Item Information Condition:. The item you've selected was not added to your cart. Best Offer:. Make Offer. Add to Watchlist Unwatch. Watch list is full.
May not ship to Germany - Read item description or contact seller for shipping options. See details. Located in:. Riverview, Florida, United States. This amount is subject to change until you make payment. For additional information, see the Global Shipping Program terms and conditions - opens in a new window or tab This amount includes applicable customs duties, taxes, brokerage and other fees.
For additional information, see the Global Shipping Program terms and conditions - opens in a new window or tab. Seller does not accept returns See details. Any international shipping is paid in part to Pitney Bowes Inc. Learn More - opens in a new window or tab International shipping and import charges paid to Pitney Bowes Inc. Learn More - opens in a new window or tab Any international shipping and import charges are paid in part to Pitney Bowes Inc. Learn More - opens in a new window or tab Any international shipping is paid in part to Pitney Bowes Inc.
When in "truth" it won't make an impact to our ears. From that stand point I'm going to ignor the jitter problem and let my ears decide and use the DACs that sound the best. Cheers, Phil. It is a very interesting read and states essentially, with the engineer who designed the DAC in question, that jitter or the ability to reduce it has a larger impact--or at least the same impact-- in terms of hearng a difference as the DACs sampling rate.
Overall the best difference, when a difference was perceptible, was increased "space" or ambiance Cheers, -h1pst3r. Posted on Wednesday, March 05, - GMT Hey H1, I read the first article and while the guys writing style was abit to be desired I managed to force myself through it.
I came away with a litte different impression than you did. The engineer felt it was due to reduction of jitter but I really didn't see anything that proved this and the author really wasn't sure himself. First of all the DAC was still off board as you would find in a receiver.
Only the upsampling card was in the Marantz. Now he said this was put in the Marantz because of jitter, but the only way to really show that it made a difference is to place the card in the DAC. Second, the improvement in sound quality may have more to do with how it was upsampled than where the DAC or upsampler was located. What I mean is that upsampling in mutiples of DVD audio is already at that rate and didn't utilize the upsampler card, but did utilize an off board DAC.
Now, the real difference may have been with the difference in transmission speed of the digital signal, but he only mentions this briefly. In that case the only thing that would be needed would be installing a network card in the Marantz.
I really couldn't say this for sure from the article. Of course, I'm pretty clueless about this stuff and I'm sure some of my assumptions are wrong. If there was something I missed please let me know, but other than using multiples of the original source and possibly the transmission speed of the signal. I don't see what this set up would have done to reduce jitter. Take care, Phil. I agree that the author was more enamored with his own writing style than with conveying point with concision.
I guess I was lumping errors associated with timing slower transmission speeds and the timing errors that accumulate into what I was calling and considering jitter. You can see how paraphrasing that article was kind of a pain. Thanks for the comments! Looks like i have bitten off more than i can chew by asking the question I went thru both the links although I couldn't quite follow the content in the first one.
Anyway, so what i understand correct me if iam wrong is that unless my receiver yamaha can upsample the 96khz digital audio out from my DVD player, its pretty much usless. So I either go for a khz DVD player or 96khz receiver yamaha ? As is, it's probably just going to send garbage to the DAC, even after the header there is no reason to think that the data would be correctly aligned once the header has been passed I don't know what exactly you mean by "disconnect" either, but that may just appear to "work" because of the above when reconnecting the DAC on the fly, you may be lucky to get the audio samples properly aligned, or at least get something audible which is still likely not to sound very good unless you're extremely lucky.
Quote from: alizare on July 05, , am. Quote from: MT on July 05, , pm. Gaze not into the abyss, lest you become recognized as an abyss domain expert, and they expect you keep gazing into the damn thing. Pages: [ 1 ] Go Up. The solution to this problem is a filter in the analog part of the converter that filters all frequencies above 22 kHz, so they can't fold back.
These filters are called brick wall filters, because they stand there like a brick wall that doesn't let anything through. By raising the sample frequency from The back-bouncing gets reduced and only affects frequencies above 20 kHz. Last edited: Jun 19, Thanks, Indeed I switched them. It is indeed the ADC that's only 96 Khz. You're explination is a bit to technical for me. Can you give me a practicle example where this conversion takes place?
I will use my receiver mainly for playing movies and music mp3 via LAN NAS , radio, watching movies from dvd and blu-ray, watching digital tv, playing normal audio cd's and playing games.
Does the ADC matters in these cases? And will the difference between 96 Khz and Khz even matter if it's not hearable? PSM1 Distinguished Member.
How will the cd's be played? In the bluray player or a cd player? How will this be connected to the receiver.
0コメント