Why rubidium clocks are a myth


#1

Once again, the nuclear option is not the best choice!



http://www.pstracks.com/pauls-posts/why-rubidium-clocks-are-a-myth/13067/



J.P.


#2

@wingsounds13 what m.paul needs is a delta time clock with a pid controler i see it as a process control. bits storage is a good start then control it for the best sound.


#3

I have read in forums that a CD player with DAC inside has little to no jitter

At the outputs. As when playing a cd this type of conversion is best. So my question is why cannot we find a way to simulate this playback process in a CPU to DAC playback. To me the

Playback quality is from worst to best as transport. Bridge. Offramp as o do not know why but to most hearing it they will agree



Al


#4

Many here, myself included, would offer up the PWT as the best sounding option.


#5

The PWT is, by a nice margin, my best source.


#6

Jitter is a digital domain phenomenon. All digital sources create jitter, including single box CD players. I believe the misconception of “little to no jitter” arises due to a poor understanding of the concept. In a CD player the output jitter relative to the inbuilt transport may be negligible, but that disregards the jitter generated by the transport!



In regards to clocks, the argument is one of accuracy vs precision. We really want precision, not accuracy.


#7

Well said sir. Precision is what we want. Long term accuracy is irrelevant. I may have to steal that. :slight_smile:


#8

And while at it you may include stratum and holdover terms;

http://www.raltron.com/products/pdfspecs/sync_an02-stratumleveldefined.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holdover_in_synchronization_applications


#9
Well said sir. Precision is what we want. Long term accuracy is irrelevant. I may have to steal that. :)


The beauty of this forum is you don't have to steal. It's a free exchange of ideas. I've certainly taken my fair share of ideas from your posts, so I'm only too happy to return the favour.

#10

Thanks!