Which USB reclocker is as good as the Innuos Phoenix USB?

I read a lot about the Innuos Phoenix USB and everyone sings its praises even owners of expensive gear. The problem is that it is expensive.

There are other reclockers like iPurifier3, the Ideon Audio USB Re-clocker 3R, or the SOtM tX-USBultra USB Audio Reclocker. In forums the feedback is that the Phoenix beats a lot of the reclockers.

Does anyone have experience with a USB reclocker that does as good job as the Phoenix USB?


I am currently testing a SOtM tX-USBultra USB Audio Reclocker on behalf of a friend.

So far there's plenty of additional detail at the expense of being a bit shouty but I'm sure that'll work itself out during the burn-in.

Remember you'll need an additional LPS & DC cable approx $1k.

I'll need about another week to fully assess but I'd say this is probably a keeper but besides the LPS an additional quality USB, clock and power cable will be required.

So that's a total of over $3-4k for the SOtM.

Unless one has done direct comparison in their system, only assumptions being made.


Lots of usb reclockers, decrapifiers, renderers/streamers out there, doubt there is some objective heiarchy of quality. The Phoenix does have quality design and parts, and advantage of a single integrated box.


I've gone optical route with Sonore OpticalRendu, sounds mighty fine to me. Does require top flight outboard lps to excel.

@jjss49 Don’t we all know that lol. I can wait till I find it in the secondhand market in the EU.

@lordmelton I remember I read the Phoenix bettered the SOtM tX, I will find the link. With regards to the lps, I know there are very good expensive ones. However, this ALLO SHANTI is perhaps good enough. It has a bank of 15000uf capacitors followed by super capacitors and a noise level of 80nV only. Price 173USD. It outputs 2 x 5v, I connected the two in serial to get an additional 10v. Allo Nirvana SMPS & Shanti LPS Review

@sns yes true, but could the Phoenix be dethroned?

I found this on a French forum (the interface is messy). I will read further to find out what results they got.

"My questioning was rather: between 600 € (SU-6) and 2400 € (Phoenix), there is 1800 €, which is already the price of good Hifi equipment, and in my opinion this is not the price that allows to qualify equipment as "high-end". Is the "gain" between these two interfaces worth €1800? There are plenty of glowing articles on both, but no comparisons."

I am getting the Sonore OpticalRendu too. I already implemented the method here Cheapest way to enhance SQ with digital streaming with good results using the Gigabit Ethernet. However, this only fixes the network side. So you still have the USB side to work with. Welcome to the quest :).

on a more serious note, i don’t buy into outboard reclockers as a category if we are talking about serious system building... one should get a superior network bridge, streamer, dac or combined unit... credible products made to a high quality level should have the clocking handled superbly within them...

@jjss49 I really would like to think this is true, but what I read disputes it. Owners of expensive gear swear by it check the Phoenix reviews here on Audiogon.

@lordmelton Here is the comparison with the SOtM tX below.

Check what Audiobacon wrote about the Phoenix:

"Having used both battery and the Paul Hynes SR4 on the SOtM tX-USBultra, I realized that its tone is more grey and neutral relative to the Phoenix. That’s probably the biggest difference between the two. The Phoenix has more “blood and tissue” and I found it to be more tonally true. Both handle timbre well.

The Phoenix also has more grit and texture while the tX-USBultra is fuller and smoother. While listening to a few tracks by Kieza, I felt the Phoenix had more realistic decay where certain harmonies lingered for the right amount of time. This actually brought me closer to when I saw her performing live. But the tX sounded more molded and solid. And thus gave more of the impression of a physical presence. Silhouettes are seemed tighter and more “rounded off” with the tX-USBultra.

Another difference is depth. The Innuos has more of it. The SOtM stays more in front and sounds more “glued together.” Whereas the Innuos plucks out the elements better. It handles the fabric of the music with more delicacy and nuance. It’s also the more open sounding of the two. The SOtM is more “collected” and laid back. Lastly, the Innuos has more impactful, deeper, and refined bass. The SOtM has more aggregated mass that is punchy but not as granular.

If you prefer a liquid, more solid, and more neutral sound, the SOtM tX-USBultra is probably the better pick. If you prefer something richer, more open, and warmer, go with the Phoenix. Although I appreciate the qualities of both, I prefer the more natural tone of the Phoenix."


reading reviews only get you so far... there is only one way to know, right?  my various tries with ddc's and usb reclockers have been wastes of time largely... but then again i don't use a noisy sloppy computer to feed my system its digital stream

ymmv obviously

Audiobacon tested with several source.

