OK, lets keep flogging this some more since it's obviosly not quite dead yet
What people are saying is:
- Manufacturers and esteemed experts like mr Katz are unanimous about that the clocking of modern converters can't be improved by external clocks (unless the the internal clock is faulty), it's based on theory and by design it's always true. Some converters suffer less from external clocking but it's never a improvement.
(When syncing 2 or more devices together there are better or worse ways of doing this, an external clock is sometimes a better alternative than deriving sync from the source singnal or FW.)
- Users/listeners/retailers claim that a external clock sometimes can improve the sound (clocking?) of converters.
From this you can draw different conclusions. But only one of them can be true.
- External clocking can improve internal clocking. Mr Katz, the manufacturers and their theory are wrong. They missed something (or they are lying...). For this to be true their theory or design must be proven faulty.
- It possible to scientifically prove that people find a subjective sound improvement in what really is a objective degeneration. (like tape compression or transformer saturation). There are sonic advantages with less then perfect clocking. (Digital is the new analog)
- Some of the devices on the market are being faulty in their design. Not meaning "less than top class" but plain "faulty" as in broken. They should be taken back to the factory and be fixed under warranty.
- Placebo effect, people hear what they want to hear. It's impossible to scientificly prove a difference in sound. In this case it's really a non issue apart from people loosing money on unnecesarry investments and the spreading of audio mythology.
If my logic is faulty please correct me. But otherwise only one of these statements is true. (It would be interesting if #2 is correct...) I don't care wich one of these is true though.
regards,
Johannes
