[time-nuts] 74HCT9046A Max. Operating Frequency
alexpcs at ieee.org
Tue Apr 29 20:53:59 EDT 2014
if you do not need to use the VCO of the 74CHXX46, just the phase
detector you could find better device at Analog Devices like the AD9901
and many others and you could use higher comparation frequency to, here
is how to do it:
with higher comparation frequency you will have less headache because of
the spurious in the VCO spectrum
> Sure, but is that close-in phase-noise or wideband white noise?
> It matters greatly how it is distributed in frequency.
> Most importantly, is it low enough to recover the clock.
> If it is too high, then one needs to use another VCO.
> In this case, he only wanted to use the 74HCT9046 as a phase
> comparator and then steer a VCXO, so the 9046s VCO phasenoise would
> not be relevant.
> The clock recovery PLL only have to have decent phase noise above 8
> kHz, as below that it is being suppressed by the loop and replaced by
> the source (and lower frequency systematics from cabling and ISI).
> Sure, near 8 kHz it needs to be decent as the suppression isn't perfect.
> Then comes the much narrower PLL.
> On 04/29/2014 02:21 AM, Alexander Pummer wrote:
>> the CMOS chip: PLL 74HC4046, 7046, 9046, will have substantial phase
>> noise, particularly close to the higher end of the usable frequency
>> On 4/28/2014 1:30 PM, Magnus Danielson wrote:
>>> On 04/28/2014 04:16 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 11:41 PM, sg sg <micpreamp at yahoo.de> wrote:
>>>>> Thanks very much for your responses!
>>>>> The source is an AK4114 AES/EBU audio receiver, which has both master
>>>>> clock (24.576 MHz) and "word select" rate (48-192 kHz) outputs.
>>>>> Perhaps it
>>>>> is better to run the PLL at the latter? Any disadvantages from this?
>>>> So this is for clock distribution in a studio? While our eras don't
>>>> about nano seconds or even micro seconds we do care that long of the
>>>> length have exactly the same number of samples. In other words at a
>>>> times into a track, all tracks have the same number of samples. I
>>>> what matters in this application is long term stability over days,
>>>> and even years. So the first step is always to figure out your
>>>> requirements and USE NUMBERS.
>>>> Next. It is not "either/or" you can put the PPL at 24..5MHz or 48K
>>>> or you
>>>> can divide by 10 and put the PPL at 2.45Mhz. or any place in between.
>>>> One question: Why use the receiver as a clock source? Most use
>>>> independent like an OX or even Rb then use that to drive a DDS chip.
>>> Rb is way overkill. Beyond keeping things in sync to ensure same
>>> sample rate, what is important is jitter but not ppm level wander.
>>> Jitter can kill your listening experience by to ways, one is bit error
>>> rate, causing bits to be incorrect. The second is that it creates
>>> side-bands, which causes issues when you try to achieve 24 bit
>>> resolution, or for that matter 130 dB dynamics. Do read what Julian
>>> Dunn had to discuss on that matter, since he look at what sidebands
>>> would do, considering masking effects of psycho-acoustics etc.
>>> Then again, we being time-nuts, overkill is easy to achieve.
>>> We need to be careful about jitter as we re-synthesize and lock things
>>> up. Jitter-peaking as a cause of jitter accumulation, and that leads
>>> to... bit errors and side-bands.
>>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
>>> To unsubscribe, go to
>>> and follow the instructions there.
>> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
>> To unsubscribe, go to
>> and follow the instructions there.
> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts at febo.com
> To unsubscribe, go to
> and follow the instructions there.
More information about the time-nuts