Using an external clock with the FF800

[JoeyM]

Then you show us the test

[DanDan]

Adam, why would the sound quality difference not be audible in a say 10 second 44.1 not compressed stereo sample? I have found such A/B tests to be 100% accurate. If you have a reason why this is not so, let's hear it.
I don't think it is reasonable to simply state that two samples, albeit of extremely hi- fidelity cannot show what you claim is audible. Why not? This is an A/B test of audible quality. No nonsense, we can all download or listen to the samples. Nothing changes but the change of clock. If you are convinced that an ext WC can cause an audible difference, well here's an opportunity to show it.
DD

[JoeyM]

Let others get their miserable popcorn, I could go for one of your beers DanDan

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by DanDan

Adam, why would the sound quality difference not be audible in a say 10 second 44.1 not compressed stereo sample? I have found such A/B tests to be 100% accurate. If you have a reason why this is not so, let's hear it.
I don't think it is reasonable to simply state that two samples, albeit of extremely hi- fidelity cannot show what you claim is audible. Why not? This is an A/B test of audible quality. No nonsense, we can all download or listen to the samples. Nothing changes but the change of clock. If you are convinced that an ext WC can cause an audible difference, well here's an opportunity to show it.
DD

Claims? Did I claim anything other than that I can can hear a difference?...I'm not going to question my ears. But Ok, Whatever you think. I think there are plenty of unscientific and debatable examples around here; and plenty of posters run back to the thread and claim a difference one way or the other. I choose not to involve myself, because I don't believe anything will become clear until you work with this gear. Many people agree that there is no point to arguing this. Its simply a waste of time. You may hear a difference or not, that is not for me to say either way.

With all due respect, I personally do not have any money invested in you buying a new master clock. I would tell you boldly and truthfully, that you'd be buying it for the wrong reasons. I don't feel the need to convince anyone of this fact. Its not for me to say either way. It is subjective. Does it change? Ya, but does it change a whole lot? No. It changes though, how you measure that change is for you alone to determine in your studio, with your analog and digital equipment. I'm not going waste any energy changing a working clocking scheme to prove what I hear FROM OUR GEAR, IN OUR ROOM, WITH OUR CONVERTERS. Why bother wasting energy on anything other than improving your own studio's response, as a prevoius poster has laid out for us. He hears the difference; who cares? Make Records, and prove your worth as an engineer, not a clock tester.

[DanDan]

Adam, I would be very happy to hear a recorded sample of YOUR ROOM YOUR GEAR YOUR CONVERTERS, as an A/B. Simply record a sample twice. Ext then Internal WC. I am sure you would come up with a fair scheme. Stereo pair, binaural headphone recording preferably, but whatever. It would take less than half an hour to do this. The difference will be audible or not. Beer is on me either way
PS Re audio engineering, I am happy to let my records speak for themselves. Let's stick with the Clock difference, if it is audible, we will all hear it in the proposed test.
DD

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by DanDan

Adam, I think my records do speak for themselves

I'm sure they do; which is why I don't understand why we are going back and forth about this. I like Guinness, what's your take on the subject?

[DanDan]

ADAM, Sooner or later a test will happen- A fair and reasonable A/B test with nothing but the Clock changed from Int to Ext. The same room, immediately sequential to eliminate any tiny differences due to temp. etc. This makes sense to me, and I have yet to hear the logic challenged. The reason I am going back and forth is that I see an end in sight. I have proposed a test which might just possibly end the ever ending Clocking controversy. I could do it my self with a borrowed NanonSync, but you undoubtedly have better resources. I am a non- believer so I reckon you are far better qualified and to show the difference, in all respects.
BTW I prefer Murphy's or Beamish, but only locally.
DD

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by DanDan

ADAM, Sooner or later a test will happen- A fair and reasonable A/B test with nothing but the Clock changed from Int to Ext. The same room, immediately sequential to eliminate any tiny differences due to temp. etc. This makes sense to me, and I have yet to hear the logic challenged. The reason I am going back and forth is that I see an end in sight. I have proposed a test which might just possibly end the ever ending Clocking controversy. I could do it my self with a borrowed NanonSync, but you undoubtedly have better resources. I am a non- believer so I reckon you are far better qualified and to show the difference, in all respects.
BTW I prefer Murphy's or Beamish, but only locally.
DD

Oh man, Murphy's is the sh#t!! But you've actually got a closer to fresh pint in your hand now don't cha!! Anyway; The Beamish is good, but I strongly prefer Murphy's over it. I guess its just personal preference. What I can tell you, is I think you might be wasting your time. Its seems you don't have to bother with any clock comparison, when you are making records just fine without one other than the internal clock of your AD/DA converter [which can also be a master clock to other converters], and the world hasn't stopped from you not using one thus far. I mean, are there not better more prevalent products you need and will make more of a difference for your studio? I would save my dough for a Fearn Compressor or EQ, [that would be me though] which I know will make way more difference than any clock will.

