List of Jitter Tolerance of DACs


Looking to create a list of jitter tolerance specifications for DACs, for something so important I am surprised how difficult this is to find for most DACs.

List the DAC Manufacturer and model followed by the Specifications for jitter. 
7ac929ee be73 4853 8000 abc8d06023d4Ag insider logo xs@2xshadorne
Benchmark DAC 3 


Jitter Tolerance (With no Measurable Change in Performance):

>12.75 UI sine, 100 Hz to 3 kHz

>1.5 UI sine at 20 kHz

>1.5 UI sine at 40 kHz

>1.5 UI sine at 80 kHz

>1.5 UI sine at 90 kHz

>0.25 UI sine above 160 kHz


IMO, it’s only mildly interesting. The main advantage of a jitter tolerant DAC is that the source and cabling is less important, so you can save money there. This jitter spec will vary depending on interface: USB versus Ethernet versus S/PDIF.

The disadvantage of a jitter tolerant DAC is that better sources will not result in better SQ.  you are stuck with the SQ/jitter of the DAC and nothing you do on the inputs with better technologies, such as Ethernet will make any difference.

What’s interesting to me is the jitter of the internal Master Clocks of these DAC’s. This is what you will see in JA’s measurements and some DAC specs.

Steve N.

Empirical Audio

Shadorne, Since UI is time of jitter divided by the period, then jitter will be equal UI divided by the frequency of the signal.  Assuming that 20kHz is present in the music DAC3 can tolerate 1.5/20E3 = 75us of jitter.  That is outstanding, taking into account that really bad CDPs produce only around 10 microseconds of jitter.  It also means that DAC3 is immune to 290,000 times jitter produced my my Airport Express (258ps jitter measured by Stereophile).  DAC3 allows me to use inexpensive Wi-Fi receiver shielding my system from computer generated jitter (electrical noise, computer speed, playback program etc).  
Hi shadorne.

In the spirit of the type of information you are requesting, I’m unable to find numbers from Schiit regarding their Yggdrasil DAC.

I was able to find the following excerpt taken from the following web site. By all means, you and Steve can feel free to shred it to pieces. I won’t be upset or offer rebuttal ad nauseam. :)

"Jitter - what jitter - yggdrasil laughs at your USB cables"

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/yggdrasil-technical-measurements.764787/

From the same site:

"Designers are often faced with trade-offs for various reasons. I believe the Schiit design team has made trade-offs that result in best auditory experience over best measurements possible on all fronts."

Steve, I’m not sure I understand your reasoning:

The disadvantage of a jitter tolerant DAC is that better sources will not result in better SQ. you are stuck with the SQ/jitter of the DAC and nothing you do on the inputs with better technologies, such as Ethernet will make any difference.
You don’t like when bad sources sound like the greatest sources for much less money?

This jitter spec will vary depending on interface: USB versus Ethernet versus S/PDIF.

It always does, but what it has to do with jitter suppression on S/Pdif?

You are always stuck with SQ/jitter of the DAC (that is great IMO in DAC3), but it doesn’t mean that DAC should be less tolerant to input jitter. The fact that S/Pdif will sound as good as "better technologies like Ethernet" is a great achievement. Why, on earth, you call it "disadvantage". According to this faulty logic any reclocker in front of the DAC, including Synchromesh that you sell, should be "disadvantage". Can you please explain, how reclocker in front of the DAC improves performance while reclocker built in is "disadvantage"?






I was able to find the following excerpt taken from the following web site. By all means, you and Steve can feel free to shred it to pieces. I won’t be upset or offer rebuttal ad nauseam. :)

"Jitter - what jitter - yggdrasil laughs at your USB cables"

The question is whether you can hear any difference with this DAC when you change from a cheap to a very good cable and when you change from one source to another.  This is the REAL indicator of jitter tolerance, not these measurements.

Even my own direct jitter measurements sometimes show very little difference and yet the SQ is noticeably different.  Measurements are not perfect and are usually insufficient.

Steve N.

Empirical Audio

You don’t like when bad sources sound like the greatest sources for much less money?

I don't like it when I develop new technologies that lower the jitter bar even more and yet some DACs cannot benefit from this because they are using a higher-jitter internal Master Clock/associated circuits.  I would argue that the "greatest sources" always cost more money.

I would agree that the midprice range of DACs is getting better and like my own goals, they are trying their best to guarantee a consistent level of performance independent of source by reclocking etc. in the DAC.  I do the same, except with external devices with their own power supplies and galvanic isolation.


It always does, but what it has to do with jitter suppression on S/Pdif?

Nothing, but the OP did not state this.

Steve N.

Empirical Audio