In terms of jitter; is femtoseconds superior and less jitter than a picosecond?

M

mdp632

Member
Joined
May 17, 2016
Messages
574
To all the digital audio gurus; I have a jitter question.

For example; is this why say the MSB Select is priced and sounds the way it does? When it comes equipped with a femtosecond clock?

Whereas; even other great digital products have jitter measured in picoseconds? The lower the number in picoseconds the less jitter?

Are there other major dac/digital manufactures that publish jitter number ratings?
 
Yes. The Femto 33 in the MSB actually measures lower, but as MSB told me, there isn’t scientific tools to measure beyond Femto 33.

But there are many other reasons why the MSB is superior as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Mike said:
Yes. The Femto 33 in the MSB actually measures lower, but as MSB told me, there isn’t scientific tools to measure beyond Femto 33.

But there are many other reasons why the MSB is superior as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

This is mostly a marketing gimmick. There used to be a company who made certain clock for DAC chips, the femto clock. Products using it were referred to as Femto DAC. Guess the name has reference to some processing the clock does.

I assume MSB is riding that bandwagon (or are maybe using the technology in some form).

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Technically one femtosecond is equal to .001 picoseconds.
A femtosecond is the unit of time equal to 10[SUP]−15[/SUP] or [SUP]1[/SUP]/[SUB]1,000,000,000,000,000[/SUB] of a second; that is, one quadrillionth, or one millionth of one billionth, of a second.
A picosecond is the unit of time equal to 10[SUP]−12[/SUP] or [SUP]1[/SUP]/[SUB]1,000,000,000,000[/SUB] (one trillionth) of a second. That is one trillionth, or one millionth of one millionth of a second.
Now, are you sorry that you asked? ;)
 
Many types of jitter. Random and deterministic are 2 broad categories. The former matters and the other does not, as an asynchronous Dac can correct for that.
Also, to measure point jitter does not tell much. It's more about the profile of the Jitter (Spectrum spread).

More importantly, jitter in the Dac is passe. Most any Dac has impressive enough stats wrt to Jitter. More important is the TRANSPORT. How is the data delivered and is it "de-jittered". Remember "GIGO". What's is the byte structure used? That can HIGHLY impact the efficacy of the Dac clock. Some wont admit it, but "Embedded" jitter matter, ie IN the word itself and between the words.

At least that is my current understanding.
 
For the umpteenth time, you can't "hear" "digital". The only thing that matters is the analog output. That you can hear. If you can "hear" jitter past the reconstruction filter, your equipment is broken. Fix or toss into bin. Or maybe give a Class A rating for being "more musical" or somesuch.

cheers,

AJ
 
Chris, you were obviously sheltered... my dad said that all the time :D....

Yea, sitting this one out also.... love digital, just not digital arguments... I couldn't afford any DAC better then what I have anyway :)...
 
The end product of digital reproduction is analog as such to an agreed I feel aj is right.
Now Msb and clocks for may dac. If the dac is reclocking like Msb does it Does matter.
As I own a few dacs one being a Msb having a better server matters a bit less.
Years ago before I made servers I built gamer pc desktops
I had a I5 cpu Ina high end gamer board
it sounded fine or what I thought was fine on pcm and simple
music. I did notice typical bloat in the low end and hiss in the high end
but when playing classical I notified something else. As the music ramped up and got louder and complex the staging blurred. And on dsd it never sounded great as most dsd lovers
only the Msb remained fine with rhis sever. So if there is a reason for better clocks and high price of Msb I feel it lies in there technology being amongst the best
now fast forward to now. Msb is still great but with a good server it too sounds better
but it’s sound of dsd shows signs of mechanical digital reproduction.
Where my pacific does not.
I had there stock clock then updated to the better clock and separate psu meaning two psu for the stack. The clock was a waist as was the additional psu
use your ears not specs or price point.
 
AJ Soundfield said:
For the umpteenth time, you can't "hear" "digital". The only thing that matters is the analog output. That you can hear. If you can "hear" jitter past the reconstruction filter, your equipment is broken. Fix or toss into bin. Or maybe give a Class A rating for being "more musical" or somesuch.

cheers,

AJ
Click to expand...

