Superclock in SL-1210

[Paul Hynes]

I seem to recall someone telling me that regulators that were designed to operate up to 100 MHz for digital circuitry were a waste of time as at these frequencies the type and position of capacitors in the circuit power lines were the important issue. The capacitors are important but so is the regulator. I have sold thousands of these regulators, so far, with a 56 day return if not satisfied guarantee. I think people are pleased with the improvements these regulators have made, as they are not being returned. If they were making no improvements I would have a very large box full of rejects by now.

Several of my friends over the years have shown the ability to discern perfect pitch just by listening to a note. They could tell if the note was off pitch by small amounts. In the past our survival in the wild was based on a keen sense of sight and hearing. Being able to judge distance and direction accurately could mean the difference between life, or death, at the hands of a predator. The human brain is a very complex organ that is capable of processing sensory input in a way that focuses on important data and ignores unimportant data. Many have reported hearing signal events buried in the noise floor.

There are plenty of examples of audio equipment with exemplary measurements that do not convey music in a comprehensible way. On balance I will take what I hear over measurements every time.

Regards
Paul

[MartinT]

On balance I will take what I hear over measurements every time.

Indeed, Paul, and yet you are an engineer. As I have said to many others over the years, there is no conflict of interest!

[Paul Hynes]

There should not be a conflict of interest but I think you will be saying this to many more over the coming years.

[Marco]

I seem to recall someone telling me that regulators that were designed to operate up to 100 MHz for digital circuitry were a waste of time as at these frequencies the type and position of capacitors in the circuit power lines were the important issue. The capacitors are important but so is the regulator. I have sold thousands of these regulators, so far, with a 56 day return if not satisfied guarantee. I think people are pleased with the improvements these regulators have made, as they are not being returned. If they were making no improvements I would have a very large box full of rejects by now.

Several of my friends over the years have shown the ability to discern perfect pitch just by listening to a note. They could tell if the note was off pitch by small amounts. In the past our survival in the wild was based on a keen sense of sight and hearing. Being able to judge distance and direction accurately could mean the difference between life, or death, at the hands of a predator. The human brain is a very complex organ that is capable of processing sensory input in a way that focuses on important data and ignores unimportant data. Many have reported hearing signal events buried in the noise floor.

There are plenty of examples of audio equipment with exemplary measurements that do not convey music in a comprehensible way. On balance I will take what I hear over measurements every time.

Bloody hell - what an amazing post!!!

I concur completely

It's going right into Our Ethos for permanent reference!

Marco.

[ar-t]

I seem to recall someone telling me that regulators that were designed to operate up to 100 MHz for digital circuitry were a waste of time as at these frequencies the type and position of capacitors in the circuit power lines were the important issue.

They did? Don't they realize regulators don't work at 100MHz? Yeah, that is why the caps are needed. But regulators regulate, and caps bypass. Both are important, but have much different jobs.

I bet they also think all caps are the same, because it is 100 MHz. Or any other frequency, as well. Oh, well........

[ar-t]

Anyway, back to the original issue.........

Guys, I am probably the only person any of you will run into that has experience designing low-jitter oscillators. If sticking a different crystal into a circuit was all it took, anyone could do it. But, it is far more complicated than that.

Most crystals perform about the same, because they are all made about the same. And that is: cheap.

To get any less phase noise (jitter) than you already have, it will cost $$$. You can not, or will not, get a "typical" crystal that will perform any better. Even if you called up someone, like IQD (in your neck of the woods), they are not going to budge unless you start to talk about making thousands. If you do find someone who will make a one-off, without a large minimum, or price tag, what do you think they will sell you?

"Why don't you want a HC-49/s? What is wrong with them? That is what everyone uses these days."

(At this point, you know you are talking to a salesman, and you might as well talk to the wall.)

Just like pretty much everything else, these days, crystals have been relegated to "commodity" status. Which means no one makes their own, as they outsource to Asian suppliers. Which is why they are all cheap, and perform that way.

In fact, I will stick my neck out further, without even seeing what is inside your TT, and go as far as to say if you do get a "new" crystal that it will be worse, than what you have.

