On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 16:06 -0800, Maluvia wrote: apogee used to have some very detailed tech stuff. the reason their stuff is so good is not directly related to the converters themselves, but to the sample clock that drives them. the less jitter you have in the clock, the less likely it is that you will see differences between the original and reconstructed waveform after going through an A->D then D->A pass. how come? imagine a perfect system with zero jitter in the clock. every N nanoseconds, the converters generate a sample value for the A->D side; every N nanoseconds, they accept a sample and feed it into the D->A reconstruction process. so if you feed the digital signal back into the D->A process, you will get an identical waveform. this isn't because apogee is cool - this is basic digital audio theory. now give that clock a little jitter, and it turns out that you end up with the reconstruction phase having a slightly different sense of time than the sampling phase. as a result, the waveform that is reconstructed can differ (albeit in minute ways) from the original. so if you can reduce the clock jitter, you can reduce this effect, and apogee has basically the best clocks you can buy. their gear is not worth the money, but it is better than just about anything else. however, my compromise is to buy an apogee clock, when possible. so for example, the mackie digital 8 bus that i own has mackie's own burr-brown based converter circuitry, but it also has the optional apogee clock card to provide word clock to the converters. --p