In Reply to: That is truly sad ... posted by Christine Tham on September 20, 2006 at 18:15:03:
<< I spent about 15 minutes summarizing the results for recent hi-rez players and the figures are very sobering >>The transport mechanism itself has virtually no effect on the measured jitter as reported by Stereophile. The primary factors are the clock, the power supply, and the PCB layout (including grounding).
<< I think the fact that the Sony players only play CDs and SACDs (and are not modified DVD transports) are quite illuminating, and suggest that a universal transport does indeed compromise jitter performance. >>
Actually, there is no such thing as an "SACD" transport. They are all DVD transports. The only difference is that on the decoder board there is an extra chip that monitors the analog output signal from the laser to allow decoding of the pit-width modulation.
<< The Esoteric DV-50 would stand out as being a particularly poor performer, despite the R&D invested by TEAC. >>
The DV-50 uses a Pioneer transport. The only thing that Teac does is replace the "bridge" that holds the disc clamp. There was essentially no R&D.
<< When you consider that recent analysis suggests that jitter needs to be below 20ps to be truly inaudible, the above figures suggest that ALL curent hi-rez players are at least an order of magnitude above ideal. >>
You are trying to compare apples with oranges. Stereophile has used the Miller Audio Research test suite for the past eight or ten years. This methodology always shows a higher jitter level than other methodologies. Go to the Stereophile website and look at old reviews. They used to use the Meitner jitter analyzer that would often yield measurements below the 30 pS range.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- A little knowledge is a dangerous thing - Charles Hansen 18:32:35 09/20/06 (56)
- A plague on both your houses - Pacman 10:56:08 09/21/06 (5)
- It's OK that the original subject has been changed, but... - Sordidman 12:40:57 09/21/06 (4)
- Your correct but... - Pacman 14:26:08 09/21/06 (3)
- Re: Your correct but... - Christine Tham 02:44:12 09/22/06 (2)
- Oh, really? - Charles Hansen 06:35:27 09/22/06 (1)
- See my other reply - Christine Tham 15:37:26 09/22/06 (0)
- Completely agree - Christine Tham 18:44:04 09/20/06 (49)
- Your lack of reading comprehension is truly astounding - Charles Hansen 19:09:37 09/20/06 (48)
- See racerguy's post - Christine Tham 20:23:52 09/20/06 (35)
- And now it's time for me to pick on YOU - racerguy 20:46:55 09/20/06 (28)
- Re: And now it's time for me to pick on YOU - Christine Tham 21:05:11 09/20/06 (27)
- Thanks, but you still didn't address the issue - racerguy 05:34:59 09/21/06 (1)
- Re: Thanks, but you still didn't address the issue - Christine Tham 22:48:39 09/21/06 (0)
- Once again you are showing your lack of knowledge - Charles Hansen 21:29:53 09/20/06 (24)
- Re: Once again you are showing your lack of knowledge - Christine Tham 21:53:30 09/20/06 (23)
- Don't be coy, give us an example - Charles Hansen 22:01:00 09/20/06 (22)
- Well, I would ... - Christine Tham 22:34:42 09/20/06 (21)
- Oh, right... - Charles Hansen 22:42:59 09/20/06 (20)
- "People buy from people they like." - String Section 23:13:41 09/20/06 (4)
- Re: "People buy from people they like." - junvel 00:57:31 09/24/06 (0)
- Re: "People buy from people they like." - graemme 14:25:15 09/21/06 (0)
- Re: "People buy from people they like." - Charles Hansen 23:36:08 09/20/06 (1)
- Re: "People buy from people they like." - sentinel90125 07:34:43 09/22/06 (0)
- What audience? - Christine Tham 23:00:08 09/20/06 (14)
- Were all reading.. - SnaggS 21:38:03 09/21/06 (1)
- Send me private email (nt) - Christine Tham 22:49:40 09/21/06 (0)
- Re: What audience? - The Sound Guy 06:24:56 09/21/06 (9)
- I hope you will understand - Christine Tham 02:41:20 09/22/06 (8)
- OK - The_Sound_Guy 00:07:49 09/28/06 (0)
- Oh, really? - Charles Hansen 06:34:16 09/22/06 (6)
- Re: Oh, really? - Christine Tham 15:36:49 09/22/06 (5)
- Just a little bit more background ... - Christine Tham 16:26:51 09/22/06 (0)
- This is why it is hard to take you seriously - Charles Hansen 16:18:48 09/22/06 (3)
- Re: This is why it is hard to take you seriously - Christine Tham 16:41:17 09/22/06 (2)
- Just one final hint ... - Christine Tham 17:03:01 09/22/06 (1)
- Re: Just one final hint ... - Lin Minh 08:39:10 09/24/06 (0)
- Re: What audience? - Charles Hansen 23:17:42 09/20/06 (1)
- Re: What audience? - Christine Tham 00:33:11 09/21/06 (0)
- Well, let's see here... - Charles Hansen 20:43:50 09/20/06 (5)
- Re: Well, let's see here... - Christine Tham 22:09:50 09/20/06 (4)
- Oh, OK, I believe you now - Charles Hansen 22:38:29 09/20/06 (3)
- And your point is? - Christine Tham 22:57:42 09/20/06 (2)
- Re: And your point is? - Charles Hansen 23:09:05 09/20/06 (1)
- Wow ... - Christine Tham 00:30:58 09/21/06 (0)
- Yours isn't so great either - racerguy 19:28:11 09/20/06 (11)
- Thanks - saved me from typing (nt) - Christine Tham 20:12:53 09/20/06 (0)
- Uhhh... - Charles Hansen 19:55:38 09/20/06 (9)
- Re: Uhhh... - Christine Tham 20:34:10 09/20/06 (3)
- Re: Uhhh... - Charles Hansen 20:57:09 09/20/06 (2)
- Re: Uhhh... - Christine Tham 22:18:51 09/20/06 (1)
- As Woody Allen would say... - Charles Hansen 22:32:48 09/20/06 (0)
- Still no good - racerguy 20:32:55 09/20/06 (4)
- Re: Still no good - Charles Hansen 20:53:31 09/20/06 (3)
- Whatever you say, Charles - racerguy 05:25:56 09/21/06 (2)
- Re: Whatever you say, Charles - Charles Hansen 07:24:03 09/21/06 (1)
- Re: Whatever you say, Charles - racerguy 07:50:06 09/21/06 (0)