Re: Jitter standards
- From: kludge@xxxxxxxxx (Scott Dorsey)
- Date: 31 Aug 2006 09:18:55 -0400
Arny Krueger <arnyk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"David Grant" <REMOVE_MEjmd_2003@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:44f5ec75$0$8906$88260bb3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Is there some reason why jitter should typically be
higher for ADAT than for SPDIF? Wavefront Semi's opto
ADAT receiver spec states 1.5ns which is quite a lot
higher than typical SPDIF receiver ICs I've been looking
at.
Just curious.
More to the point - why worry about jitter during a digital->digital
transfer where the ultimate target is almost always a storage device? As
long as there are no data errors, the storage device acts like a giant
de-jitter buffer, and that is that!
Because it is VERY easy to run lightpipe fairly short distances and get
so much jitter that the receiver produces errors or will not lock up.
You cannot run fifty foot lightpipe cables with any degree of reliability
into most receivers, because the jitter gets so bad the receiver cannot
extract a clock.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Jitter standards
- From: Romeo Rondeau
- Re: Jitter standards
- References:
- Jitter standards
- From: David Grant
- Re: Jitter standards
- From: Arny Krueger
- Jitter standards
- Prev by Date: Re: legit scenarios for using compression during tracking?
- Next by Date: Re: legit scenarios for using compression during tracking?
- Previous by thread: Re: Jitter standards
- Next by thread: Re: Jitter standards
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
