pink fish media

Go Back   pink fish media > discussion > audio

Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
  #256  
Old 25-03-12, 09:26 PM
ADL ADL is offline
HiFi reborn
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 166
Dear John, I have sent you a pm with my address
  #257  
Old 25-03-12, 11:30 PM
JohnW JohnW is offline
Trade: Lakewest
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADL View Post
Dear John, I have sent you a pm with my address
ADL,

I sent the file yesterday - PM again with and I'll resend the file.

John
  #258  
Old 26-03-12, 01:23 AM
JTC JTC is offline
Saint Alphonso!
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 7,026
Well, I'm back with the CDQ after a couple of months with the MDAC. Nothing's wrong, I just need to play CDs and vinyl again. Going back the way is interesting - actually, whilst the MDAC *is* better sounding than the CDQ, the difference is not as significant as I felt when I tried the MDAC after the CDQ. I could happily live with either.

In the meantime I think the MDAC is going into the second system alongside the Alesis active speakers. It'll probably be wasted there but hey ho...

Roll on the CDQ+, John....
__________________
SBT-EDO/MDAC T-L2/EE Avant/ATC 100ASLT/HD800s
  #259  
Old 26-03-12, 01:53 AM
finesensations finesensations is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wilky View Post
Set my Opt 2 for a Samsung HD Freeview/BR/PVR to medium and works fine as the frequency swings aren't as extreme as your PVR.
If set to low (or obviously auto) it drops out every few seconds - totally the fault of the Samsung.

Dave.
Hi Dave

Have I got it the wrong way round?

I was under the impression that the High setting would reduce jitter more than the Low setting but at the expense of possible/more drop outs.

But you are experiencing drop outs on the Low setting and no drop outs at the higher Medium setting.

Now I'm confused!
  #260  
Old 26-03-12, 02:23 AM
travelfotografe travelfotografe is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 121
I believe you have gotten it the wrong way round.

The low versus high refers to DPLL BW where "BW" is bandwidth. A High (or wider) Bandwidth means M-DAC will be more forgiving on the clock stability of the incoming digital signal, but will reduce jitter less. A Low (or narrow) Bandwidth means M-DAC will be less forgiving on the clock stability of the incoming digital signal, but will reduce jitter more.

Leon

Quote:
Originally Posted by finesensations View Post
Hi Dave

Have I got it the wrong way round?

I was under the impression that the High setting would reduce jitter more than the Low setting but at the expense of possible/more drop outs.

But you are experiencing drop outs on the Low setting and no drop outs at the higher Medium setting.

Now I'm confused!
  #261  
Old 26-03-12, 02:35 AM
Plutox Plutox is offline
Registered Abuser
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,634
β firmware...

... update process OK, and my unit was probably one of the first off the production line as one of JohnW's "specials". Updated via tiny netbook computer running Windows 7 32 bit.

I can also report that the optical locking problem I had when my Internet radio tuner was cold is successfully addressed by the update.
__________________
Pluto X
  #262  
Old 26-03-12, 02:38 AM
finesensations finesensations is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelfotografe View Post
I believe you have gotten it the wrong way round.

The low versus high refers to DPLL BW where "BW" is bandwidth. A High (or wider) Bandwidth means M-DAC will be more forgiving on the clock stability of the incoming digital signal, but will reduce jitter less. A Low (or narrow) Bandwidth means M-DAC will be less forgiving on the clock stability of the incoming digital signal, but will reduce jitter more.

Leon
Hi Leon

On the High setting my PVR Tuner sample rate changes from 47.680k to 48.321k approx. every 1 to 3 seconds.

On the Low setting it is steady at 48.000k.

So on the Low setting I'm getting the best of both worlds, is that correct?

It's the term 'Jitter Rejection' that's confusing me where High = Low and Low = High!

Last edited by finesensations; 26-03-12 at 02:53 AM.
  #263  
Old 26-03-12, 03:06 AM
Wilky Wilky is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 2,234
Quote:
Originally Posted by travelfotografe View Post
I believe you have gotten it the wrong way round.

The low versus high refers to DPLL BW where "BW" is bandwidth. A High (or wider) Bandwidth means M-DAC will be more forgiving on the clock stability of the incoming digital signal, but will reduce jitter less. A Low (or narrow) Bandwidth means M-DAC will be less forgiving on the clock stability of the incoming digital signal, but will reduce jitter more.

