Antijitter

I have a Theta Jade and found that one so called "anti-jitter" or "jitter reducer"device actually added jitter. The device can only reduxce jitter if the transport itself has more jitter than the so called "jitter reducer". I still believe that data errors are far more important tahn jitter. I recently did a test using the output of 3 different transports, my Theta, a borrowed SONY and my Toshiba DVD. The difference, especially above 10k was still striking. I am surprised how little low end transport technology has improved since I did a similar analysis 6 or 7 years ago.

Hi Garfish. I am definitely a believer in spending on a good transport, to the extent that I find it much harder to find a transport that I am happy with, than I do with DACs. Even with a jitter reducer in place, changes in transport or the cable connecting the transport to the jitter reducer are quite audible. In fact I reckon CD sound is very let down by today's transports. The Phillips transports found in most CD players and Transports only sound good for a few months and then deteriorate badly - to the extent that I recommend having them overhauled about every 12 to 18 months. Have a look at them and you will notice the cheap crappy plastic parts and the tiny wee bearing. You will hear the difference quite markedly when it comes back from the service shop. For that reason I am a believer in the Theta transports that are based on the laser disk players (but do not play laser disks on them as you will stress the motor's bearing too much), and the various players that are based on the excellent TEAC VRDS transport (as is used by Wadia). The higher priced Pioneer stable platter transport mechanism is OK too, but not all of the stable platter mechanisms are well made.

Hi Phil; I agree with the above posts in that with your equipment the SF UJB would probably make little or no difference in music character/quality. But they definitely do have their place, eg I use an SF UJB between a Sony CA9ES and Muse Model Two DAC. Besides jitter reduction the UJB also converts the (Stereophile dreaded) toslink output to the preferred and more robust coax, and the UJB + DAC make the CA9ES sound as good as my XA7ES. So, I think jitter reducers are really useful with inexpensive, toslink only cd players, but the better the transport or player, the less the benefit, ie my Sony XA7ES does not need the UJB (or DAC) to sound good, but I use it anyway. I also use a Theta TLC (a jitter reducer and format converter also) to good effect with my Pioneer CD Recorder which I then also route to the Muse DAC. There's more than one way to skin a cat. I know it's controversial, but I am not a supporter of expensive transports, but I believe strongly in excellent DACs-- that's just been MY experience.

I agree with Eldragon. Unless you are making the last change you are ever going to make (yeah right!), adding an anti-jitter device can be poor economics. What if your next move is a one box player, or the top-of-line Theta combination, or a new format? Either way you will have to get rid of the Jitterbug. Anti-jitter devices do work. I once enjoyed very good results with a DIP in between a CAL Alpha and CAL Delta. But I now have the top-of-line Theta two-box and neither the DIP or the SF Ultra Jitter Bug are remotely up to it (which makes me wonder if the Jitterbug is up to your Theta combo either). Remember that a jitter device only does the job that a decent player (whether one box or two) should have done in the first place - which makes the jitter device a band-aid. IMHO it is much better to look to upgrade your CD combination.

I used Monarchy DIP, between much more "inferior" units, Marantz 63/X-ACt Dac/ x-10 buffer/ and heard no sonic difference. I believe in simpler aproach to improving the sound. Get better gear to begin with. Adding, "stuff' here and there, can, and will deteriote the final product: THE SOUND! If it's better...you wont know about it. Spend money on Lp's, CD, or good book...Good Luck!