So, what happens if you have this amazing output stage but, a transport that spews jitter into the signal?

Yes, we can't "hear" it but, the effects of jitter in digital reproduction are pretty obvious. Good thing I didn't start an MQA or Network Cable thread :-)
 
Alrainbow said:
Msb is still great but with a good server it too sounds better
but it’s sound of dsd shows signs of mechanical digital reproduction. Where my pacific does not.
Click to expand...

Hi Al,

I listened to the MSB Select II DAC several times a day over six different days at two audio shows. There were a number of times when I was the only one in the room and I listened to many of my own reference SACDs as well as many of theirs. Not once did the SACDs ever sound like mechanical digital reproduction. In fact, it was some of the best DSD I’ve ever listened to, especially when they had MSB’s proprietary digital filter turned on.

And yes, I have listened to the Lampizator Pacific DAC at both RMAF and Axpona, and it sounded outstanding on DSD. But no more organic than the MSB Select II DAC in my honest opinion. That’s why it’s now in my signature line.

Congrats on your Lampizator Pacific, it is a wonderful sounding DAC.

Best,
Ken
 
mdp632 said:
So, what happens if you have this amazing output stage but, a transport that spews jitter into the signal?
Click to expand...
Fix or bin. Jitter is a measurable in physical reality metric. Your example of a "spewing" transport please.

mdp632 said:
Yes, we can't "hear" it but, the effects of jitter in digital reproduction are pretty obvious.
Click to expand...
Sure. As they said the the Matrix
attachment.php


There are many reasons why DACs can sound different. If jitter is the reason, it's broken.
 

Attachments

  • insta5.gif
    insta5.gif
    582.8 KB · Views: 81
Alpinist said:
Hi Al,

I listened to the MSB Select II DAC several times a day over six different days at two audio shows. There were a number of times when I was the only one in the room and I listened to many of my own reference SACDs as well as many of theirs. Not once did the SACDs ever sound like mechanical digital reproduction. In fact, it was some of the best DSD I’ve ever listened to, especially when they had MSB’s proprietary digital filter turned on.

And yes, I have listened to the Lampizator Pacific DAC at both RMAF and Axpona, and it sounded outstanding on DSD. But no more organic than the MSB Select II DAC in my honest opinion. That’s why it’s now in my signature line.

Congrats on your Lampizator Pacific, it is a wonderful sounding DAC.

Best,
Ken
Click to expand...
I think maybe i wound have to point it out to you then. Also what tubes were used in the dac you compared. Owning is not the same as Listining and when the filter is turned on it smooths the dsd. And what speakers were used. While all of this can be subjective some is just not May I ask what dac you own and setup ?
 
AJ Soundfield said:
Fix or bin. Jitter is a measurable in physical reality metric. Your example of a "spewing" transport please.


A cheap laptop connected via USB into a high end dac.. Such as an MSB, DCS etc... Compared to a Aurrender etc...
Click to expand...
 
Alrainbow said:
I think maybe i wound have to point it out to you then. Also what tubes were used in the dac you compared. Owning is not the same as Listining and when the filter is turned on it smooths the dsd. And what speakers were used. While all of this can be subjective some is just not May I ask what dac you own and setup ?
Click to expand...

Hi Al,

While you’re “pointing it out to me”, maybe you could also point it out to JVS from Stereophile, who was sitting in front of me reviewing it at Axpona, as well as Mike Bovaird and Mike Lavigne, who both own one, since we all apparently missed it.

I currently own an Esoteric Grandioso K1 CD/SACD Player and Grandioso G1 Master Clock, which does a pretty fair job of reproducing DSD. You obviously prefer the sound of the Lampizator Pacific, which is fine, as you voted with your wallet, and I prefer the sound of the Select II DAC, as I voted with mine. Different tastes for different ears keeps this hobby interesting but in the end, it’s only our opinions.

Ken
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top