Showing (off) your dCS setup - description and photos

[Ermos (Erno)]

@struts001

But bear with me. Imagine the DAC is a wheel and the clock is a precision motor whose job is to turn the wheel at a very precise speed. And let’s just say that precision motor is very good indeed. How do you improve on it? A master clock is like a second motor (which needs to be even higher precision to add any value) connected to the first one with some kind of transmission. Let’s call this the “active” approach. An alternative solution is to have a bloody great big flywheel (PLL), let’s call this the “passive” approach. While I can see the logic in the active approach I can also see lots of possible problems that the passive approach very elegantly avoids**. I find it hard to convince myself that this will result in a net improvement.

@James has explained us how it works, here:

Dcs clock jitter specs

Yes, both of these points are correct. If you are connecting a reference clock to the Vivaldi Clock, it has to be more accurate than the Vivaldi Clock in the long term for it to have any positive impact. So, the accuracy needs to be higher than +/- 0.1 parts per million over time. Jitter (and subsequently phase noise) on a reference clock going into the Vivaldi Clock is largely irrelevant as in essence the Vivaldi Clock doesn’t respond to fast changes on the reference input - it has a slow ac…