"Does the server you connect the Phoenix to matter? I tried a custom music server with LPS, a laptop, and of course the Innuos ZENith SE Mk.2. The short answer is “hell yeah.” Even a laptop powered by only a battery won’t sound nearly as good as a dedicated server with a linear power supply. And by “as good” I mean…it’s a pretty large delta."

At the end he bought the Phoenix:

"I wasn’t expecting to purchase this USB reclocker. But the main reason I am is because of its performance with voice recordings. Too many times, a lot of HiFi gear will strip the soul of the performers while polishing everything else"


I am not questioning the usefulness of the Phoenix. I am just asking if there is  an equally effective USB reclocker.

well then you should buy one immediately! audiobacon says so it must be superb...🤣

@jjss49 the title of this discussion is "Which USB reclocker is as good as the Innuos Phoenix USB?"

haha ok

but maybe you should ask audiobacon... who else would know better... but oh wait, his answer would be none, as he bought the innuos 

sorry i can't resist playing with you a little... good luck, hope you find your cheaper than innuos phoenix nirvana...

UltraRendu does have two Femto clocks,one for network, other for usb, also does usb rendering. So, in fact its network and usb device. Sonore in different league vs prior SOTM SMS 200 Neo.


At this point I'm mostly in jjss49 camp as far as dedicated usb decrapifiers, reclockers. A server that optimally renders usb should negate the need for such a device. Those that don't can use audiophile switch with quality clock, connect to streamer that does quality rendering, finally dac which should have quality usb board. Quality rendering means good noise filtering and clocking, why add another device, redundant with quality internal clocking.


we are pushing on a rope... but advice given here is worth what people have paid for it

now, audiobacon... maybe more valuable...🤣

ok i'll stop, went on a bike ride this morning, lil amped up...

"A server that optimally renders usb should negate the need for such a device."

- It should, but does it do that in reality? What I read on Audiogon reviews or on the net negates this claim. Again I am not questioning the usefulness of the Phoenix, USB reclocking or DDC.

I am yet to find a negative review of the Phoenix. If you know of one please share it.

Kindly, I would like to ask people who have experience (or info with links) of the Phoenix in comparison with other USB reclockers (if any) to contribute in this discussion.



Well, in relation to those positive Phoenix reviews, were they used in combination with an optimized renderer. The Innuos Zeniths don't have optimized rendering, only the Statement does, adding the Phoenix to that would be redundant.


Quality internal renderers already do what Phoenix does. The reason Phoenix has good reviews is because they're being used with less than optimized rendering.  I doubt you'll ever see Phoenix partnered with servers like Wadax, Pink Faun, Taiko Extreme, certain models of Antipodes. At top end of servers, no need since they essentially have a Phoenix built in to them. For the mid price and lower server with non-optimized rendering, the Phoenix would likely be of benefit. I contend, along with others, that a streamer/renderer does the job better than the Phoenix or any usb filter/cleaner device. A quality streamer is going to do a much better job rendering vs the server without quality rendering. The quality steamer cleans the network,  filters and clocks the usb (doing the job of Phoenix), and renders better than those servers. Bottom line, you're getting far more bang for the buck, three functions for the price of one!

I should add, most streamers are going to require quality outboard lps for best sound quality, certainly brings cost up. Still, even with this, I believe good value vs. Phoenix or any dedicated usb only device.


Not saying Phoenix not good for what it does, based on  Innuos description and reviews I believe it does what it does well.

It would be interesting if someone who owns a Phoenix shares his experience. I will eventually list links of reviewers who mentioned their gear and some were expensive.

We are just exchanging experiences and information sns :)

Look what I found. It is sure interesting info worth investigating.

Check this:

 head-fi.org - Innuos Phoenix USB Reclocker

"Then this weekend I plugged it between a Sonore UltraRendu and my Devialet Expert 1000 Pro. The impact in a two channel system was even more dramatic—huge step up in clarity/width/depth of the sound stage, esp. with 192/24 FLACs. I’ve never experienced such immersive recreation of recorded music. Truly stunning."



Post removed 

@djones51 This is true. A reclocking USB device doesn't alter the speed at witch the DAC asynchronously retrieves USB data packets. Additionally, USB reclockers claim to only repacket the data without altering it. So how can one explain all the positive reviews on Audiogon and the net about the Phoenix and other USB reclockers?

