Can the Apogee Rosetta double as my system clock?

[88fingerz]

Hey all,

I'm on a Mac G4/Digi 001 setup and currently use an RME ADI8-pro as my conversion as well as master clock (via ADAT lightpipe).

Can the Apogee Rosetta 800 (or 200 for that matter) unit perform double duty as well or am I looking at the need for the additional Big Ben unit?

Thanks for any insight, Dean

[logichead]

Yes, the Rosetta can be your master clock, although I can't remember whether the 001 has word clock in or not. If not, you can set the 001 to clock to lightpipe or spdif from the Rosetta.

Best...H

[88fingerz]

Thanks for the reply H.

The fact this is possible negates the need for the Big Ben?

As other devices in my arsenal are also word clock needy (many accept word clock via BNC connection) can the Rosetta clock fully master multiple devices the way a Big Ben would, or will something possibly be lost in the translation (being that a daisy chain scenario will be taking place))?

Thanks again, hope my question is clear.

Dean

[GCL]

The Rosetta 800's manual shows how to do this, recommending T-Bar connectors on each unit, rather than daisy-chaining. (You can download the manual at their site.) I've been told by Apogee that while the Rosetta's clock is not quite as super-duper as what's in Big Ben, it is nonetheless excellent as it is their ultra-low jitter Intelliclock technology.

[88fingerz]

Fantastic news! I'll assume (unless I come across the good fortune of A/B-ing the 2 units in action) the difference between the Rosetta's and Big Ben's clocking is not night & day.

Dean

[GCL]

Right -- Apogee told me that the difference is very subtle.

[Infa]

Subtle ,,, but difference is difference.

FWIW, I got to extensively talk in person with Dan Lavry (and Daniel Weiss, and the folks at Apogee)(but not together of coarse ) at AES just the other day.

And just to wrap it up as quick as I can with out going on for 4 hours (like Dan did for me which was vey appretiated), but the biggest concern about quality of your sound, and jitter, etc... when dealing with these converters, and master clocks IS,,, DO NOT mix converters.

It is very important. Dan was saying even don't mix his Blue with his Gold in a converter set up. So in turn even if it is from the same company do NOT mix converter models with others.

The reason for this was a little over my head, but to put it VERY simplified, it is due to every box has a different latency, along with slightly different other things. The clock(s) try to compensate for the differences that apply to clocking issues, and it is subtle, but more damaging he said than alot of other concerns you may have.

Hence, do not (lets say) get a cheap Lucid DA converter, and then think if you got a Lavry Gold DA (or AD) and slaved the other to it etc.. that it would improve your sound. NO, infact it would be worse than just staying ALL Lucids. But of coarse not as good as ditching your Lucids and getting ALL LAvry Golds.. You get the picture..

I do not know if this applies to you, BUT I thought the info was valuable.

[lukejs]

Hey Infa ! thanks for the info... I have a worry now... are you just talking about not mixing two AD converters , or AD and DA converters ? I have an AD16-x and interface to a Lynx AES16, and am using "DIGITAL IN" as the clock source...not word clock... and connect my Apogee Mini -Dac to the AES16 for two channels of output. Because of the nature of the input connections on the AES16, I can't use word clock to sync to the AD16-x's clock. All 16 channels of the AD16-x go to port A of the Lynx AES16, so I can't use Lynx's special cable that has 4 ins, 4 outs, and the word clock in on it. I use their other cable that sends 16 channels of digital audio, no word clock cable. On the output side of the Lynx AES16 (port B) I use one AES cable to send 2 channels of AES out to my Mini DAC. Am I ok with this in your opinion , or is this the type of mixing of converters that they say is not optimal ? Thanks !! Luke

[Infa]

Originally posted by lukejs
Hey Infa ! thanks for the info... I have a worry now... are you just talking about not mixing two AD converters , or AD and DA converters ? I have an AD16-x and interface to a Lynx AES16, and am using "DIGITAL IN" as the clock source...not word clock... and connect my Apogee Mini -Dac to the AES16 for two channels of output. Because of the nature of the input connections on the AES16, I can't use word clock to sync to the AD16-x's clock. All 16 channels of the AD16-x go to port A of the Lynx AES16, so I can't use Lynx's special cable that has 4 ins, 4 outs, and the word clock in on it. I use their other cable that sends 16 channels of digital audio, no word clock cable. On the output side of the Lynx AES16 (port B) I use one AES cable to send 2 channels of AES out to my Mini DAC. Am I ok with this in your opinion , or is this the type of mixing of converters that they say is not optimal ? Thanks !! Luke

Wow,,, that IS a good question. Before two days ago, I would say you were fine, and to not worry. But now I am saying you are raising a very good question.

As I am not the serious tech head, and only soak info in, better than I relay it , I really wish Dan would chime in here to answer YOUR situation particularly. See I did not ask him all that exact stuff, and paths you are concerned about. So I can not tell you I am sure about this honestly.

BUT from what I am making out that he is saying, mixing ANY converters from AD to AD , DA to DA, AND yes AD to DA also is a complete no no. Remember this is for optimal performance, some wouldn't even notice a difference (I think).. So it is up to you how important it is.

