist -Original Message- From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Burt I. Weiner Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 10:39 AM To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear A friend of mine signed me up for a catalog from the "Audio Advisor". He said I deserved this - I was afraid to ask what he meant by that! Spend a few minutes looking over this site: http://www.audioadvisor.com/ Be sure to check out their "Power cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords Burt, K6OQK >From: "Rob Kimberley" >To: "'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'" > >Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > >An old saying: "a fool and his money are often parted". > >Sums things up nicely I feel. > >Rob Kimberley Burt I. Weiner Associates Broadcast Technical Services Glendale, California U.S.A. b...@att.net www.biwa.cc K6OQK ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
As an Audiophile and T-Nut I am often torn by what could affect sound quality, but I have realized that there are many things that affect sound that as engineers we have not learned to define. As a scientist I look forward to the day we can accurately rate how equipment will sound in mathematical terms. I fact in the next month I will be working on a project that covers both my Time Nut and Audio passions with one of the music industries leading engineers Gus Skinas who has lead the development of the SACD. Jitter is a concern in digital audio and we are going to use a Cesium standard and low phase noise clean-up oscillator during recording and playback to determine the degree that timing affects sound quality. I am still not ready to spent thousands on power cords. Thomas Knox > From: robkimber...@btinternet.com > To: time-nuts@febo.com > Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 15:55:15 +0100 > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > I must get one of their line cords to see if it will improve my timing > system!! > > You just have to laugh at this nonsense. > > Rob K > > -Original Message- > From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On > Behalf Of Burt I. Weiner > Sent: 07 May 2012 15:39 > To: time-nuts@febo.com > Subject: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > A friend of mine signed me up for a catalog from the "Audio Advisor". He > said I deserved this - I was afraid to ask what he meant by that! Spend a > few minutes looking over this > site: http://www.audioadvisor.com/ Be sure to check out their "Power > cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords > > Burt, K6OQK > > > >From: "Rob Kimberley" > >To: "'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'" > > > >Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > > > > >An old saying: "a fool and his money are often parted". > > > >Sums things up nicely I feel. > > > >Rob Kimberley > > Burt I. Weiner Associates > Broadcast Technical Services > Glendale, California U.S.A. > b...@att.net > www.biwa.cc > K6OQK > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
A crummy crystal oscillator zero beated to WWV is good to 1 in 10E6, a Rb disciplined to GPS maybe 1 in 10E11. Do you seriously think you, or anybody, can hear a pitch difference of 0.001 Hz in the audio range? A quartz crystal is plenty good for any audio application, IMO. -John = > All this kerfuffle about that Rubidium Clock kind of misses the point. > This is not some "Audiophool" thing but a serious piece of gear used for > recording studios. I am not going to get into the pricing of it, but if > you add up the cost of a /new/ Rb unit, distribution amp, power supply > and back up batteries built into a case, it starts to add up. > > I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the > Master Clock for your master recordings. > > My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version > of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves > the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to > believe him. > > What could be more "time nuts" than wanting a precise clock? > > Dan > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
> >> In message <226574.14407...@smtp104.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com>, "Burt I. >> Weiner" w >> rites: >> >> Next step will be to try to sell them electricity produced on >> turbogenerators aligned to the earths magnetic field in order >> to deliver minimal low unharmonic distotion... I've been thinking I should be selling motor/generators to this idiots. Basically it is just an AC alternator that is belt driven by an electric motor. It produces very clean power as there is no electrical connection to the grid. The rubber belt is non-conductive. It is useless and not needed but at least uses "real science" and works as advertised. >> -- >> Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 Not to try and one up you or anything but... I remember using 7th ed on a Vax780. It was a novelty we had no real use for it. Must have beed about the time timeframe as your Zilog machine. Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, 07 May 2012 08:20:55 -0700 Dan Rae wrote: > I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the > Master Clock for your master recordings. > > My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version > of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves > the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to > believe him. The thing is, that an Rb is good for one thing: Have a long term stable and accurate frequency source that is better than 1 to some billions for measurement or other stuff that take more than a few hours or have to be repeated exactly in a couple of weeks. For audio, you need a frequency source that is stable over a couple of hours (probably a working day) and shows "low" jitter. Where as low jitter is quite high in time-nuts terms and stable not stable at all. A cycle-to-cylcle jitter of a couple of ns is not audioable at all, but any Rb will have a much lower jitter. Or to have a different look at it, you want to have very low phase noise, as this phase noise is mixed in over the ADCs into your signal. But as we know, the phase noise of an Rb is not defined by the Rb physics package, but by the OCXO they use. (yes i know that the close in phase noise is defined by the reference and not by the OCXO, but the "base level" is the OCXO, not the reference) As for stability. You want the instruments to sound the same over an recording. Ie the human ear has to preceive the recorded sound as the same. The frequency resolution of the human ear is somewhere around 3Hz. This makes for 150ppm (at 20kHz). Even a 32kHz tuning fork crystal achieves an absolute accuracy that is better than this. Its stability is much better than this Of course, you want to have enought headroom for other non ideal components. So, lets say, go for a factor of 10, then we are at 15ppm. For absolute accuracy, that's already a good XO. For stability, still most XO should do that. Or to say it differently: Using some good OCXO with low or very low phase noise would be more than enough for even the most high end audio equipment. You don't even have to discipline it, as a even quite bad OCXO has variations much lower than 1ppm, which is definitly not something anyone can hear. IMHO getting a 20-50USD OCXO from ebay, some good, low noise power supply (audio power supplies with low noise in the <40kHz region), some distribution amplifier with low noise figure and you are set. All in all probably at a cost of 200-300USD including rack mount. If you want to have "high fidelity" you can use an GPSDO to get your OCXO within a couple mHz. To summarize: Nobody here does want to insult anyone who does professional audio recordings. But having the knowledge of what the stability and accuracy numbers for an ordinary Rb mean, and being able to put that into perspective with the not so good capabilties of the human sensory systems, one wonders why people spend an awfull lot of money for something that has no audiable effect over something a lot cheaper. Not to mention that other things have a much higher impact on audio quality than the reference oscillator: Like temperature and humidity during recording (do you control them as well to the ppm level?), or the tuning of the instruments which wanders quite a bit during use. Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount of jitter in a DAC (X) can have a large difference (Y) when sampling a complex wave form especially in the audiophile world where the sound of 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete levels is clearly superior to older 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1 KHz to 192 KHz formats. Thomas Knox > Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 17:59:04 +0200 > From: att...@kinali.ch > To: time-nuts@febo.com > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > On Mon, 07 May 2012 08:20:55 -0700 > Dan Rae wrote: > > > I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the > > Master Clock for your master recordings. > > > > My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version > > of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves > > the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to > > believe him. > > The thing is, that an Rb is good for one thing: Have a long term > stable and accurate frequency source that is better than 1 to some > billions for measurement or other stuff that take more than a few > hours or have to be repeated exactly in a couple of weeks. > > For audio, you need a frequency source that is stable over a couple > of hours (probably a working day) and shows "low" jitter. Where as low > jitter is quite high in time-nuts terms and stable not stable at all. > A cycle-to-cylcle jitter of a couple of ns is not audioable at all, > but any Rb will have a much lower jitter. Or to have a different look at it, > you want to have very low phase noise, as this phase noise is mixed in > over the ADCs into your signal. But as we know, the phase noise of > an Rb is not defined by the Rb physics package, but by the OCXO they use. > (yes i know that the close in phase noise is defined by the reference > and not by the OCXO, but the "base level" is the OCXO, not the reference) > > As for stability. You want the instruments to sound the same over an > recording. Ie the human ear has to preceive the recorded sound as the > same. The frequency resolution of the human ear is somewhere around 3Hz. > This makes for 150ppm (at 20kHz). Even a 32kHz tuning fork crystal > achieves an absolute accuracy that is better than this. Its stability is much > better than this > Of course, you want to have enought headroom for other non ideal components. > So, lets say, go for a factor of 10, then we are at 15ppm. For absolute > accuracy, that's already a good XO. For stability, still most XO should > do that. > > Or to say it differently: Using some good OCXO with low or very low > phase noise would be more than enough for even the most high end > audio equipment. You don't even have to discipline it, as a even > quite bad OCXO has variations much lower than 1ppm, which is definitly > not something anyone can hear. > > IMHO getting a 20-50USD OCXO from ebay, some good, low noise power supply > (audio power supplies with low noise in the <40kHz region), some distribution > amplifier with low noise figure and you are set. All in all probably at > a cost of 200-300USD including rack mount. If you want to have "high fidelity" > you can use an GPSDO to get your OCXO within a couple mHz. > > To summarize: Nobody here does want to insult anyone who does professional > audio recordings. But having the knowledge of what the stability and > accuracy numbers for an ordinary Rb mean, and being able to put that into > perspective with the not so good capabilties of the human sensory systems, > one wonders why people spend an awfull lot of money for something that has > no audiable effect over something a lot cheaper. Not to mention that other > things have a much higher impact on audio quality than the reference > oscillator: Like temperature and humidity during recording (do you control > them as well to the ppm level?), or the tuning of the instruments which > wanders quite a bit during use. > > Attila Kinali > > -- > Why does it take years to find the answers to > the questions one should have asked long ago? > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Actually in digital audio playback timing is just as important except that there is no was to remove jitter during poor recordings. Thomas Knox > Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 08:20:55 -0700 > From: dan...@verizon.net > To: time-nuts@febo.com > Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear > > All this kerfuffle about that Rubidium Clock kind of misses the point. > This is not some "Audiophool" thing but a serious piece of gear used for > recording studios. I am not going to get into the pricing of it, but if > you add up the cost of a /new/ Rb unit, distribution amp, power supply > and back up batteries built into a case, it starts to add up. > > I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the > Master Clock for your master recordings. > > My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version > of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves > the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to > believe him. > > What could be more "time nuts" than wanting a precise clock? > > Dan > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, 7 May 2012 10:02:25 -0600 Tom Knox wrote: > > Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount > of jitter in a DAC (X) can have a large difference (Y) when sampling a > complex wave form especially in the audiophile world where the sound of > 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete levels is clearly superior to older > 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1 KHz to 192 KHz formats. Yes, i know that jitter is a pain when it comes to ADCs, but keep in mind that your audio ADC does have a jitter of a couple 100ps itself. If it's a high end ADC that is. The standard ADCs are usually in the ns range. For a normal 10MHz XO you measure the jitter in in the lower 10ps at most, a good one at lower than 1ps cycle-to-cycle. Of course, you have to keep the clock signal clean of any disturbance that might add modulations to it. But that's a matter of keeping the power supply clean and having the signal shielded. It's not an inherent property of an Rb to have low jitter. And as we all know from the recent hype on the FE-5860As and the following measurements, not all Rb's are low jitter. Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, 7 May 2012 18:19:19 +0200 Attila Kinali wrote: > Of course, you have > to keep the clock signal clean of any disturbance that might add modulations > to it. But that's a matter of keeping the power supply clean and having the > signal shielded. It's not an inherent property of an Rb to have low jitter. > And as we all know from the recent hype on the FE-5860As and the > following measurements, not all Rb's are low jitter. Addendum: Just to make sure it doesn't sound like i think that engineering audio devices is easy. Dealing with audioable frequencies is probably one of the most tedious tasks you can give to an electrical engineer these days. You have to deal with very low frequencies and you are not allowed to do averaging... Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
