Yeah, finally a voice of reason in this thread. Some of the earlier claims make me want to throw up. People are making it sound like the sound of a clock is aural heaven or hell.
You can't even rightly claim "This clock sounds like _________."
A clock doesn't have a sound. Except maybe if you listen close enough, a really freakin' fast "tick tock tick tock"
Sound-wise each of these clocks will interact drastically differently with different converters - and most importantly, with the types of jitter those converter's PLL chips are already introducing (usually source of >90% of the jitter reaching the converters), and will continue to do so even after an external clock is hooked up.
If you hook up a clock you are definitely adding some kind of jitter. In a particular converter's case, it may be that the kind of added jitter from an external clock is inaudible or even pleasing. It may also reduce some other kinds of jitter (or not), which could also be either good or bad sounding depending on the particular converter.
It simply isn't right to make sweeping conclusions on the "sound of a clock" by testing through a single converter.
And besides, nobody is posting any files here.
That one guy that claimed to actually have some and done a proper A/B backed out for "ethical reasons," though he had no problem showing the exact same CD to all his engineer buddies...?
The one time I've ran an actual test with a good external clock, I proved my intial "ah, this seems to improve things" reaction very wrong. I did a blind ABX test on myself with and without the clock. I even phase-nulled the results and the differences were WAY down, we're talking like -80db... on the brink of the dynamic range limit of a CD, and also about the same value you'd get just from random errors and uncontrollable variables by running the exact same test twice, clock or no clock.