Either it is all lies and smoke or there is something in the USB communication mechanism that is not common knowledge yet. I wasn't able to find an answer to this question. I only read review after review of how good the results of using a USB reclocker are.

If you find a single negative review about the Phoenix please share it.



@djones51   +1

With asynchronous USB DAC's clock is not based on rate of incoming data (as it is with S/Pdif).  Data is delivered in frames (each frame containing multiple samples) at constant frequency, for instance 1kHz.  DAC receives frames and places samples in the buffer signaling back buffer's over or underflow.  Upon this signal computer adjusts the size of next frame.  That way DAC will never loose samples while its clock is independent and constant.  As djones51 said - reclocking data that will be reclocked anyway doesn't make much sense.  The only useful thing of USB reclocker could be isolation (if any) to avoid injecting electrical noise from computer into DAC.  It is very likely that good DAC has already optical isolation and USB reclocker won't help much.  Minimizing electrical noise (good power supplies etc.) seems more important.

@kijanki I totally agree I am not disagreeing at all.

But.. how can you explain all the positive reviews about the Phoenix. I can make a long list of positive reviews on Audiogon and on the net.

Anyone found a negative review yet? Can someone explain this mystery please :)

@tjag   It is likely that Phoenix reclocker helped users who had outdated synchronous USB or provided some electrical isolation.  Since reclocking of the signal that doesn't come in real time doesn't make any sense, I'm just saying - be sure you can return it if it doesn't help.  On the other hand if you strongly believe that it will bring improvement - it will and, as Seinfeld said, "There is nothing wrong with it"  :)

I surmise these reclockers derive most of their improvements by lowering the noise floor rather than the reclocking. Servers are likely the noisiest component in streaming system,  the Phoenix should be providing lower noise floor.


I too am skeptical of adding multiple clocks, clock in renderer and usb board in dacs should do the job. At one point I added audiophile switch to my streaming setup, the OXCO clock in that far superior to the relative crap one in my router. Result was by far the worst addition to my streaming in five or six years of experimenting with various streaming components.


Ed Meitner of EMM scoffs at these various add on clocks, claims they do nothing or screw up timing. He states clocks should be internal, placed closest to circuit their providing timing for. He hears lower jitter mostly as affecting sound stage at this point, most of the jitter that we hear as digititus has been decreased to the point this only impacts lower level digital. Funny thing was, the audiophile switch I added decreased sound stage size, etched image outlines, I did hear more detail. This tells me something about adding another clock in that switch, I presume mismatched or excessive clocking.


Again,  optimize the usb rendering and input in dac, good to go, this best implementation of clocks.

@kijanki Yes I get it. I am definitely buying a Phoenix when I find one on the secondhand market or if someone recommends an equally good USB reclocker.

Look at all these positive review on the net. I didn’t list those on Audiogon:

"USB reclockers are an important element of a highly optimized digital audio chain. If your budget allows it, forget the spaghetti, and get yourself a Phoenix. Its addition in your USB chain will bring a huge grin on your face!"

@tjag What you should look for in all these reviews is what server is being used, this will tell you what purpose Phoenix serving. I suspect everyone of those servers is not optimizing usb rendering, this means using inferior clocking and noisy usb connected directly to motherboard, not good.


The problem with streaming is you can never get back what you lost, nothing that comes after a weak link can be recovered. This means information lost from high noise floor can't magically reappear, bad timing emanating from poor rendering cannot suddenly be re-timed at point of rendering, re-clocker is only band aid. You want to fix things at the source, band aids may help, but the damage remains.

@sns  I agree, internal clocks close to D/A converter IC make sense to me.  Advertisement of external clocks often shows extreme accuracy or long term stability - both unimportant.  Important is the jitter of the clock, that often is not specified and can be increased by the method of delivery (cable, external electrical noise, clock's PS noise).  I would rather spend money on better DAC instead of very expensive "femtosecond" external clock.  AFAIK jitter below about 50ps becomes inaudible, while "femtosecond" suggests 1000x below this level.  It is like buying keyboard able to type million words per second.


@sns Thank you for your advice. I have a simple but relatively good streamer ifi Zen with a nice DAC Musician Aquarius. I am not worried that my streamer is better than what these guys have :)

I did read about what gear they used, and it is a variety. One reviewer even tested the Phoenix with the Sonore UltraRendu and reported a positive result.

