The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
best clock for aurora16?need help!!
Old 28th June 2009
  #1
Gear Head
best clock for aurora16?need help!!

hi there!please i need help...
wich one is the best clock?
aurora 16 slaved to a bigben
or aurora slaved to a rosetta 200
i can get a bigben by 900€
and a rosetta by 1400€

of course second option give me more i/o's,but wich clock is better?
thanks in advance slutz!!!
Old 28th June 2009
  #2
Lives for gear
 

the aurora internal clock is excellent. Use it everyday. Big Ben over the rosetta. wouldnt take rosetta over the aurora
Old 28th June 2009
  #3
Lives for gear
 
Slikjmuzik's Avatar
 

I use the Blacklion Audio Microclock II. It's amazing, slightly different from the Big Ben, but just as good for less than half the cost. I love it and my tracking, mixing and monitoring has improved from having it in the chaing affecting the sonics of my conversion and obviously the jitter in the speciall way that it does from the start of the track.
Old 28th June 2009
  #4
Lives for gear
 
crypticglobe's Avatar
The internal clock is actually really great. However, I do notice a slight improvement when clocking to a very high quality external clock. My favorite is the Universal Audio 2192. It's also my favorite converter.
Old 28th June 2009
  #5
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by crypticglobe View Post
The internal clock is actually really great. However, I do notice a slight improvement when clocking to a very high quality external clock. My favorite is the Universal Audio 2192. It's also my favorite converter.
And just to me the naysayer, I have never noticed an improvement with any external clock and the Aurora. That goes for the Big Ben, the bla micro clock, the Cranesong Hedd, and the jaw dropping Fred Forssell Discrete a/d I'm using now. Different yes, better no. Just my take anyway.

So to the op, save your money or spend it on other things.
Old 28th June 2009
  #6
Gear Maniac
 

I'm with thermos. I heard an Aurora clocked using a big ben against the internal clock, and I heard no improvement using big ben. The internal clock in the Aurora is great imo - spend the money on something else because you would be wasting it adding an external clock.
Old 28th June 2009
  #7
Lives for gear
 
e-cue's Avatar
 

Internal clock sounds best to me. I haven't heard the Black Lion unit yet.
Old 28th June 2009
  #8
Lives for gear
 
Audio Hombre's Avatar
 

i don't even know why you'd want to concern yourself with improving the clock on the aurora.it's perfectly fine as is and it's money better spent elsewhere imho.if it ain't broke,don't fix it
Old 28th June 2009
  #9
Lives for gear
 
flute player's Avatar
 

Hi there,

The internal clock is indeed giving a good result.
But I have clocked my Auror 8 to an Antelope audio OCX.
I have also heard god results for the Rosendahl nanoclock.
If your budget is a little higher you can go for the Grim Audio CC1.

Greetz,

Paul
Old 28th June 2009
  #10
Gear Addict
 
bbgallaway's Avatar
 

Do you have more than just the one converter? The only reason to get an external clock is to sync multiple units from what I've heard. Using an external clock over a good internal will always increase jitter due to the extra connections involved. The Aurora's are supposed to be able to compensate for incoming jitter, but even then you're introducing more steps to achieve the same result - just use the internal clock.
Old 28th June 2009
  #11
Lives for gear
 
crypticglobe's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
And just to me the naysayer, I have never noticed an improvement with any external clock and the Aurora. That goes for the Big Ben, the bla micro clock, the Cranesong Hedd, and the jaw dropping Fred Forssell Discrete a/d I'm using now. Different yes, better no. Just my take anyway.

So to the op, save your money or spend it on other things.
There is a trick to it. Did you turn off the syncrolock?? Lynx doesn't make it easy... but the Syncrolock feature can be turned off. When you turn it off, the green "sync" light on the front does not light up, and then the unit is truly slaved to the external clock. When syncrolock is on... the lynx is still using it's own clock... but synchronizing in some clever, lynx invented way to the external devices as well.

That is (and proves you have good ears, not fooled by what your eyes see) why you would hear NO difference when clocking to an external source if syncrolock is still on.

I believe Lynx said they invented this method to prevent their conversion quality from being deteriorated when clocking to a inferior clock.

Try it.... you might be surprised.
Old 28th June 2009
  #12
Gear Addict
 
la grange's Avatar
 

BIG WARNING ABOUT BIG BEN,
The supply of this unit is slightly above 3 V while the standard supply is 5 V.
I didn't know and trusted the brand and the salesman that sold me this unit but it is simply useless outside the Appogee system. Some set up have been running trouble free but lots of others are not covered by the BB clock.
You live and learn, I did.
Going to rosenthal now!