[DanDan]

Yep Anaogue Rocks and doesn't depreciate in value.
My last investments just before this ReDeCession kicked in were
V76, totally refurbed by StudioTeknik
GML, new, when the dollar was 1.6 vs the Neuro.

I think I will borrow that NanoSync and do the test sometime.
Great little box the Nano, I used it in a system with 5 Digital devices, with Master sync coming from TV world.

Best Regards, DD

[space2012]

Originally Posted by theblotted

fwiw, i clock RME FF800 with Lavry Blue, and i don't hear that dramatic of a difference. usable, yes. life-changing, no.

have you turned off DDS in hdsp settings ?
is your cable 99.997% OFC ?
do you have clean AC power ? furman series 2, monster stage 5 , etc..

[space2012]

Originally Posted by DanDan

I would be very happy to hear a recorded sample ... as an A/B. Simply record a sample twice. Ext then Internal WC. .... The difference will be audible or not. .... Let's stick with the Clock difference, if it is audible, we will all hear it in the proposed test.
DD

jitter in recording = A
jitter in playback = B

if you have a= 1ppm
and b = 1ppm
a+b = 2ppm

if you have a = 1 ppm
and b = 800ps
a+b = 1ppm + 800ps

or if you have a=800ps
and b = 800ps
a+b = 1600ps

ALL THAT MEANS, IF YOU HAVE A LOW JITTER DAC, Low ADC JITTER WILL BE HARDER TO HEAR.
AND
IF YOU HAVE A HIGH JITTER DAC CLOCK, High JITTER ADC WILL BE EASYER TO HEAR.
becouse jitter its accumulative.
BIG LOUDSPEAKERS ARE MUCH MORE SENSITIVE TO JITTER, THAN SMALL LOUDSPEAKERS.
JITTER FEELS/SOUND BIGGER.

Lynx Aurora clocked with INT AND EXT with Ishochrone.

WHEN YOU CAN HEAR THE DIFERENCE,
YOU KNOW THAT ALL CLOCKS Makes the AD/DA chips to SOUND DIFERENT.
AND IN THE END ALL COMES DOWN TO PERSONAL TASTE.

i like louder "less harmonic cancelations" in-your face sound, powerfull mid & bass, round tube like detailed highs, 3d & transparent mid range sound of my Drawmer M-Clock <1ppm 15º-30º.
but its verry sensitive/picky about room & rack temperature.

Alesis Ai-2 its close enough with +-50ppm, makes noticeable harmonic cancelations "lacks" in the midbass, but sounds verry amazing for the price, blows away RME SteadyClock(TM) anyway.

IF YOU CANNOT HEAR THE DIFFERENCE ? = YOU ARE IN THE WRONG BUSSINESS!

[space2012]

Originally Posted by Reborn

One day i did a test. I was able to reliably pick out the signal I was listening too and tell if the clocking was internal to the RME or slaved from the SSL channel strips clock. I could clearly hear a more open soundstage with the EXT. clocking. However there was also a increase in jitter.

Jitter is a lack of precision in the clock signal.
since the clock signal its verry tiny.
each 101010101010101
its 1/3GHz per second. for 44.1khz, and up to 25ghz for 192khz.

more jitter makes harder for the AD/DA chip to know if its an 1 or a 0
lossing sampling details

digital audio travels in serial. left & right LRLRLRLRLRLRLR
both sides with all freq. ranges, to sound at same time/reproduced at same time.
must travel pretty fast. since LR are linked, jitter makes harder for the AD/DA chip to know whats L or R.
reducing the stereo.

the most important issue with jitter its the harmonics.
everybody knows that the same signal mixed to it self in a time aligned manner but out-of-phase, the energy cancels each other, and sound will dissapear.
thats where bad rooms with lots of standing waves comes from.

same person, same instrument in a room with bad acoustics will sound totally diferent in a room with good acoustics.

