Jump to content
IGNORED

Which DACs or Renderers have external clock inputs?


Recommended Posts

Well there is always analogue, with it WOW and Flutter..:D

For home audio, its only jitter at the point of conversion that's the issue, and even the most pedestrian DAC these days should have sorted that pretty much out. I cant understand external clocks for routers and switches! Maybe I'm missing something, and also the jitter levels people worry about! Yet most clock mods I have seen are via a cable, not a good idea.

 

Link to comment

A quality low noise rubidium oscillator can be made to have very good short term stability, very low phase noise, insensitive to temperature fluctuations and have very low power consumption.

 

Short Term Stability (AVAR):

1s 0.002ppb max

10s 0.005ppb max

100s 0.002ppb max

1hr 0.006ppb max

 

Phase Noise (typ):

-113dBc/Hz @ 1Hz

-138dBc/Hz @ 10Hz

-152dBc/Hz @ 100Hz

-155dBc/Hz @ 1kHz

-158dBc/Hz @ 10kHz

 

https://www.iqdfrequencyproducts.com/news/2017/01/11/low-phase-noise-rubidium-atomic-oscillator-module/

 

https://www.iqdfrequencyproducts.com/news/2017/01/11/low-phase-noise-rubidium-atomic-oscillator-module/

Link to comment

10MHz...

There are clocks and there are clocks... These are more for time base correction as Plisken mentioned earlier. All the gear that this clock will hook up to will have the correct interface for the clock, these have to be laid out as pedantically as RF or microwave feeds, any mismatches will negate the clocks ultimate accuracy. They have to be so accurate so that the interface losses etc. are minimal and the clock at a device input pin is withing tolerance. Clocks in my opinion are not really DIYable, they are too critical and must be considered at the initial layout stage. In fact there placement will over-ride all other interfaces to a CPU, PHY etc. Distributing clocks is a signal integrity night mare and the only way it can be done properly is laying out the board and using simulation. On the EMC side you don't want your clock signals to interact with any other signals, so the preferable placement and routing is on the same side as the device being clocked, with traces on the same layer no via's and a large ground pour around the traces if possible, preferably 10X the trace width (if less than 3-5X its best just to leave space, thin guard rails round traces can actually increase coupling as parallel traces will couple to the same thin piece of ground track). Some of these clocks are 40+MHz ...

Link to comment

For reference, here are some phase noise figures for three clocks.

 

Antelope 10MX:

1Hz ≤-70 dBc/Hz
10Hz ≤-87 dBc/Hz
100Hz ≤-114 dBc/Hz
1kHz ≤-130 dBc/Hz

 

CH Precision T1:

1Hz: < -105dBc/Hz
10Hz: < -125dBc/Hz
100Hz: < -145dBc/Hz

 

Mutec REF 10:

1Hz ≤-116 dBc/Hz
10Hz ≤-142 dBc/Hz
100Hz ≤-155 dBc/Hz
1kHz ≤-160 dBc/Hz

 

Don't where the TEAC new clock is, gee, lets hope a little better than the Antelope. I gather all these are measured at the output of the device, rather than the clock module itself which would not include board layouts.

AS Profile Equipment List        Say NO to MQA

Link to comment

Usually ones with poorly implemented clocks onboard, made by companies who often sell an external clock they would like you to purchase, or pro audio DACs.

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment
5 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

 

Which is TEAC?

 

11 minutes ago, mansr said:

TEAC do some pro gear under the Tascam brand, so there's that. They also target the audiophile consumer market, though they seem comparatively sensible. Some products might also be aimed at both markets.

 

And apparently DCS has realised that the audiophile is much more profitable and no longer produce pro audio gear...

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

Speaking of a pro company who sells to audiophiles: Lynx Hilo has word clock input.

https://www.lynxstudio.com/products/hilo/

 

 

 

(Probably) because the Hilo is also an A/DC and as such is a pro audio product. o.O

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
14 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

I think if you as Lynx they will tell that input is not meant for audiophiles to improve the unit:)

 

Or they might just say that the word clock input doesn't improve performance of the unit and that it's there for synchronization with other devices.

You can email them here: https://support.lynxstudio.com/hc/en-us/requests/new

"Science draws the wave, poetry fills it with water" Teixeira de Pascoaes

 

HQPlayer Desktop / Mac mini → Intona 7054 → RME ADI-2 DAC FS (DSD256)

Link to comment
12 hours ago, barrows said:

Usually ones with poorly implemented clocks onboard, made by companies who often sell an external clock they would like you to purchase, or pro audio DACs.