Leon
Bang on.
  #264  
Old 26-03-12, 04:46 AM
jonstatt jonstatt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 59
It is a good point.

The menu item is headed "Jitter reduction", so I do think it is misleading that high does not mean higher jitter reduction!
  #265  
Old 26-03-12, 05:20 AM
finesensations finesensations is offline
pfm Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonstatt View Post
It is a good point.

The menu item is headed "Jitter reduction", so I do think it is misleading that high does not mean higher jitter reduction!
Hi jon

It is actualy 'Jitter Rejection' not 'Reduction', don't need more confusion!

To be fair, the options do also say 'Bandwidth' e.g High Bandwidth so it's me just concentrating on the 'High' that has got me confused.

Also, although I now understand what the settings really mean/do, thanks to travelfotografe and confirmed by Wilky, it doesn't explain to me why I get a stable sample rate of 48.000k on the Low setting (high jitter rejection/more forgiving clock stability) and a variable sample rate, which changes from 47.680k to 48.321k approx. every 1 to 3 seconds, on the High setting (low jitter rejection/more forgiving clock stability).

I have now changed the settings to Low.
  #266  
Old 26-03-12, 05:46 AM
Richard Kimber Richard Kimber is offline
MDAC Premium Fusion
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 429
"Thank you for the details on the Linux install - that's one more OS that the updater has been tested on. "

Hang on a minute! This isn't Linux, it's Windows running under Linux Now a Linux version would be nice ....

Last edited by Richard Kimber; 26-03-12 at 06:47 AM.
  #267  
Old 26-03-12, 06:47 AM
Richard Kimber Richard Kimber is offline
MDAC Premium Fusion
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonstatt View Post
It is a good point.

The menu item is headed "Jitter reduction", so I do think it is misleading that high does not mean higher jitter reduction!
Actually, I think one or two of the items on the original menu could be clearer. I don't know if the upgrade will be different. But as a non-expert I find the entry about the D3E Decorrelator confusing, especially as the discussion on the forum refers to 'on' and 'off' or 'enabled' and 'disabled', while the menu entries are 'Leave unmodified', 'Partial suppression', and 'Full suppression'. There are too many negatives .
  #268  
Old 26-03-12, 11:49 AM
Nenox Nenox is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 13
Attenuation

Hi Guys and thank you for your kind replies. Now for a questions about attenuation :-)

Running the Mdac into my Sugden power amp I'm using between 40-30db of digital attenuation.

I tried using Rothwell in-line RCA attenuators (10db I believe) on the side of the amp inputs, but the results are quite poor or at least not to my liking (mirrors my previous experience with them).

Is there any reason to believe that the attenuation provided by the basic Mpax would give me a very different result than the Rothwells?

Now I don't mean to cause any offense here. I simply don't understand enough about how the technical side of audio works and I wanted to ask since I seem to recall John recommending using the Rothwell's at some point.

Thanks :-)
  #269  
Old 26-03-12, 12:12 PM
JohnW JohnW is offline
Trade: Lakewest
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,916
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nenox View Post
Running the Mdac into my Sugden power amp I'm using between 40-30db of digital attenuation.

I tried using Rothwell in-line RCA attenuators (10db I believe) on the side of the amp inputs, but the results are quite poor or at least not to my liking (mirrors my previous experience with them).

Is there any reason to believe that the attenuation provided by the basic Mpax would give me a very different result than the Rothwells?
The MPAX allows to re-buffer the output after the attenuator - I've noticed that amplifier front ends like to be driven from low impedance sources - re buffering after attenuation within the MPAX will achieve this.

Also the MPAX will provided a "summed" output of the MDAC's differential output - so the RCA outputs on the MPAX will have slightly better SNR and Dynamic range then the RCA outputs on the MDAC.

The MPAX will now include the latest MOSFET CROSSII output stage - this should be even better then the MDACs internal output stage to drive cables / amplifier input stage's.

John
  #270  
Old 26-03-12, 12:13 PM
arthur arthur is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,945
Does the Sugden not have XLR inputs Nenox?

I've not heard a sugden amp yet but they have a wonderful reputation and I'd kill for a masterclass power amp

If you are using the attenuators and still listen at -40 to -30dB you may need more attenuation than 10dB I think.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
pink fish media