same happens with wordclock jitter and harmonics.
harmonics are verry small, low level info, verry suceptible to clock/cable jitter, and jitter can make some of them to cancel them selfs, creating an incomplete reproduction.

listening bob marley -1- is this love song extracted to .wav from the legend cd.
some instruments almost dissapear with the RME clock.
and with Ai-2 bass gets BIGER, Stronger, and sounds more natural 3D, more accurate.
with drawmer and some AAD songs the diference its insane,
but cable quality also affects jitter like crazy,
most cables add jitter, its incredible.
only true 99.997% OFC will deliver clean clock at 44k/48khz, for higher sample rates, pure silver must be used.
...
jitter affects sampling points.
creating wrong sampling points, specially in high frequency ranges,
high frequencies are smaller, sampling points must be more accurate, making them more sensitive to wordclock precision.

anyone can see here:
test A/D D/A - without personal bias & without ears!

i have taked lots of time, studing and understanding the wordclock jitter variable in digital audio.

why sometimes i hear jitter diference so BIG,
why some people dont hear it ?
why sometimes i dont hear it?
why happens? etc...

for those that think clock regeneration like benchmark dac1, mytek dac96, lavry da10 its better than an atomic clock, i tell them, thing again.
***********
all DACs say they can operate in Wide Mode = bypassing the clock regeneration,
exept lavry black,

as you can see here:

The video shows a Lavry DA10 locking on a 88.2kHz S/PDIF input using the two PLL modes in this order: Wide, CrystalLock. The measured signal is the masterclock input of the AD1955 DAC on pin 27. The oscilloscope shows the frequency of the masterclock in kHz. As you can see, the DAC operates at a fixed 15MHz clock in both modes, contrary to the claims of the manufacturer.
***********

The video shows a Lavry DA10 in CrystalLock mode locking on various input sampling rates in this order: 44k1, 48k, 88k2, 96k, 176k4, 192k and back to 44k1. The oscilloscope is showing the masterclock operating the DA10's AD1955 DAC (pin 27). You can see that the masterclock is fixed at 15MHz regardless of the samplerate of the input S/PDIF data. This again proves that CrystalLock mode indeed uses asynchronous sample rate converter just as in Wide mode, contrary to the claims made by the manufacturer.
***********

The video shows a Lavry DA10 locking on a 88.2kHz S/PDIF input using the three PLL modes in this order: Wide, CrystalLock, Narrow. The measured signal is the wordclock input of the AD1955 DAC on pin 2. The oscilloscope shows the frequency of the wordclock in kHz. As you can see, the DAC operates at 117kHz sample rate converted data in all three modes, contrary to the claims of the manufacturer.
***********
Agilent | Jitter Analysis
www.jitter.de
Digital Audio Interfaces
http://www.drawmer.com/uploads/File/...clock-sync.pdf
http://www.apogeedigital.com/pdf/app...ermination.pdf
http://www.aslgroup.com/dcs/VeronaClockingPaper.pdf
http://www.apogeedigital.com/pdf/bigben_usersguide.pdf page 21
http://www.blacklionaudio.com/Word_Clock_Myths.pdf

Black Lion Audio MicroClock Review - Full review of the Black Lion Audio MicroClock master word clock - FutureMusic TestDrive: Black Lion Audio Review
http://www.futuremusic.com/news/test...ng_clock-1.aif
http://www.futuremusic.com/news/test...LA_Clock-1.aif

[DanDan]

Hi Space, my A-B test is so simple I think many just don't get it.
A is ext clock B is int clock. For both A and B, the exact same music clip is played back over he same speakers, recorded by the same mics, same distance, same room etc. The only thing changing is the clock.
DD

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by space2012

Jitter is a lack of precision in the clock signal.
since the clock signal its verry tiny.
each 101010101010101
its 1/3GHz per second. for 44.1khz, and up to 25ghz for 192khz.

more jitter makes harder for the AD/DA chip to know if its an 1 or a 0
lossing sampling details

digital audio travels in serial. left & right LRLRLRLRLRLRLR
both sides with all freq. ranges, to sound at same time/reproduced at same time.
must travel pretty fast. since LR are linked, jitter makes harder for the AD/DA chip to know whats L or R.
reducing the stereo.

the most important issue with jitter its the harmonics.
everybody knows that the same signal mixed to it self in a time aligned manner but out-of-phase, the energy cancels each other, and sound will dissapear.
thats where bad rooms with lots of standing waves comes from.