If you take into consideration that the best currently available DACs, also true for analog circuits, have a dynamic range about 120-126dB, the last 3-4 bits are quite irrelevant (random noise mostly)... a good 20bit DAC already pushes the limits. The marketingdroids swarming for the newest "32" bitters is even more ludicrous. On the other side, the dynamic range of the ear (if you care the least for the future of your hearing), and of the quietest available listening spaces, hardly gets to 100dB... Of course, for the DSPs involved in the signal chain, 32bits integer math might not be enough, due to rounding errors. On 5/7/2012 7:02 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount of jitter in a DAC (X) can have a large difference (Y) when sampling a complex wave form especially in the audiophile world where the sound of 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete levels is clearly superior to older 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1 KHz to 192 KHz formats. Thomas Knox Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 17:59:04 +0200 From: att...@kinali.ch To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear On Mon, 07 May 2012 08:20:55 -0700 Dan Rae wrote: I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the Master Clock for your master recordings. My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to believe him. The thing is, that an Rb is good for one thing: Have a long term stable and accurate frequency source that is better than 1 to some billions for measurement or other stuff that take more than a few hours or have to be repeated exactly in a couple of weeks. For audio, you need a frequency source that is stable over a couple of hours (probably a working day) and shows "low" jitter. Where as low jitter is quite high in time-nuts terms and stable not stable at all. A cycle-to-cylcle jitter of a couple of ns is not audioable at all, but any Rb will have a much lower jitter. Or to have a different look at it, you want to have very low phase noise, as this phase noise is mixed in over the ADCs into your signal. But as we know, the phase noise of an Rb is not defined by the Rb physics package, but by the OCXO they use. (yes i know that the close in phase noise is defined by the reference and not by the OCXO, but the "base level" is the OCXO, not the reference) As for stability. You want the instruments to sound the same over an recording. Ie the human ear has to preceive the recorded sound as the same. The frequency resolution of the human ear is somewhere around 3Hz. This makes for 150ppm (at 20kHz). Even a 32kHz tuning fork crystal achieves an absolute accuracy that is better than this. Its stability is much better than this Of course, you want to have enought headroom for other non ideal components. So, lets say, go for a factor of 10, then we are at 15ppm. For absolute accuracy, that's already a good XO. For stability, still most XO should do that. Or to say it differently: Using some good OCXO with low or very low phase noise would be more than enough for even the most high end audio equipment. You don't even have to discipline it, as a even quite bad OCXO has variations much lower than 1ppm, which is definitly not something anyone can hear. IMHO getting a 20-50USD OCXO from ebay, some good, low noise power supply (audio power supplies with low noise in the<40kHz region), some distribution amplifier with low noise figure and you are set. All in all probably at a cost of 200-300USD including rack mount. If you want to have "high fidelity" you can use an GPSDO to get your OCXO within a couple mHz. To summarize: Nobody here does want to insult anyone who does professional audio recordings. But having the knowledge of what the stability and accuracy numbers for an ordinary Rb mean, and being able to put that into perspective with the not so good capabilties of the human sensory systems, one wonders why people spend an awfull lot of money for something that has no audiable effect over something a lot cheaper. Not to mention that other things have a much higher impact on audio quality than the reference oscillator: Like temperature and humidity during recording (do you control them as well to the ppm level?), or the tuning of the instruments which wanders quite a bit during use. Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mai
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
It has nothing to do with engineering. "Artists", and I use the word with a huge bag of salt, are often Prima Donnas. They are under the illusion that their works are masterpieces, because they sell millions of copies on iTunes or elsewhere, or theit concerts are sold out in two minutes. So, naturally, every nuance of their work needs THE most elaborate equipment to reproduce it in every breathless detail. So, to cater to the "talent", studios build bigger, more impressive, facilities, to attract them. It's almost entirely a marketing enterprise. The hucksters leading the gullible at all levels. I have a friend who is very into classical music. He spent tens of thousands on a sound system. I then suggested he spend a few hundred and go listen to the Boston Symphony live and in person. He was really bummed out for months afterwards. Now he has taken up collecting records, yes vinyl. Go figure, -John == [snip] > To summarize: Nobody here does want to insult anyone who does professional > audio recordings. But having the knowledge of what the stability and > accuracy numbers for an ordinary Rb mean, and being able to put that into > perspective with the not so good capabilties of the human sensory systems, > one wonders why people spend an awfull lot of money for something that has > no audiable effect over something a lot cheaper. Not to mention that other > things have a much higher impact on audio quality than the reference > oscillator: Like temperature and humidity during recording (do you control > them as well to the ppm level?), or the tuning of the instruments which > wanders quite a bit during use. > > Attila Kinali > > -- > Why does it take years to find the answers to > the questions one should have asked long ago? > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On 5/6/2012 7:39 PM, Jim Palfreyman wrote: http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. My chuckle for the day. Jim Palfreyman ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. Audiophools strike again Randy ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 8:59 AM, Attila Kinali wrote: > On Mon, 07 May 2012 08:20:55 -0700 > Dan Rae wrote: > >> I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the >> Master Clock for your master recordings. You are right about that. But there are better clocks at 1/10th of the price. Also in a recording studio, many times you need to phase lock to an existing source and you do NOT want to be dead-on to some specific frequency. Jitter matters more then being frequency accurate. And end use would never hear a 1E-6 absolute frequency error, and I mean "never". But relative frequency errors and jitter is audible As for audiophool's home playback systems there is no need at all for an Rb clock. They would do much better with an $50 OCXO in a box. Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Hi Be careful when you talk about jitter of any device, OCXO's included. There is always an implied bandwidth in the conversion of phase noise to jitter. If you extend the bandwidth down low enough (as in low audio) the jitter goes up quite a bit. In the case of audio, jitter at low frequencies just might be something to worry about. Bob -Original Message- From: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-boun...@febo.com] On Behalf Of Attila Kinali Sent: Monday, May 07, 2012 12:19 PM To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear On Mon, 7 May 2012 10:02:25 -0600 Tom Knox wrote: > > Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount > of jitter in a DAC (X) can have a large difference (Y) when sampling a > complex wave form especially in the audiophile world where the sound of > 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete levels is clearly superior to older > 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1 KHz to 192 KHz formats. Yes, i know that jitter is a pain when it comes to ADCs, but keep in mind that your audio ADC does have a jitter of a couple 100ps itself. If it's a high end ADC that is. The standard ADCs are usually in the ns range. For a normal 10MHz XO you measure the jitter in in the lower 10ps at most, a good one at lower than 1ps cycle-to-cycle. Of course, you have to keep the clock signal clean of any disturbance that might add modulations to it. But that's a matter of keeping the power supply clean and having the signal shielded. It's not an inherent property of an Rb to have low jitter. And as we all know from the recent hype on the FE-5860As and the following measurements, not all Rb's are low jitter. Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Isn't "long term stability" an oxymoron? Or, put another way, a Murphy Mantra? Don MailLists > Let's expect the ultimate portable MP3 player with atomic clock > reference... >:] > > Also funny are the offerings with RbO CD-clocks... usually "tweaked" > FE-5680s, which are not exactly famous for a clean jitter/spurious free > output signal... The only reason is the easiness of output frequency > adjustment (for the DDS models) to that of the standard CD clock, which > promptly places a premium on the price tag. > A good XO is way better and cheaper, with the notable exception of > temperature, and long term stability - still waiting for the golden ears > capable of hearing that one... > > On 5/7/2012 12:20 PM, Attila Kinali wrote: >> On Mon, 07 May 2012 13:40:15 +0530 >> Raj wrote: >> >>> I once did a test with a "audio expert" and compared a CD and a >>> digital copy. >>> He confirmed that the copy was the original and when I showed him >>> which was which >>> he still refused to believe.. I know a local guy who gold plated the >>> PCBs for his home brewed amp! >> >> >> Well.. there is lots of bogus information going around in the >> audiophile >> scene... Probably mostly because todays audio technology is so >> advanced, >> that Clarke's 3rd Law applies... >> >> But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at >> http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html >> It's an MP3 player with high precision timing. It does not only use >> two TCXOs with<5ps Jitter.. No! It also employes a technique known >> as "Jitter Kill" for the ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) >> >> Attila Kinali > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > -- "Neither the voice of authority nor the weight of reason and argument are as significant as experiment, for thence comes quiet to the mind." R. Bacon "If you don't know what it is, don't poke it." Ghost in the Shell Dr. Don Latham AJ7LL Six Mile Systems LLP 17850 Six Mile Road POB 134 Huson, MT, 59846 VOX 406-626-4304 www.lightningforensics.com www.sixmilesystems.com ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On 5/7/2012 2:20 AM, Attila Kinali wrote: On Mon, 07 May 2012 13:40:15 +0530 Raj wrote: I once did a test with a "audio expert" and compared a CD and a digital copy. He confirmed that the copy was the original and when I showed him which was which he still refused to believe.. I know a local guy who gold plated the PCBs for his home brewed amp! Well.. there is lots of bogus information going around in the audiophile scene... Probably mostly because todays audio technology is so advanced, that Clarke's 3rd Law applies... But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html It's an MP3 player with high precision timing. It does not only use two TCXOs with<5ps Jitter.. No! It also employes a technique known as "Jitter Kill" for the ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) Attila Kinali Yup! Audiophools strike again. . . Randy ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Suppose you have a perfect, ideal clock that puts out 'convert' pulses at an exact rate is used to strobe a high precision A/D. Now suppose you add jitter to that perfect clock so that the rate stays the same but time interval between successive pulses varies randomly between P(1-x) and P(1+x). How big would x have to be before anyone could detect any difference in the sound? I have my opinion, but what is yours and why? -John === > On Mon, 7 May 2012 10:02:25 -0600 > Tom Knox wrote: > >> >> Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount >> of jitter in a DAC (X) can have a large difference (Y) when sampling a >> complex wave form especially in the audiophile world where the sound of >> 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete levels is clearly superior to older >> 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1 KHz to 192 KHz formats. > > Yes, i know that jitter is a pain when it comes to ADCs, but keep > in mind that your audio ADC does have a jitter of a couple > 100ps itself. If it's a high end ADC that is. The standard ADCs are > usually > in the ns range. For a normal 10MHz XO you measure the jitter in in the > lower > 10ps at most, a good one at lower than 1ps cycle-to-cycle. Of course, you > have > to keep the clock signal clean of any disturbance that might add > modulations > to it. But that's a matter of keeping the power supply clean and having > the > signal shielded. It's not an inherent property of an Rb to have low > jitter. > And as we all know from the recent hype on the FE-5860As and the > following measurements, not all Rb's are low jitter. > > Attila Kinali > > -- > Why does it take years to find the answers to > the questions one should have asked long ago? > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
One of my other avocations is precision shooting. I would not like to engage in a contest to see which bunch of aficionados has more folklore Don Javier Herrero > El 07/05/2012 11:20, Attila Kinali escribió: >> But to bring this back to time nutty topics, have a look at >> http://www.colorfly.eu/product.html It's an MP3 player with high >> precision timing. It does not only use two TCXOs with <5ps Jitter.. >> No! It also employes a technique known as "Jitter Kill" for the >> ultimate mobile sound experience! :-) Attila Kinali > > It plays MP3 or uncompressed audio? ;). And the sliding potentiotemer... > prone to all kinds of noises and imbalance, and the nice wood enclosure, > hand engraved, of course manufactured in a controlled temperature and > humidity environment, that no doubt has a very positive effect on the > sound, probably as good as the EMC shielding that provides. Also I love > this paragraph "On month day of year, the technique of circuit named > Jitter Kill was registered as a patent for the other special technique > of the Pocket HIFI player". When was/will be month day of year? > excellent accuracy :) > > I imagine Steve Wan and his team laughing out loud everytime their get a > purchase order. > > Regards, > > Javier > > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > -- "Neither the voice of authority nor the weight of reason and argument are as significant as experiment, for thence comes quiet to the mind." R. Bacon "If you don't know what it is, don't poke it." Ghost in the Shell Dr. Don Latham AJ7LL Six Mile Systems LLP 17850 Six Mile Road POB 134 Huson, MT, 59846 VOX 406-626-4304 www.lightningforensics.com www.sixmilesystems.com ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Nearly all modern recordings are "multiple mono". One microphone per instrument
if not more. Multiple overdubs. If high ticket artists are collaborating, they
may be recorded at different times. (Bruce Springsteen and Rosanne Cash duet
for example.) They want a high bit depth so the final product doesn't have a
high background noise.
The classic back of the envelope calculation regarding clock jitter is based on
44.1KHz sampling and a 20KHz sine wave. Take the maximum slew rate of the sine
wave and the timing uncertainty (jitter), then compare to a LSB. It doesn't
take much jitter even at 16 bits to be significant.
Modern ADCs are MASH. I don't know the analog to the argument for that
technology.
-Original Message-
From: MailLists
Sender: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 19:31:10
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Reply-To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
If you take into consideration that the best currently available DACs,
also true for analog circuits, have a dynamic range about 120-126dB, the
last 3-4 bits are quite irrelevant (random noise mostly)... a good 20bit
DAC already pushes the limits.
The marketingdroids swarming for the newest "32" bitters is even more
ludicrous.
On the other side, the dynamic range of the ear (if you care the least
for the future of your hearing), and of the quietest available listening
spaces, hardly gets to 100dB...