Guessing what era that TT was made, I will wager it uses a HC-49 holder. Which is the typical holder used in commercial electronics, back then. They are ok. Biggest flaw is it is a resistance-weld holder. Which is going to limit performance, as it will not be as clean (internally) as one would need, for really good performance.

And you are going to step down, to a HC-49/s.

I am sure there is 1000 things you can do, to improve your TT. Changing the crystal is not one of them.

[WOStantonCS100]

Anyway, back to the original issue.........

Guys, I am probably the only person any of you will run into that has experience designing low-jitter oscillators. If sticking a different crystal into a circuit was all it took, anyone could do it. But, it is far more complicated than that.

Most crystals perform about the same, because they are all made about the same. And that is: cheap.

To get any less phase noise (jitter) than you already have, it will cost $$$. You can not, or will not, get a "typical" crystal that will perform any better. Even if you called up someone, like IQD (in your neck of the woods), they are not going to budge unless you start to talk about making thousands. If you do find someone who will make a one-off, without a large minimum, or price tag, what do you think they will sell you?

"Why don't you want a HC-49/s? What is wrong with them? That is what everyone uses these days."

(At this point, you know you are talking to a salesman, and you might as well talk to the wall.)

Just like pretty much everything else, these days, crystals have been relegated to "commodity" status. Which means no one makes their own, as they outsource to Asian suppliers. Which is why they are all cheap, and perform that way.

In fact, I will stick my neck out further, without even seeing what is inside your TT, and go as far as to say if you do get a "new" crystal that it will be worse, than what you have.

Guessing what era that TT was made, I will wager it uses a HC-49 holder. Which is the typical holder used in commercial electronics, back then. They are ok. Biggest flaw is it is a resistance-weld holder. Which is going to limit performance, as it will not be as clean (internally) as one would need, for really good performance.

And you are going to step down, to a HC-49/s.

I am sure there is 1000 things you can do, to improve your TT. Changing the crystal is not one of them.

If what you say about sourcing crystals is true, then I have a big question for Inspire about their Monarch turntables. They say, "...such as a new
quartz chip of greater spec..." So, either someone has already done what you say only has a slim chance of being possible or the Inspire folks aren't being honest. I would love to know which one it is.

[Marco]

If what you say about sourcing crystals is true, then I have a big question for Inspire about their Monarch turntables. They say, "...such as a new
quartz chip of greater spec..." So, either someone has already done what you say only has a slim chance of being possible or the Inspire folks aren't being honest. I would love to know which one it is.

Me too, Biff!! Any view on this, Partick?

Here's a pdf of the review where the crystal upgrade is mentioned: http://www.inspirehifi.co.uk/inspire...n12%5B1%5D.pdf

The onboard circuitry is upgraded with high-spec parts such as a new quartz chip of greater spec – taking speed control to even greater heights than previously achieved with past Technics, it is claimed.

???

Marco.

[ar-t]

If what you say about sourcing crystals is true, then I have a big question for Inspire about their Monarch turntables. They say, "...such as a new
quartz chip of greater spec..." So, either someone has already done what you say only has a slim chance of being possible or the Inspire folks aren't being honest. I would love to know which one it is.

I would never say they are dishonest. The guys in marketing tend to get all excited about little things. It is outside of their purview, and things that are insignificant, to the technical guys, seem like a big deal to the non-technical guys. And they tend to blow them out of proportion.

Besides, it makes for good copy.

[MartinT]

I am sure there is 1000 things you can do, to improve your TT. Changing the crystal is not one of them.

Thank you Patrick, that's very useful information. The crystal type as far as I can see is a HC49 low profile can.

So, if we assume for the moment that the crystal cannot be improved upon, we are left with two scenarios:

1) Lift the crystal from the PCB and make a temperature controlled environment for it, say between 40-60C.

2) Lift the crystal from the PCB and put it into a better/more stable oscillator circuit.

The question is, will either of these give us lower jitter than the crystal in the AN6680 circuit fed with a very clean power rail?