On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:39:44 GMT
"Bedouin" wrote:

That's not what I mean. The chip I'm referring to takes digitally
"resamples" the incoming bit stream so that the output has a different rate
to the input, while the frequencies remain unaltered. This allows the DAC
to use its own clock, which can then be made very low jitter.

Heh. yes, feed a jitterless DAC a signal now full of aliasing effects.

A win of engineering over common sense again ;-)

--
Spyros lair: http://www.mnementh.co.uk/ |||| Maintainer: arm26 linux

Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are tasty and good with ketchup.

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:39:44 GMT
"Bedouin" wrote:

That's not what I mean. The chip I'm referring to takes digitally
"resamples" the incoming bit stream so that the output has a different
rate
to the input, while the frequencies remain unaltered. This allows the
DAC
to use its own clock, which can then be made very low jitter.

Heh. yes, feed a jitterless DAC a signal now full of aliasing effects.

A win of engineering over common sense again ;-)

Indeed - hence my comment that I did not really think it was an appropriate
solution.

"Ian Molton" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:39:44 GMT
"Bedouin" wrote:

That's not what I mean. The chip I'm referring to takes digitally
"resamples" the incoming bit stream so that the output has a different
rate
to the input, while the frequencies remain unaltered. This allows the
DAC
to use its own clock, which can then be made very low jitter.

Heh. yes, feed a jitterless DAC a signal now full of aliasing effects.

A win of engineering over common sense again ;-)

Indeed - hence my comment that I did not really think it was an appropriate
solution.