same person, same instrument in a room with bad acoustics will sound totally diferent in a room with good acoustics.

same happens with wordclock jitter and harmonics.
harmonics are verry small, low level info, verry suceptible to clock/cable jitter, and jitter can make some of them to cancel them selfs, creating an incomplete reproduction.

listening bob marley -1- is this love song extracted to .wav from the legend cd.
some instruments almost dissapear with the RME clock.
and with Ai-2 bass gets BIGER, Stronger, and sounds more natural 3D, more accurate.
with drawmer and some AAD songs the diference its insane,
but cable quality also affects jitter like crazy,
most cables add jitter, its incredible.
only true 99.997% OFC will deliver clean clock at 44k/48khz, for higher sample rates, pure silver must be used.
...
jitter affects sampling points.
creating wrong sampling points, specially in high frequency ranges,
high frequencies are smaller, sampling points must be more accurate, making them more sensitive to wordclock precision.

anyone can see here:
test A/D D/A - without personal bias & without ears!

i have taked lots of time, studing and understanding the wordclock jitter variable in digital audio.

why sometimes i hear jitter diference so BIG,
why some people dont hear it ?
why sometimes i dont hear it?
why happens? etc...

for those that think clock regeneration like benchmark dac1, mytek dac96, lavry da10 its better than an atomic clock, i tell them, thing again.
***********
all DACs say they can operate in Wide Mode = bypassing the clock regeneration,
exept lavry black,

as you can see here:

The video shows a Lavry DA10 locking on a 88.2kHz S/PDIF input using the two PLL modes in this order: Wide, CrystalLock. The measured signal is the masterclock input of the AD1955 DAC on pin 27. The oscilloscope shows the frequency of the masterclock in kHz. As you can see, the DAC operates at a fixed 15MHz clock in both modes, contrary to the claims of the manufacturer.
***********

The video shows a Lavry DA10 in CrystalLock mode locking on various input sampling rates in this order: 44k1, 48k, 88k2, 96k, 176k4, 192k and back to 44k1. The oscilloscope is showing the masterclock operating the DA10's AD1955 DAC (pin 27). You can see that the masterclock is fixed at 15MHz regardless of the samplerate of the input S/PDIF data. This again proves that CrystalLock mode indeed uses asynchronous sample rate converter just as in Wide mode, contrary to the claims made by the manufacturer.
***********

The video shows a Lavry DA10 locking on a 88.2kHz S/PDIF input using the three PLL modes in this order: Wide, CrystalLock, Narrow. The measured signal is the wordclock input of the AD1955 DAC on pin 2. The oscilloscope shows the frequency of the wordclock in kHz. As you can see, the DAC operates at 117kHz sample rate converted data in all three modes, contrary to the claims of the manufacturer.
***********
Agilent | Jitter Analysis
www.jitter.de
Digital Audio Interfaces
http://www.drawmer.com/uploads/File/...clock-sync.pdf
http://www.apogeedigital.com/pdf/app...ermination.pdf
http://www.aslgroup.com/dcs/VeronaClockingPaper.pdf
http://www.apogeedigital.com/pdf/bigben_usersguide.pdf page 21
http://www.blacklionaudio.com/Word_Clock_Myths.pdf

Black Lion Audio MicroClock Review - Full review of the Black Lion Audio MicroClock master word clock - FutureMusic TestDrive: Black Lion Audio Review
http://www.futuremusic.com/news/test...ng_clock-1.aif
http://www.futuremusic.com/news/test...LA_Clock-1.aif

Space! Dude, you're my hero. I find your posts amazing.

[theblotted]

Originally Posted by space2012

have you turned off DDS in hdsp settings ?
is your cable 99.997% OFC ?
do you have clean AC power ? furman series 2, monster stage 5 , etc..

yeah, DDS off.

i don't know what OFC is, but i roll my own analog cables with Mogami/Belden 110Ohm AES/EBU cables with Neutrik ends.

i use a Cyberpower True-SineWave Online UPS so it's as clean as it gets.

not sure what you're trying to get at? Lavry is that last 1% of improvement for me. you?

-----------

oh and about them YouTube video's, check out the reply from Brad Johnson from Lavry explaining it here (scroll down or Find: "YouTube") -

Lavry Engineering :: View topic - Indifference of DA10 to digital source components

[Doc Mixwell]

Originally Posted by theblotted

i don't know what OFC is

Oxygen Free Copper