Now here is why I say YOUR particular situation is a doozy. From the way you describe your path, it is possible you ARE ok !! Why ?? Well because it seems your AD and final DA are not really linked up anyway. (am I correct?).

See I have a BNC word clock cable (and BNC T splitters) that links my AD to my DA's, so they are all part of this "one thingness"..

BUT your situation is like ,, since the AD and DA aren't really clocked up to each other but rather each are clocked into the interface which is intercepted by your computer (maybe? right?), then it doesn't matter, because the computer intercepted the chain, and then spit it out your DA all reconfigured..

Now I could be completely wrong about this, plus I am just HOPING that you are ok,, ya know.. I hate to see people have to break their banks over stuff. So I could be WANTING it to work out.

But seriously, it seems you could be ok in this matter. Now here is where I and YOU would need to ask another question about conversion to Dan or someone. ..... When a clocking signal is doing exactly what your path is doing, does the computer and it's "interface" act as a non changing "link" (per say) in the path of the clock from the first AD to the last DA ?? Or does it intercept the path, and then "re create" it (in a sense) and send it out to the DA as a fresh "new" clocking signal ??

If it is the first one,, then you are NOT ok, and you fall under the "Mixing converters clock signals, and latency issues" syndrome I just learned about. BUT if it is the second,, THEN you should be ok...

Anyone else care to chime in on this one ??

Like Dan for instance ?? (ha ha) (hopefully) --

go to the http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/ forums and ask him there

[lukejs]

Hey Infa ! Good info...and questions ! I just took a look at my Mini DAC manuel and saw something interesting on the clock circuitry. Let's say for example that I only have the Mini DAc connected to the AES16, and have no AD16-x connected. This is how I was for about 2 months while I was waiting for my AD16x to arrive. I had no AD conversion, and was only playing around with my new powercore, sampled virtual piano, etc.... In this scenario, my Lynx sent an audio bitstream to my Mini DAC through AES signal, along with Lynx's internal clock. So the AES16 was my clock source, and the mini DAC locked to that clock source. Now, the way I see it, is like this....maybe when I've got the AD16-x connected, and I'm recording, the internal clock of the AES16 won't be used, but will slave to the AD16-x's master clock through the AES DIGITAL IN 1 SIGNAL( I can choose this in the configuration of the Lynx AES16), and this clock signal will then pass to the Mini DAC because it's locking to the signal it's receiving from the AES16. ( like the transitive property...a=b and b=c, then c =a.....if you will) . Now, when I'm not recording, this is where I'm not sure what really happens.... say if I'm just playing back a file that I just recorded.... will the AD16'x clock still be used for this playback ? Maybe it's like this..... that as long as the AD16-x is turned on, and set to a clock say.. 96khz.... is it continually sending this clock out to the Lynx AES16 so it can use it for playback ? mann..... I never really thought about this stuff before..... you think I'm more or less on target here ?Thanks !! Luke

[Infa]

Yes,, Luke I think you are really on target to a point here.

Actually I may have worded myself too jumblia ,, but you are saying what I was asking as one senerio, just in another way. Hence,, we are on the same page here. --but questions still arise--

What you said makes sense on how your A/D is currently working. Which is senerio 1 in my previous posts questions.

Which means (if it is truly the way it is) that unfortunately no matter how good it SEEMS that set up should be, you ARE mixing converters here.

The AD16 X has ever so slight different clocking,latency,etc and how it compensates for it than that of your Mini DAC and your AES16, and each of them are different from each other as well. THEREFORE creating this "not so optimal quality" in this set ups way of translating a audio signal from either A to D or D to A.

And also STILL leaves the question of which I was getting at in the end, which you worded as "Now, when I'm not recording, this is where I'm not sure what really happens" ... This is the real underlining question to the whole concern for me here.

Mainly because you are not recording when you are mixing. Mixing is VERY important. Hell it ALL is !! So this is not to be taken lightly.

I do not feel in your paticular case this is a night and day difference. But it is something to think about.

Honestly I would just get a DA 16 X and I would be able to sleep at night......

And when you do so, make sure to make it so the 16 X's are doing all the converting BEFORE and AFTER the Lynx. Just use the Lynx as a way to get to and fro the computer.

If conversion is done BEFORE it gets to it, then it don't have to do no work, it just shoots a straight pre converted signal into your computer, and same with the way out.

AND your AD and DA will be correctly word clocked together. Don't forget to "terminate" the DA (or your last DA if you get more than one DA 16 X).. And they will be working optimally together, and also be a married "pair" with identical latency, clocking, and compensations, etc...

But at the same time Luke, you are doing fine with what you got. Please don't let me change your whole set up. If it ain't broke , don't fix it.

It's just if you ARE looking to optimize and have some spare dough lying around,, then by all means DO IT !!