I don't get why the guy inserted Phoenix between Devialet and ultrarendu. The Devialet has non-optimal usb rendering so I understand the improvment using sonore and phoenix. Reviewer should place UltraRendu directly after Devialet, listen, then add Phoenix AFTER UltraRendu. I'd bet on no better or dimiinished sound quality used in this order. If the guy added Phoenix after having previously used Devialet direct to UltraRendu, I'd suggest further lowering of noise floor with Phoenix here, benefited UR, redundant clocks don't help. I'd also like to know what power supply reviewer uses with UR, quality of this has great impact on noise floor of that unit.

This is the only entry on the net I read someone claiming to have bettered the Phoenix. I don’t know if I believe him because this is a selling ad (Mano ULTRA mkII Music Streamer). By the way the Mano doesn’t have a USB output.

Check what he wrote

"I am only selling because I changed DAC’s and no longer have an I2S input. But this streamer was outstanding and bettered my previous Sonore UltraRendu/Innuos Phoenix USB path at a much cheaper cost"




Post removed 

@sns I believe that reviewer on head-fi (muski) is doing pretty well for himself and his system. This is his gear:

  • Devialet Expert 1000 Pro $35000
  • DAVE DAC $14000
  • Innuos PhoenixUSB $3195
  • Focal Utopia $2600
  • Sonore OpticalRendu $1895

Total: $48340

With such a system there is no way he forgot to add a decent linear power supply

Post removed 

omg -- this thread is quickly becoming the sweaty armpit of audiogon 😆

To the OP I deleted my posts. I promised myself I wouldn’t comment on reclocker threads. If someone wants to believe this stuff then they will. I apologize for the interruption.  Carry on.


What is it with you and this attitude?

Apparently you have close no knowledge in digital gear.

You asked for advice in a thread you created:

Wisdom of buying high priced digital gear (given new advancements underway)

As I am fairly new to the world of stand-alone streamers and DACs, as well as combo units like a Hegel amp with onboard DAC, my question is whether it is wise to buy some of the more expensive high end streamers and DACs, say in the 3-4-5 grand (and up) range.

For instance, a Bluesound Node 2i is a capable digital bit-source (weak internal DAC noted) at only $500, so I question the benefit of buying a $2-3-4k unit from Innuos, Brooklyn, Auralic etc etc? But if I do, just to try them, I am concerned there will be newer units out in the future, and these used units may take significant value hits.


Then you come here bringing your lack of knowledge and "armpit" attitude.

Treat people as you want to be treated.




@gavin1977 The Pink Faun USB Bridge is a good solution when streaming from a PC.

You know what, I am starting to think it is the USB that is complicating things. The USB was originally developed for computer communications and not for audio. They say if the USB is implemented well then it will work great. Yes, but from the reviews I read it seems no one is implementing it well enough thus the need for the Phoenix.

In my DAC both the USB and I2S support the same sampling rate:

USB / I2S : PCM up to 32bit 1536kHz, DSD up to DSD1024, DSD DoP up to DSD64

Perhaps it is time to try a digital interface that outputs I2S like the Singxer SU-6 or the AUDIO-GD DI-20 HE.

The Mano ULTRA mkII Music Streamer would have been great. It has two femto ultra low jitter clocks. I need to ask them about the I2S PCM sampling rate, because it seems to support 24bits only while my DAC supports 32bit PCM or is there something I am misunderstanding?

HDMI I2S LVDS = 44.1 Khz – 192 Khz | 16-24 bit – DSD64 (DoP)

A new question then, how good is sound over the I2S? :)

Tjag   Here is the DCS line up it’s one the the most premium digital in the world .

what dac would you use with this ? If buying new Their Bartok dac-Streamer 

isexceptional ,my brother owns one ,and no reclocker necessary imo.


This case is closed.

A reviewer "Koso" on audiophilestyle.com tested the Phoenix USB against the Ideon 3R Master time (USB reclocker) and the Denafrips Gaia DDC (no USB output).



On 5/27/2022 at 8:08 PM, beautiful music said:

So are you end up letting Gaia go or am I missing thing?

Yes, that’s the plan. PhoenixUSB is doing magic in my setup.


A new question then, how good is sound over the I2S? :)

I use I2s with a USB to I2s DDC, I've been very happy with it and am only trying out the SOtM USB Ultra as an experiment for a friend.

However the SOtM is bringing something into the mix but it'll take about a week more to burn in.

This is the DDC and DAC I'm using to excellent results:



I do think you'll get a better result if you do the USB to I2s conversion firstly and then maybe try the USB reclocking later, if you feel it's necessary. BTW I use RJ45 I2s.