Oli
Old 28th June 2009
  #13
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crypticglobe View Post
There is a trick to it. Did you turn off the syncrolock?? Lynx doesn't make it easy... but the Syncrolock feature can be turned off. When you turn it off, the green "sync" light on the front does not light up, and then the unit is truly slaved to the external clock. When syncrolock is on... the lynx is still using it's own clock... but synchronizing in some clever, lynx invented way to the external devices as well.

That is (and proves you have good ears, not fooled by what your eyes see) why you would hear NO difference when clocking to an external source if syncrolock is still on.

I believe Lynx said they invented this method to prevent their conversion quality from being deteriorated when clocking to a inferior clock.

Try it.... you might be surprised.
The Aurora ALWAYS works off its own clock, like any decent converter out there.

The difference is in how that clock is locked to the master word clock

When syncrolock is off, it uses the traditional Phase Locked Loop analogue circuitry, which continuously tries to track the average rate of the master clock, whilst supressing jitter. They don't give details on syncrolock, but I suspect it is probably a similar approach to Lavry's CrystalLock, which you could think of as a PLL implemented using digital processing rather than analogue processing in an attempt to avoid the problems with analogue PLLs.

(first paragraph of section 2.6.2 in the manual for confirmation that it's using a PLL by the way)
Old 28th June 2009
  #14
Lives for gear
 
TornadoTed's Avatar
As a related question,

I am thinking of getting Pro Tools HD2 and 2x Lynx Aurora 16's, what's the best way to clock them?
Old 29th June 2009
  #15
Gear Head
ok..thanks at all!!!
but,in case of take the rosetta,better slaved to auroras clock?
its better converters,dith options,etc....
and in case of use the aurora in masterclock to rosetta...
wich way is better?
aes?
wordclock?
i will use with a pt hd2
great site guys!thanks so much
Old 29th June 2009
  #16
I have tried the Big Ben and the Antelope audio OCX extensively.

I still preferred the internal clock over the external ones. Save your money
Old 29th June 2009
  #17
I would make the Aurora the master clock and the Rosetta the slave word clock.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sonidoricoes View Post
ok..thanks at all!!!
but,in case of take the rosetta,better slaved to auroras clock?
its better converters,dith options,etc....
and in case of use the aurora in masterclock to rosetta...
wich way is better?
aes?
wordclock?
i will use with a pt hd2
great site guys!thanks so much
Old 29th June 2009
  #18
Lives for gear
 
jpupo74's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonidoricoes View Post
hi there!please i need help...
wich one is the best clock?
aurora 16 slaved to a bigben
or aurora slaved to a rosetta 200
i can get a bigben by 900€
and a rosetta by 1400€

of course second option give me more i/o's,but wich clock is better?
thanks in advance slutz!!!
Do you need a clock to synch some other stuff in your studio with the auroras???
If not it'll jut be a waste of money.
Cheers,
Pupo
Old 29th June 2009
  #19
Lives for gear
 
crypticglobe's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Hodgson View Post
The Aurora ALWAYS works off its own clock, like any decent converter out there.

The difference is in how that clock is locked to the master word clock

When syncrolock is off, it uses the traditional Phase Locked Loop analogue circuitry, which continuously tries to track the average rate of the master clock, whilst supressing jitter. They don't give details on syncrolock, but I suspect it is probably a similar approach to Lavry's CrystalLock, which you could think of as a PLL implemented using digital processing rather than analogue processing in an attempt to avoid the problems with analogue PLLs.

(first paragraph of section 2.6.2 in the manual for confirmation that it's using a PLL by the way)

Thanks for explaining that correctly. I do hear a difference with sycnrolock off....and prefer what I hear with it off..and clocked to my 2192.
Old 29th June 2009
  #20
Gear Head
ok,no need to clock other devices,the unique ad/da is the aurora 16 and a rosetta200/ua2192(still deciding...ua its in mind...have one by 1800$!!!!
i will try the two ways,and post here impressions early as possible...
aurora masterclock>2192 slaved
and viceversa.the idea is to have different mojos on 2 buss monitoring and AD conversion of the mix buss next to the hardware(some germ comps and germ eqs...)coming back to daw...
auroras cleaner?
uad smoother...?
we will see....
thanks at all!!!!
Old 2nd July 2009
  #21
Lives for gear
 
Adebar's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by thermos View Post
And just to me the naysayer, I have never noticed an improvement with any external clock and the Aurora. That goes for the Big Ben, the bla micro clock, the Cranesong Hedd, and the jaw dropping Fred Forssell Discrete a/d I'm using now. Different yes, better no. Just my take anyway.