OK so dCS, SOtM, Mutec all have poorly implemented clocks?

Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10  --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, mansr said:

No idea. Why don't you take them apart and check?

 

Just to check if its implemented correctly is a costly proposition. A better method would be use an external clock and see if it indeed improves the sound. One way or the other, all these companies does suck all your money out :D

Link to comment

The pro audio crowd are very cost-conscious, which is good. They demand a lot of features  at an affordable price. Audiophiles are very concerned with quality. We also are fairly bigoted against minimalist circuit design; we really want to see large transformers, fat paper-oil capacitors, heatsinks everywhere, etc and so on. It's a visual reference for trust thing.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, rickca said:

OK so dCS, SOtM, Mutec all have poorly implemented clocks?

Ask yourself this: If they already had the best possible clock internally, while would they advocate adding an external one?

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment
4 hours ago, GUTB said:

The pro audio crowd are very cost-conscious, which is good. They demand a lot of features  at an affordable price. Audiophiles are very concerned with quality. We also are fairly bigoted against minimalist circuit design; we really want to see large transformers, fat paper-oil capacitors, heatsinks everywhere, etc and so on. It's a visual reference for trust thing.

I do not think that all audiophiles are feature oriented or against minimalist circuit/component designs, but you are probably mostly correct.  For me, I prefer the most simple system that can get the job done: DAC direct to amp, two channel, minimal add-on too-dads etc...

The pro world is entirely different, although top level pro ADC/DACs are still pretty spendy: Weiss/Merging.  Much of the pro world is supported by starving musicians doing home studios these days (my GF and many of her musician friends are those), so it is very, very cost conscious.  Audiophiles, on the other hand, often have real jobs with real paychecks, like in IB, or insurance execs, etc...

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment
1 minute ago, barrows said:

Ask yourself this: If they already had the best possible clock internally, while would they advocate adding an external one?

Master clocks are designed to discipline the clocks of several devices.  That's why they have 4-8 outputs.  Putting that quality of clock in a single device would make it prohibitively expensive.  Even at the high end, there's a target price point.

Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10  --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's 

Link to comment
Just now, rickca said:

Master clocks are designed to discipline the clocks of several devices.  That's why they have 4-8 outputs.  Putting that quality of clock in a single device would make it prohibitively expensive.  Even at the high end, there's a target price point.

Have you actually priced this out?  I have.  Yes, adding a really good clock internally adds cost, but not anywhere near as much as any of these external clocks cost (at BOM).  Ayre sourced a custom cut crystal XO for its new DAC, to excellent effect, for example, and they are very well aware of the performance advantage of installing this XO internally rather than providing a clock input.

At what dCS charges for a DAC they should have awesome low phase noise XO(s) internally.  Instead they charge 5 figures for their DACs, and then suggest that you should purchase an additional clock component to get best performance: sorry, this screams money grab to me and there is no argument which can be made for anything else. 

SO/ROON/HQPe: DSD 512-Sonore opticalModuleDeluxe-Signature Rendu optical with Well Tempered Clock--DIY DSC-2 DAC with SC Pure Clock--DIY Purifi Amplifier-Focus Audio FS888 speakers-JL E 112 sub-Nordost Tyr USB, DIY EventHorizon AC cables, Iconoclast XLR & speaker cables, Synergistic Purple Fuses, Spacetime system clarifiers.  ISOAcoustics Oreas footers.                                                       

                                                                                           SONORE computer audio

Link to comment
21 minutes ago, barrows said:

Have you actually priced this out?

OK.  Let's use the same logic for integrated LPS.  Going from ultraRendu to Signature Rendu SE takes the price from $875 to $3295.  See?  For $2420 I can buy a multirail SR7.

 

I do realize there's an advantage to having the LPS closely coupled with the ultraRendu like you have done with the Signature Rendu SE.

Pareto Audio AMD 7700 Server --> Berkeley Alpha USB --> Jeff Rowland Aeris --> Jeff Rowland 625 S2 --> Focal Utopia 3 Diablos with 2 x Focal Electra SW 1000 BE subs

 

i7-6700K/Windows 10  --> EVGA Nu Audio Card --> Focal CMS50's 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...