[lukejs]

Hi Infa.. I when i bought my mini DAC , they told me at apogee that I was getting the exact same converters that are in the AD16-x , so I figured that I was ok... Also, they told me that if I really wanted more outputs and expansion options, that I could buy a Rosetta 800 (192khz edition) and said those converters and technology were the same as the AD16-x ( minus the c777 clocking technology). The Apogee support guy went furthur to say that if I clocked this Rosetta 800 to the AD16-x, It would bring up the quality of my AD conversion of the Rosetta to nearly identical to the AD16-x !! I figured that I really should have bought the Rosetta, but I was just starting my studio( and still am !!) so I opted on the Mini DAC, and bought a powercore, and some more mics. I am hoping that with my system, that clocking will all come from the Apogee AD16-x, but the more that I think about it, I have a feeling that what will happen is that when I'm mixing in the box, the AES16 will be doing it all with it's internal clock. I'm going to look into this by sending a few of our posts to the gurus at Lynx. I'll post his reply . Thanks ! Luke

[Infa]

Thanks,,, I'll be looking for it.

But remember. I don't think alot of people even know about this, or are even anal enough to care or think there is a difference.

Yes it MAY be true that the mini dac, rosetta , and 16 share some similar to exact things. BUT it is the latency that is different on every box to the next except for "pairs" of AD and DA's...

And Dan is saying these latency , and other subtle overlooked differences is what can cause inconsistancies in your audio signal..

For instance, I don't really know about the Mini Dac, but I know for sure that the Rosetta 800 and Rosetta 200 share the exact same clock, and several other things. BUT as Dan said they will produce a different latency reading each. And this is where the problem can start.

As minimal as it is, it is still there. And I want you to know that someone not up on this idea might not know what the heck we are saying, and may think it is bull. So look out for that.

But it will be interesting to find out. Please let me know !!

Thanks --


And to back what Apogee told you though,, it is TRUE that under your previous set up that a great box such as that 16 was going to improve your sound. That is because it is such a great quality unit. BUT if you are not running its "pair" then it is not optimal.

Example. Say since you got the new unit you noticed a certain amount of sound quality gain. It was a AD that you just got and noticed this audio quality gain, and since you have a "off" (not paired) DA from the AD you think to your self, man if I get the DA "pair" to this AD I just got, It will give me the SAME amount of audio quality gain as I just got !! Therefore as a whole I will DOUBLE the first amount of noticed audio quality gain...

Well from what Dan is saying, if you did that you would MORE than double (maybe triple) the first amount of noticed audio quality gain !!

Why ?? Well because when you got the first AD, sure you noticed a difference because it is a quality box. But because the DA was not "the pair" to it, the issues I speak about earlier kick in, and in a sense the DA is holding the complete optimization back. So you were not really noticing the true WHOLE amount of change that new AD you got could do.

But once you do get the "paired to it" DA then not only do you hear the same difference as you heard before (obviously because it is the same box), but it is also optimized due to not mixing converters, latency, etc. and you release the REAL potential of noticable audio quality gain from EACH unit.... Therefore possiblly gaining trifold the quality from before, instead of just double..

But let me know what these kats say -- I am interested...

[lukejs]

Here's what Lynx said.....

The C777 will always be the clock source in the scenario you've described. Even when audio is not passing from the AD16X into the AES16, it is still receiving clock from the digital input and passing that clock to the Mini DAC. Keep the AES16 on Digital In 1 at all times to keep the AD16-X as the clock source.

So this explains how the clock is distributed.... but really doesn't answer the question about mixing AD and DA converters... but from what I believe, the quality in my setup should not be hindered due to the fact that my DA is not the same. Even if I did have the DA16-x, it too would have to slave to the clock being fed to it by the AES16. Who knows..... I just know that it's probably going to sound damn good when I finally get it all set up !!!! hahahhaha A hell of alot better than my old Audigy 2 platinum !!! See ya ! Luke

[Infa]

Originally posted by lukejs
I just know that it's probably going to sound damn good when I finally get it all set up !!!! hahahhaha A hell of alot better than my old Audigy 2 platinum !!! See ya ! Luke

Awesome !! Thanks for the post back. Yeah that was a pretty easy, predictable answer.
And you are right. The real question is still there.
But as you said, that is OK....

Your system as I said before will sound way better than it did before !! And that is all that matters..

Just do some happy, fun, great recordings

Right on !!,

Infa

[David Kulka]

Interesting thread. But Infa, with all due respect to Dan and the folks at Apogee, I am skeptical that mixing converters is really an issue. In a case of using an A-D from company 1 and a D-A from company 2 I don't think latency differences would matter at all. In a case of using one A-D from company 1 and another A-D from company 2, I suppose there might be certain very far fetched scenarios in which something detectable might occur, but even that seems like a long shot to me.

When putting together systems I do generally try to stay with similar brands and product lines, mainly so that warranty and support issues can be confined to one company, and so the rack looks "together". But as for audio issues, I don't quite buy it. My 2 cents.

[clip6]

David just sent email through your web site and it came back. Where can we send you email.

Thanks

[David Kulka]

I wonder why that happened? I just sent myself an email using the link on the home page and it worked.

Anyway it's info at studioelectronics dot biz. (Spelled out that way to discourage spam.)