Of course, for the DSPs involved in the signal chain, 32bits integer
math might not be enough, due to rounding errors.
On 5/7/2012 7:02 PM, Tom Knox wrote:
>
> Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount of
> jitter in a DAC (X) can
> have a large difference (Y) when sampling a complex wave form especially
> in the audiophile world where the sound of 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete
> levels is clearly superior to older 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1
> KHz to 192 KHz formats.
>
> Thomas Knox
>
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 17:59:04 +0200
>> From: att...@kinali.ch
>> To: time-nuts@febo.com
>> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
>>
>> On Mon, 07 May 2012 08:20:55 -0700
>> Dan Rae wrote:
>>
>>> I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the
>>> Master Clock for your master recordings.
>>>
>>> My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version
>>> of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves
>>> the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to
>>> believe him.
>>
>> The thing is, that an Rb is good for one thing: Have a long term
>> stable and accurate frequency source that is better than 1 to some
>> billions for measurement or other stuff that take more than a few
>> hours or have to be repeated exactly in a couple of weeks.
>>
>> For audio, you need a frequency source that is stable over a couple
>> of hours (probably a working day) and shows "low" jitter. Where as low
>> jitter is quite high in time-nuts terms and stable not stable at all.
>> A cycle-to-cylcle jitter of a couple of ns is not audioable at all,
>> but any Rb will have a much lower jitter. Or to have a different look at it,
>> you want to have very low phase noise, as this phase noise is mixed in
>> over the ADCs into your signal. But as we know, the phase noise of
>> an Rb is not defined by the Rb physics package, but by the OCXO they use.
>> (yes i know that the close in phase noise is defined by the reference
>> and not by the OCXO, but the "base level" is the OCXO, not the reference)
>>
>> As for stability. You want the instruments to sound the same over an
>> recording. Ie the human ear has to preceive the recorded sound as the
>> same. The frequency resolution of the human ear is somewhere around 3Hz.
>> This makes for 150ppm (at 20kHz). Even a 32kHz tuning fork crystal
>> achieves an absolute accuracy that is better than this. Its stability is much
>> better than this
>> Of course, you want to have enought headroom for other non ideal components.
>> So, lets say, go for a factor of 10, then we are at 15ppm. For absolute
>> accuracy, that's already a good XO. For stability, still most XO should
>> do that.
>>
>> Or to say it differently: Using some good OCXO with low or very low
>> phase noise would be more than enough for even the most high end
>> audio equipment. You don't even have to discipline it, as a even
>> quite bad OCXO has variations much lower than 1ppm, which is definitly
>> not something anyone can hear.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
That was a big problem with the dynamic range of tape recorders, which had to be solved with noise reduction circuits. Even good 16 bit ADCs have a higher DR than the SNR of most instruments in quiet recording studios. With the mixing of multiple dubs, the main problem is the summed background noise, not that of the ADCs. When doing the mix digitally, a DAW with higher bit depth is needed, to conserve the DR: 16 tracks need another 4 bits. The downmix can then be truncated to the final media bit depth (eventually with some dither added, if not self-dithered due to noise). The main problem with the old CD format wasn't actually the DR, the SR was chosen too low. One of the famous audiophile studios (Chesky Records) expressly avoids overdubbing, and postprocessing, and puts accent on the microphone placement. That's real art, unlike some "sound engineer" using heavy processing, and turning up the compression control, for a "louder sound". "Modern" AD/DA-Cs are mostly sigma-delta for technological, and cost reasons. The better ones are also multi-bit... On 5/7/2012 7:59 PM, li...@lazygranch.com wrote: Nearly all modern recordings are "multiple mono". One microphone per instrument if not more. Multiple overdubs. If high ticket artists are collaborating, they may be recorded at different times. (Bruce Springsteen and Rosanne Cash duet for example.) They want a high bit depth so the final product doesn't have a high background noise. The classic back of the envelope calculation regarding clock jitter is based on 44.1KHz sampling and a 20KHz sine wave. Take the maximum slew rate of the sine wave and the timing uncertainty (jitter), then compare to a LSB. It doesn't take much jitter even at 16 bits to be significant. Modern ADCs are MASH. I don't know the analog to the argument for that technology. -Original Message- From: MailLists Sender: time-nuts-boun...@febo.com Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 19:31:10 To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Reply-To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear If you take into consideration that the best currently available DACs, also true for analog circuits, have a dynamic range about 120-126dB, the last 3-4 bits are quite irrelevant (random noise mostly)... a good 20bit DAC already pushes the limits. The marketingdroids swarming for the newest "32" bitters is even more ludicrous. On the other side, the dynamic range of the ear (if you care the least for the future of your hearing), and of the quietest available listening spaces, hardly gets to 100dB... Of course, for the DSPs involved in the signal chain, 32bits integer math might not be enough, due to rounding errors. On 5/7/2012 7:02 PM, Tom Knox wrote: Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount of jitter in a DAC (X) can have a large difference (Y) when sampling a complex wave form especially in the audiophile world where the sound of 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete levels is clearly superior to older 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1 KHz to 192 KHz formats. Thomas Knox Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 17:59:04 +0200 From: att...@kinali.ch To: time-nuts@febo.com Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear On Mon, 07 May 2012 08:20:55 -0700 Dan Rae wrote: I see nothing odd about wanting to get the best possible source for the Master Clock for your master recordings. My son does run a small studio and for him I was able to make a version of that unit, for a lot less money of course. If he says it improves the sound of the recordings, and his customers agree, I am inclined to believe him. The thing is, that an Rb is good for one thing: Have a long term stable and accurate frequency source that is better than 1 to some billions for measurement or other stuff that take more than a few hours or have to be repeated exactly in a couple of weeks. For audio, you need a frequency source that is stable over a couple of hours (probably a working day) and shows "low" jitter. Where as low jitter is quite high in time-nuts terms and stable not stable at all. A cycle-to-cylcle jitter of a couple of ns is not audioable at all, but any Rb will have a much lower jitter. Or to have a different look at it, you want to have very low phase noise, as this phase noise is mixed in over the ADCs into your signal. But as we know, the phase noise of an Rb is not defined by the Rb physics package, but by the OCXO they use. (yes i know that the close in phase noise is defined by the reference and not by the OCXO, but the "base level" is the OCXO, not the reference) As for stability. You want the instruments to sound the same over an recording. Ie the human ear has to preceive the recorded sound as the same. The frequency resolution of the human ear is somewhere around 3Hz. This makes for 150ppm (at 20kHz). Even a 32kHz tu
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message <4fa7fb9b.3040...@yahoo.com>, "Randy D. Hunt" writes: >On 5/6/2012 7:39 PM, Jim Palfreyman wrote: >> http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Antelope-Audio-Isochrone-10M-Rubidium-Atomic-Clock-/270809581736?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f0d8248a8 >> >> Make sure you read the description to discover what it's being sold for. The name of the company is even funnier: "Sonic Circus" :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message , "Bob Camp" writes: >If you extend the bandwidth down low enough (as in low audio) the jitter >goes up quite a bit. In the case of audio, jitter at low frequencies just >might be something to worry about. Not with the kind of physical laws I live in. At low audio frequencies, say 100 Hz, you have at least 441 samples per period of audio, and the Y-difference from one sample to the next is so small, that no amount of jitter will have sonic impact. At a 20 kHz frequency however, you have sign reversal from sample to sample and moving a sample in X has very high impact on the energy of that and the surrounding samples. This is exactly why we use oversampling in the first place: You get more gentle slopes from sample to sample which means that the jitters effect is attenuated in the result. The place where this audio-jitter-homoepathy comes from, is the first generation of Philips CD players, CD-100 etc, which had "jitter" come up from the poor mechanics, because there were insufficient buffering before the de-interleaver. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message <62172.12.6.201.2.1336409319.squir...@popaccts.quikus.com>, "J. Fors ter" writes: >Suppose you have a perfect, ideal clock that puts out 'convert' pulses at >an exact rate is used to strobe a high precision A/D. > >Now suppose you add jitter to that perfect clock so that the rate stays >the same but time interval between successive pulses varies randomly >between P(1-x) and P(1+x). > >How big would x have to be before anyone could detect any difference in >the sound? You have to tell us the sampling frequency before we can answer. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Analog Devices and Linear Technology have application notes on this subject. At least with sampling converters, jitter directly limits dynamic range. My back of the envelope calculation comes up with about 25ps of RMS jitter for an ideal 16 bit sampling converter at audio frequencies but most delta-sigma converters should tolerate higher levels. Analog Devices says 100s of ps of clock jitter is acceptable for them. How low can the dynamic range be before it becomes audible? On Mon, 7 May 2012 09:48:39 -0700 (PDT), "J. Forster" wrote: >Suppose you have a perfect, ideal clock that puts out 'convert' pulses at >an exact rate is used to strobe a high precision A/D. > >Now suppose you add jitter to that perfect clock so that the rate stays >the same but time interval between successive pulses varies randomly >between P(1-x) and P(1+x). > >How big would x have to be before anyone could detect any difference in >the sound? > >I have my opinion, but what is yours and why? > >-John > >=== > >> On Mon, 7 May 2012 10:02:25 -0600 >> Tom Knox wrote: >> >>> >>> Actually the numbers are quite real, play with the math, a small amount >>> of jitter in a DAC (X) can have a large difference (Y) when sampling a >>> complex wave form especially in the audiophile world where the sound of >>> 24bit dac 16,777,216 discrete levels is clearly superior to older >>> 16 bit dac 65,536 possible levels in 44.1 KHz to 192 KHz formats. >> >> Yes, i know that jitter is a pain when it comes to ADCs, but keep >> in mind that your audio ADC does have a jitter of a couple >> 100ps itself. If it's a high end ADC that is. The standard ADCs are >> usually >> in the ns range. For a normal 10MHz XO you measure the jitter in in the >> lower >> 10ps at most, a good one at lower than 1ps cycle-to-cycle. Of course, you >> have >> to keep the clock signal clean of any disturbance that might add >> modulations >> to it. But that's a matter of keeping the power supply clean and having >> the >> signal shielded. It's not an inherent property of an Rb to have low >> jitter. >> And as we all know from the recent hype on the FE-5860As and the >> following measurements, not all Rb's are low jitter. >> >> Attila Kinali >> >> -- >> Why does it take years to find the answers to >> the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message <4fa80913.7000...@medesign.ro>, MailLists writes:
>That was a big problem with the dynamic range of tape recorders, which
>had to be solved with noise reduction circuits. Even good 16 bit ADCs
>have a higher DR than the SNR of most instruments in quiet recording
>studios.
Not so fast there...
Yes, in theory your ADC could digitize a signal 14*6 = 84 dB below
reference level, but it would do so with 50% distortion, because
there would only be three distinct levels: {-1, 0, +1}
This is a much overlooked issue, in particular with classical music
where dynamics in the music can account for way more dB than people
realize.
We must start out by defining the acceptable level of total distortion,
if we choose 0.5% then we need 200 digital levels, roughly 8 of
your 16 bits for the signal.
That gives you a headroom of 7 bits (leaving one for the sign) and
that gives you 42 dB of S/N.
That isn't very much, headroom, 42dB, when the conductor waves the
entire philharmonic AND the full opera choir in, for for that wonderful
"Dies Ira" of Verdis. Or Carmina Burana. Or any of the many
other 'shock-effects' classical composers have enjoyed.
With digital, you get most distortion at weak signals, where your
ears are much better at detecting it, with vinyl you get more
distortion on strong signals, just like your ears, meaning the
level becomes unbearable sooner.
That is why, in plain and simple terms, classical struggles with
digital: High distortion in weak passages.
It is also why the CD media has changed rythmic music, which
went from a love of distortion to a love of pure tones when
the CD media made it possible to play loud pure tones.