So to the op, save your money or spend it on other things.
The Forssell has only wordclock input. It works only on internal clocking.
Old 2nd July 2009
  #22
Gear Addict
 

External clocks introduce more jitter. Use the internal clock of your converter.

Read:

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Proper word clock implementation
Old 2nd July 2009
  #23
Lives for gear
 
s.d.finley's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Careyn View Post
External clocks introduce more jitter. Use the internal clock of your converter.

Read:

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Proper word clock implementation
In that same thread Bob Katz states that jitter may have a euphonic or pleasing effect.

I just purchased an Aurora 16 and have it clocked to my UA 2192. I had the UA first. I have tried the Aurora 16 clocked internally and externally via the 2192, and I do prefer the sound of the Aurora clocked to the UA. The difference is not night and day but more of a subtle clearness on the top and bottom. I also monitor from the UA outputs. This way I have all 16 analog i/o available for inserts on the aurora in PTHD.
Old 2nd July 2009
  #24
Lives for gear
 
Marcocet's Avatar
I love the Antelope OCX but differences in clocks are slight, and there are general disadvantages to using external clocks, so you're probably better off saving your money and working off the lynx internal clock which is totally good.

The only clock I've heard and been blown away by was the Antelope 10M atomic clock. If you haven't heard one yet you owe yourself to give it a shot. However we're talking about 6k for the atomic unit and another 2k for a clock to interface it with... Still just change compared to what people had to spend to buy a good tape machine new, but I haven't gotten around to picking one up yet. It's definitely on my list.
Old 2nd July 2009
  #25
Lives for gear
 
True North's Avatar
 

There was an incredible thread on here that extensively the whole internal/external clocking debate. I beleive Dan Lavry was laying down some serious digital theory, very interesting stuff......... if you are a geek like me. If you are really interested in this topic you should use the search function to seek it out.

ALSO

With the Auroras I have noticed a significant difference in the way I boot up and turn on my gear and the effectiveness of the Synchrolock function.

I have 2 AES-16 cards, 1 Aurora 16 and 1 Aurora 8. I start everything in stages. First I boot up the computer and open the mixer to see when the second card is locked to the time code of the first card clock.

Then I turn on one convertor at a time and wait until each is synchrolocked. It makes a big difference in the stability of my personal rig. I used to just turn everything and I had spotty performance.
Old 2nd July 2009
  #26
AB3
Lives for gear
 

I think the Antelope OCX is noticeably better, especially with grand piano and percussive instruments. Tighter bass and highs, etc.

It is worth the money for this.

But you must make sure that Synchrolok is OFF or you do not get the benefit from it.

I know there are scientific arguments against this, but my ears say it is better.
Old 2nd July 2009
  #27
Lives for gear
 
thermos's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adebar View Post
The Forssell has only wordclock input. It works only on internal clocking.
Yeah, clearly. Whenever I use that unit I always clock the Aurora to it.

And crypticglobe, I have indeed tried it with syncrolock off and to me in every case it sounds more jittery and less defined. YMMV though. I would like to try it with an Isochrone someday, as I've heard nothing but amazing things about them.

Also, I've said this before but to my ears (and if you get Lynx on the phone) the Aurora sounds best when its the master, the aes 16 card is the slave and syncrolock is turned on for both.
Old 2nd July 2009
  #28
Gear Addict
 

AGAIN External clocks introduce more jitter. Use the internal clock of your converter.

Read:

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Proper word clock implementation
Old 2nd July 2009
  #29
AB3
Lives for gear
 

So when something sounds better with an external clock - it is just an illusion.

Go with the documents, not your ears? Sorry have to disagree. I use the Isochrone regularly with the Aurora and it sounds better to me. It sounds tighter and better to me.

Now that is just my experience. But I guess a document is better than my own ears?

I would suggest that if anyone wants to decide- they should use their ears. That is what we hear with (mostly anyway.)
Old 2nd July 2009
  #30
Lives for gear
 
Martin Kantola's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AB3 View Post
So when something sounds better with an external clock - it is just an illusion.
Do an ABX (blind) test and find out if you can hear a difference or not. But what's important to remember is that just because something is clearly technically better it's not necessarily musically better too...

Martin
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump