The studio I mix in had an Aardvark. We mixed the first single last October, but then they got a hold of the Lucid clock (SSG-192). We remixed the same single with the Lucid-it blew the Aardvark away (which was pretty damn good to begin with). The mix was wider and the whole sound had more presence.
The quote above was taken from another post, but I'm interested in knowing if a test has been done between the SSG-192, and SyncII, aside from that of the Ocean's 11 single.
I had a GENx, and bought the SyncII cause it also made my mixes wider, it had more presence, and the lower end was tighter.
Is the SSG a better unit? If anyone has any info, pass it on...
all I can say is that I am perfectly happy with my aardsync II.
I would how ever doubt that the Lucid would "blow away" the aardsync.
I'm sure that there is a difference, but when it comes down to comparing 2 or more good clocks (lucid, aardvark, rohsendahl, apogee, ....) the differences are usually very subtle. not what I would call "blow away". That would mean that with one clock the mix would suck and with the other it would sound great. I can hardly believe that.
I auditioned a Lucid about 3 weeks ago, in transition to a new room and some new gear. I didn't expect much, it was kind of a lark.
Both myself and my assistant noticed my system sounding very punchy and open. Really good, but hey, it's a new room and the monitors are pretty nice.
So anyway, I violated my own rule and failed to have any proper controls or any proper A/B on the listen. Really, since I didn't expect much, it was more of a "Have a listen to this" from a local pro audio shop.
So I proceeded to install an Aardsync II and a Sync DA, since I use 10 seperate clock feeds in my room. Sounds fine.
But in reality, I'm now haunted by the sneaking suspicion that the Lucid sounded better. Possibly somewhat better. But since, idiotically, I failed to do proper testing, I'm guessing.
Dang it. I will now *have* to get the Lucid bacl and listen. As I sit here typing, I'm fairly certain the Lucid sounded better in retrospect. Pretty darn sure.
If you watch REALY closely and long enough ..... I stared at it for 15 minutes .... you can see a slight jitter between monkey 1 and 3 .... but only after 15 minutes, which proves that this forum resides on a pretty good server with very low jitter specs.
Or could it be that monkey 1 and 3 need to be nudged. You probably forgot the delay factor between your modem and the server when you put in Nr 3. Ask Jules for the specs and nudge it back by say 12 pico bauts or so ....
Are you on a digital connection ??? maybe you should go back to an analog modem .....
(see what it does to different sources)
GM emailed some jitter spec measurements he did awhile back between the two boxes...the Lucid was much better i.e. lower jitter.
I think the clock changes things quite audibly. Flipping between a PSX100SE clock and the Rosendahl, the relationship between instruments changes somewhat...enough to haved mixed them differently by a dB or so.
Just because the Aard or Lucid or Rosendahl sounds better with gear X does not equal better with gear Y. I really think this is the source of much of the disagreement about gear.
Cables, cable length, impedence of the clock port being fed, jitter correction circuits within some of the gear being fed, EMI, RFI and a bunch of other factors we don't understand could elevate one clock over another from room to room.
I'd love it to be simple as GM deciding which was better, or one guy checking the thing in his room, however microscopically detailed he was, but I don't think it works that way for clocks or other gear that is this cable and cable length sensitive. Like mic pres and mics.
I will certainly run the test soon, since I'm mixing next week. Probably all 3 boxes. I'll be happy to post. But that's using friggin' 10 WC outs in my room on mostly Paris. Not exactly a standardized scene
My point is, who knows if the same test in room Z with PT or Motu would yield the same conclusion?
Some units just sound better with their own internal clocks, some units sound better clocked from the outside. Many times I've run mixes where it was a combination of both, internal and external clocking.
Originally posted by Jules I am sending Prism WC round my joint. I could try Nanosync or Cranesong but I lost the energy to expirement...
That's all wrong. Prism clocks suck, dude. Like, their jitter is about 14 picofarads per vestibule.
A real man would waste at least 3 days, better spent somewhere in the sunlight, chasing his own tail (or other member) dfegad in search of that elusive something .