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 18:15 +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > > We must start out by defining the acceptable level of total distortion, > if we choose 0.5% then we need 200 digital levels, roughly 8 of > your 16 bits for the signal. > > That gives you a headroom of 7 bits (leaving one for the sign) and > that gives you 42 dB of S/N. Not true in a correctly dithered quantizer (And they almost all are these days)... This is counter intuitive, but adding 1 LSB of uncorrelated noise having the correct statistical properties (Triangular probability distribution) has the effect of completely linearising the conversion process at the cost of adding about 3dB of noise to the system. With the noise added you can hear narrow tones well below the wideband noise floor. In a correctly dithered system the broadband noise floor is the only thing determined by the word length, and narrow band signals can be resolved to well below the noise floor. Further, as the statistical properties of the noise are not all that tightly coupled to its frequency domain properties, it is possible to filter the noise to move most of the energy away from the regions where the ear is most sensitive. 16 bits is actually fine as a distribution format, where is shows up as a little short is as a capture format as at capture time you need headroom to ensure nothing unexpected causes clipping, but once you are done with the processing it is trivial to strip the headroom out and dither down to 16 bits. This discussion would be better over on the Pro audio list rather then time nuts. 73, Dan. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message <1336415866.16321.14.camel@laptop>, Dan Mills writes: >On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 18:15 +, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >16 bits is actually fine as a distribution format, Yes, I agree with that, and lets use that agreement to stop the topic :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > We must start out by defining the acceptable level of total distortion, > if we choose 0.5% then we need 200 digital levels, roughly 8 of > your 16 bits for the signal. > > That gives you a headroom of 7 bits (leaving one for the sign) and > that gives you 42 dB of S/N. > > That isn't very much, headroom, 42dB, when the conductor waves the > entire philharmonic AND the full opera choir in, for for that wonderful > "Dies Ira" of Verdis. Or Carmina Burana. Or any of the many > other 'shock-effects' classical composers have enjoyed. You are mixing recording and distribution. The 16-bit 44.1K "CD Quality" is for distribution to consumers. Few people record with that format. 24-bits and 96K is a common recording format. and then later it is mastered to "fit" within the CD format.And don't forget that some tools the mastering engineer has are EQ, "dithering" and frequency dependent compression. It is VERY rare that a performance would be linearly transliterated to the CD. What you get is something that was modified to sound good on consumer playback equipment. With "good" being the engineer's person opinion. Back to recording. It is common to have the master studio clock be an OCXO. This would drive the (96K) sample clock and it is the sample clock that gets distributed inside the rack. My cheep home system, I think has a low cost XO inside and is pretty much jitter free. Simple XOs can be pretty good especially what you care more about "clean" than accurate Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On 05/07/2012 08:15 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message<4fa80913.7000...@medesign.ro>, MailLists writes:
That was a big problem with the dynamic range of tape recorders, which
had to be solved with noise reduction circuits. Even good 16 bit ADCs
have a higher DR than the SNR of most instruments in quiet recording
studios.
Not so fast there...
Yes, in theory your ADC could digitize a signal 14*6 = 84 dB below
reference level, but it would do so with 50% distortion, because
there would only be three distinct levels: {-1, 0, +1}
This is a much overlooked issue, in particular with classical music
where dynamics in the music can account for way more dB than people
realize.
We must start out by defining the acceptable level of total distortion,
if we choose 0.5% then we need 200 digital levels, roughly 8 of
your 16 bits for the signal.
That gives you a headroom of 7 bits (leaving one for the sign) and
that gives you 42 dB of S/N.
That isn't very much, headroom, 42dB, when the conductor waves the
entire philharmonic AND the full opera choir in, for for that wonderful
"Dies Ira" of Verdis. Or Carmina Burana. Or any of the many
other 'shock-effects' classical composers have enjoyed.
With digital, you get most distortion at weak signals, where your
ears are much better at detecting it, with vinyl you get more
distortion on strong signals, just like your ears, meaning the
level becomes unbearable sooner.
That is why, in plain and simple terms, classical struggles with
digital: High distortion in weak passages.
It is also why the CD media has changed rythmic music, which
went from a love of distortion to a love of pure tones when
the CD media made it possible to play loud pure tones.
The late Julian Dunn has covered this in AES papers and pre-prints.
It relates to side-band, modulation frequency and masking-effects. He
came up with a sinusoidal modulation mask.
Look up his work!
Cheers,
Magnus
___
time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message , Chris Albertson writes: >You are mixing recording and distribution. The 16-bit 44.1K "CD >Quality" is for distribution to consumers. I'm old enough to have listend to comparisons when 16 bit 44.1KHz was _both_ recoding and distribution format :-) As I said: one of the main drivers for oversampling is to relax requirements for analog and clock precision. >What you get >is something that was modified to sound good on consumer playback >equipment. With "good" being the engineer's person opinion. Or in the case of an entire generation worth of european classical recordings: "good" being equal to "Karajan can hear it through his increasingly severe deafness" :-) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
New question about "jitter" in recording.I was reading some time ago about non-uniform sampling. Basically the time between samples is random (or as random as you can make it) But now you have to sample a clock AND the signal. Or more likely use a psuedorandon sample interval that can be reconstructed without clock samples The main problem with this technique is that few people understand the math. For example what is the frequency response of a system with a given mean and standard deviation sample period? Advantages are that you can sample higher frequency than 1/2 the average sample rate and alieasing is less a problem. Chris Albertson Redondo Beach, California ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
In message , Chris Albertson writes: >Advantages are that you >can sample higher frequency than 1/2 the average sample rate and >alieasing is less a problem. Disadvantage: on playback you get both a sample and a standard deviation :-) I don't think anybody uses random sampling unless they have to (think "when can we actually see this star with this telescope" etc) -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 p...@freebsd.org | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
j...@quikus.com said: > Suppose you have a perfect, ideal clock that puts out 'convert' pulses at an > exact rate is used to strobe a high precision A/D. > Now suppose you add jitter to that perfect clock so that the rate stays the > same but time interval between successive pulses varies randomly between > P(1-x) and P(1+x). > How big would x have to be before anyone could detect any difference in the > sound? It's easy enough to work out the right ballpark. Feed a theoretical sine wave into your A/D. Set it to the max amplitude and max frequency that you expect the system to handle. Look at the zero crossing (max slope). How much time does it take for the signal to transition from an output of 0 to an output of 1 (LSB). If your clock if off by that much in time, the analog voltage that you sample will be off by 1 bit. It's a big deal at radar frequencies, less so at audio. You want to make sure that you don't use one of the oscillator packages that has a programmable PLL. Their jitter specs are nasty. -- These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
Wow! $1260 for a 4' power cord, but wait, there's more... It was named 'Power Cord of the Year'. Mike On 5/7/2012 9:39 AM, Burt I. Weiner wrote: A friend of mine signed me up for a catalog from the "Audio Advisor". He said I deserved this - I was afraid to ask what he meant by that! Spend a few minutes looking over this site: http://www.audioadvisor.com/ Be sure to check out their "Power cords" at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords Burt, K6OQK From: "Rob Kimberley" To: "'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'" Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear An old saying: "a fool and his money are often parted". Sums things up nicely I feel. Rob Kimberley Burt I. Weiner Associates Broadcast Technical Services Glendale, California U.S.A. b...@att.net www.biwa.cc K6OQK ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there. ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 08:28:41AM -0700, J. Forster wrote: > A crummy crystal oscillator zero beated to WWV is good to 1 in 10E6, a Rb > disciplined to GPS maybe 1 in 10E11. > > Do you seriously think you, or anybody, can hear a pitch difference of > 0.001 Hz in the audio range? > > A quartz crystal is plenty good for any audio application, IMO. > > -John I completely agree, and far more significant than accuracy is jitter (phase noise) in maybe the tenths of a Hz to thousands of Hz area. This does modulate the sampled sound and perhaps is perceptable at very low levels. BUT Cesium, or Rb buys nothing in respect to phase noise in those ranges... really good quality quartz oscillators have much better close in phase noise than many Rb's or Cesiums... What Cesium and Rb buy is good performance measured over much larger taus... which cannot possibly have any impact on human hearing. -- Dave Emery N1PRE/AE, d...@dieconsulting.com DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass 02493 "An empty zombie mind with a forlorn barely readable weatherbeaten 'For Rent' sign still vainly flapping outside on the weed encrusted pole - in celebration of what could have been, but wasn't and is not to be now either." ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
It's kinda a trick question. The important thing is 'before anyone could detect any differences in the sound?' I was involved in making a decision to go with brand A or B speakers in a roughly 1200 seat auditorium. There was a lot of political pressure to choose brand B. IMO, brand A sounded better in all cases, except possibly for some specially chosen 'high pressure' jazz advocated by fans brand B. So I set up an A/B test. To make the test fair the speakes were colocated and each set of speakers had their own amps and levels were set to exactly the same SPL on pink noise. Nobody but I knew which speakers were on at what time. The test audience selected brand A as the best sound, but eventually brand B was installed. Politics won. Bottom line, when evaluating the claims of audiophools, like you can 'hear the difference', you have to do truly random, blind, tests A/B tests. I doubt that you need anything better than a crummy $2 crystal to clock audio systems. YMMV, -John > > j...@quikus.com said: >> Suppose you have a perfect, ideal clock that puts out 'convert' pulses >> at an >> exact rate is used to strobe a high precision A/D. > >> Now suppose you add jitter to that perfect clock so that the rate stays >> the >> same but time interval between successive pulses varies randomly between >> P(1-x) and P(1+x). > >> How big would x have to be before anyone could detect any difference in >> the >> sound? > > It's easy enough to work out the right ballpark. > > Feed a theoretical sine wave into your A/D. Set it to the max amplitude > and > max frequency that you expect the system to handle. Look at the zero > crossing (max slope). How much time does it take for the signal to > transition from an output of 0 to an output of 1 (LSB). > > If your clock if off by that much in time, the analog voltage that you > sample > will be off by 1 bit. > > > It's a big deal at radar frequencies, less so at audio. You want to make > sure that you don't use one of the oscillator packages that has a > programmable PLL. Their jitter specs are nasty. > > > -- > These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's. I hate spam. > > > > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
May we PLEASE go back the the intended purpose of this list. Hadley K7MLR A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well. Peter Cooper, of Fermi Lab, says, "Every experimentalist knows that the apparatus, or at least your understanding of it, is always at fault until demonstrated otherwise." He also says, "Nature is really unmoved by what I, or anyone else, believes." ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Mon, 07 May 2012 20:50:41 +0200 Magnus Danielson wrote: > > It is also why the CD media has changed rythmic music, which > > went from a love of distortion to a love of pure tones when > > the CD media made it possible to play loud pure tones. > > > > The late Julian Dunn has covered this in AES papers and pre-prints. Could you tell a little bit more? Which Julian Dunn is it and what does AES stand for? And do you have any links/papers at hand that i could have a look at? :-) Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
AES = Audio Engineering Society Google "Julian Dunn" audio -John = > On Mon, 07 May 2012 20:50:41 +0200 > Magnus Danielson wrote: > >> > It is also why the CD media has changed rythmic music, which >> > went from a love of distortion to a love of pure tones when >> > the CD media made it possible to play loud pure tones. >> > >> >> The late Julian Dunn has covered this in AES papers and pre-prints. > > Could you tell a little bit more? Which Julian Dunn is it and > what does AES stand for? And do you have any links/papers at > hand that i could have a look at? :-) > > Attila Kinali > > -- > Why does it take years to find the answers to > the questions one should have asked long ago? > > ___ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. > > ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear
On Wed, 9 May 2012 09:43:25 -0700 (PDT) "J. Forster" wrote: > AES = Audio Engineering Society > > Google "Julian Dunn" audio Thanks a lot... now i have more to read for those rainy evening ;-) Attila Kinali -- Why does it take years to find the answers to the questions one should have asked long ago? ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear - can we please close this thread
Guys, this thread and the un-countable emails it has generated so far is the exact type of discussion that TVB just sent out an email about that should not be on time nuts. bye, Said In a message dated 5/7/2012 16:00:54 Pacific Daylight Time, mbla...@satx.rr.com writes: Wow! $1260 for a 4' power cord, but wait, there's more... It was named 'Power Cord of the Year'. Mike On 5/7/2012 9:39 AM, Burt I. Weiner wrote: > A friend of mine signed me up for a catalog from the "Audio Advisor". > He said I deserved this - I was afraid to ask what he meant by that! > Spend a few minutes looking over this site: > http://www.audioadvisor.com/ Be sure to check out their "Power cords" > at: http://home-audio.audioadvisor.com/search?w=Power+Cords > > Burt, K6OQK > > >> From: "Rob Kimberley" >> To: "'Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement'" >> >> Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Oh dear >> >> >> An old saying: "a fool and his money are often parted". >> >> Sums things up nicely I feel. >> >> Rob Kimberley > > Burt I. Weiner Associates > Broadcast Technical Services > Glendale, California U.S.A. > b...@att.net > www.biwa.cc ___ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
