2. digital
  3. 147917-3034

Digital clock - any recommendations?

Recently heard an Esoteric setup with and without a digital external clock and the difference was not subtle.  I have a marantz sa11 s2.  Any recommendations?
tzh21y
mzkmxcv
777 posts
 
@folkfreak
If it is a good DAC, then what OP heard is not real. People wanting to believe expensive “tweaks” actually matter. However, going off the Stereophile measurements of the Esoteric D-07, even $100 DACs have better jitter than that, so...

If the Topping DAC did not benefit from a reclocker (meaning the issue is internal jitter and not external jitter), then why would the Esoteric be worse.

@dgarretson

Same thing, no. The better your DAC, the less improvement an external clock/reclocker makes.

To restate, if your >$500 DAC benefits from an external clock, it’s a piece of junk. There is no reason why it should not internally reclock it’s inputs, that’s just a company selling a lamborghini body with a corolla engine.

For any good DAC, the only jitter is internal, meaning external clocks, which affect external jitter, will have no effect.


dgarretson
2,599 posts
 

@mzkmxcv  OK, you rooted me out:  Esoteric and DCS are expensive junk, and so are laboratory instruments like my Stanford Perfection 10 Rubidium clock specified +/- .05 ppb and < -150dBc/Hz@ 10kHz phase noise.  None of this matters with any DAC >$500.

I'm done.   

folkfreak's avatar
folkfreak
1,349 posts
 
Dear @mzkmxcv riddle me this then. Why are the suppliers of external clocks primarily suppliers to recording studios? Presumably the studios can afford the clock impervious DACs of which you speak so highly yet they somehow seem to think it worth investing in master clocks?

My favorite clock and the one I’m looking forward to adding to my system is of course the Abendrot https://abendrot-audio.com
mzkmxcv
777 posts
 
@folkfreak

riddle me this then. Why are the suppliers of external clocks primarily suppliers to recording studios? Presumably the studios can afford the clock impervious DACs of which you speak so highly yet they somehow seem to think it worth investing in master clocks?


To quote someone else:

This is so all digital processing, DAC’s, ADC’s all sample at exactly the same time and all data words...are generated/read at the exact same time.
When this was not done the drift in each clock of every ’device’ would make them all different in frequency (very slightly) and timing.

What a studio needs and what a residential setup needs are totally different. 24Bit provides 0 benefit for consumers, but is needed for studios so they can gain recordings without increasing the noise floor to audible levels.

We are not talking about audio production, we are talking about audio reproduction, specifically reducing jitter from the source to the DAC by using external clocks. Any good DAC will reclock internally, so unless you have so much jitter that your DAC is losing lock, there is no need for an external clock on a good DAC, because it would make no difference, the only jitter from a good DAC is internal.
folkfreak's avatar
folkfreak
1,349 posts
 
@mzkmxcv you are also aware that the Esoteric and DCS systems we are discussing are all multi box systems with seperate transports, upsamplers, DACs and so on. Hence the focus on ensuring a consistent master clock between them?

I have no opinion on the effect this would have on a one box system but in the case of multi box systems the benefit of both consistent word clocking at sample rates (ie multiples of 44.1 or 48) and a superior master clock (ie 10 MHz) is obviously audible, st least in my system (DCS Vivaldi based)
More to discover