>         In beginning my quest to make a $ensible upgrade to my 
 > existing Carver CD player I have run across a couple terms/items I 
 > don't fully understand in relation to the digital world.
        For the price of some of these upgrades, you might just want to can 
the Carver unit (how much do you want for it ;)  and buy an all in one 
solution.  Jitter is MUCH MUCH less when you don't send it out a SPDIF 
connector of any kind.  In this case, you might want to check out these CD 
players Stewart Pinkteron recommended to me in descending order:
Marantz CD-17
Sony XA3ES
Denon DCD-1015
Sony CDP-XE900E
Marantz CD-67
        They're all reasonably priced and the top two in particular come VERY 
close to the best boxes for a fraction of the price.   They need no jitter 
boxes since the drive is in the same box as the DAC.  In particular, I'd take 
a look at the Sony XA3ES.  It's been getting VERY good reviews and is 
technically VERY sound according to the engineers on RAHE.
 > that the "Digital Time Lens" is the forerunner of the "Soft EQ" 
 > where it synthesizes that portion lost from the
 > "L-R" during the record process and replaces it. ??????
        I read about this years ago, but I forget what it does exactly.  But 
yes, the basic idea is to take out the harsh edge of crappy CDs.
 >         Next. I have run into several terms to describe the digital 
 > cables that run between pieces (transport/DAC/AJ etc). I see 
 > "coaxial...RCA...Coaxial RCA....Optical....and others that are just 
 > describes by letter abbreviations. Then there are some proprietary 
        I just read some technical info on these.  In terms of home 
(non-professional environment), properly terminated coaxial is the best 
choice.  Glass fiber is next best and Toslink is the worst.  
        Audio Alchemy has an almost jitter free solution in the form of 
they're (I2S?) connector, but it wasn't designed for long runs, so if you go 
with Audio Alchemy with this connector, keep it as short as possible or noise 
can leak in.  You're also limited to Audio Alchemy DACs with it (unless some 
other places are starting to support it).
        Theoretically, jitter shouldn't matter in the cable because the DAC 
should be able to reclock the data stream, but there's all sorts of 
discussion going on in RAHE about the various problems, etc. involving 
jitter.  Almost no DAC designs reclock.  That's why jitter busters are so 
popular, but unless you're using that audio alchemy special connection, 
you're getting jitter the moment you hook that to a DAC.  Unless I buy that 
Lexicon DC-1 at sometime in the future, I plan to replace my CD player with 
something like the Sony XA3ES when this one goes and avoid this hassle.
 >         I see the jitter factors listed for DACs equipment with anto 
 > jitter circuitry as being ".50" and the majority of the external 
 > units between .35 and .20. What is a level I should be concerned 
        I'm not sure what these are exactly, since jitter is typically 
measured in picoseconds.  Those are probably shorthand for 50 picoseconds, 35 
ps, and 20 ps.  I've read varying results as to how much jitter might be 
audible.  Frankly, I'm leary of any of the studies.  It's something that 
hasn't really been satisfactorily proven.  Also, jitter is blamed for too 
many problems in digital.  You also can't do anything about jitter 
permanantly eteched into a recording at the A/D side of the chain, which 
appears as noise/distortion.  Once again, I have no idea how much of this is 
really audible.  My biggest beefs with digital are with individual 
recordings.  I find nothing "ill" about my best sounding discs, so I don't 
know how much I buy into this jitter issue to begin with.  Personally, I 
wouldn't mind taking some double blind tests in this area just to see if I 
can tell any difference.  Unfortunately, finding a test that is conducted 
propelry is not easy.  Maybe I should pay Gabe Wiener or JJ a visit at their 
respective labs. :)
                                                               
 > wide and weigh less than most speaker cables. Combine these with the 
 > new speakers Carver is working on and we will end up with huge high 
 > end sound coming from a clock radio, two strings and two soup cans. 
 > SOmehow it wouldn't be the same.
        Oh, I don't know.  Those new hetrodyning speakers could end up being 
almost invisible in a room.  If they sound better than conventional speakers, 
who cares if they're not big bulky impressive looking things...well, I see 
your point, but that's really sort of a machismo thing.  I can't really talk 
what with my 6 foot speakers. ;-)
--- FLAME v1.1
---------------