2. digital
  3. 172761-160899

.? Digital Reclocking and syncing clocks does anyone know the correct Answrrsb

Hello To all ,many Audiophiles I have found do not  even know what a Digital reclocker is, and what does it do exactly , and how it helps the incoming signal.

and the Bigger question is Syncing  the clock to Dac.

for example with Denafrips Reclocker , the most versatile I have seen with input outputs especially from Hermes, Gaia DCC reclockers  most inputs,outputs,       they have both   45,and 48 MHZ  for clock sync. ,other dacs clocks may use 5-10 MHz  ,this gets a bit confusing.
Here is a big question , say you have a very good dac with over clock ⏰, 

Is there any advantage to syncing clock say from cheaper Iris DDC reclocker  ,to the  very good say Terminator oven  controlled clock. The Big  question is how does this work? Does the better clock in the dac dominate or influence  the lesser  clocks ?

or don’t bother syncing clock with cheaper Iris DDC ?  Do you have to have a reclocker with = quality ⏰ clock  to the dac to  make it  a Sonic improvement ? 
these are the questions  no one I know has been able to answer with absolute knowledge.

just the reclocker itself is worth wild for. It filters and cleans the incoming digital signal ,through usb,BNC,or coaxial cable, then reclocks signal to dac to have a pristine signal to read.. in this respect even a good basic reclocker like Iris would be very good ,on pontus and even Venus dac ,and Holo springs worked well 

for $600, next Big step the $1250 Hermes better everything including oven controlled clocks ,if you can afford it.  Syncing clocking is the big Question is there any benefit going from a lesser Iris clock in the Iris DDC reclocker syncing clock to say a Terminator + with far superior oven  clocks?Is there any benefit ? If so why ?  Thank you to Anyone who may have the expertise to logically explain this.
Hopefully Alvin Chee will see this ,Happy listening to  your music .🎶 🎵 

jimob

Showing 2 responses by itsjustme

itsjustme
681 posts
 

@cindyment

I mean both IM and unpleasant harmonic distortions (i prefer to simply use the musical term dissonant so that it is better understood). I leave that definition to music theorists and psychoacousticians.

reference for those who wish to dive in.

The 49720 does not suck at all. Those two chips are among my favorites, for musical amplification. Re-read read what I said: I stated that the % THD+noise measurement of my own designs, in comparison, "sucks". Meaning since amusing language seems lost here "is substantially higher in aggregate measured by FTC methods" (which i think are misleading, to normal consumers, for the reasons i stated)

But, maybe the inference needs to be stated: My custom designs, higher levels of total distortion and all, sound meaningfully better in many respects. Perceived dynamics being the most obvious.

 

Why? You tell me. I have some educated guesses (and no, on those, I’m not talking)

itsjustme
681 posts
 

one thing is for sure the best measurements don’t always sound the best .

A perfect example A vacuum tube amp,or preamp measure no where near as good as even a mid fi amp but it’s distortions being even just sound right to the ear 

I am always wary of entering this swamp, but the huge elephant on the table comes from music theory - dissonance and consonance.  Its just plain mistaken to correlate " enjoyment" with "lest distorted, overall.

1. People's tastes differ

2. People's hearing differs.  Many in our (and i step into muck here) hobby are old men and have high frequency hearing loss.  Is a flat response best for them?  BTW many old rockers have tons of HF hearing loss and IMNSHO master records accordingly.  bright!

3. Consonant distorion can sound good.  Its disortion, but enjoyable.

4. Dissonant distortion sounds awful.

5. Corollary to 3 and 4 - ideally we would have a weighted measurement of distortion - reducing or eliminating the weight of consonance and vice-versa.

6. Now, if ALL distortions go to zero, or close, we ought not to be able to hear them. But #1,2 above might complicate that assertion.

I have spent 30 years trying to find measurements that lead me to better sounding designs. I have a few. I also have a bigger library of design tricks that produce good sound, but i cannot always measure why. My stuff has adequate measurements for THD + noise, but compared to a super opamp like a 49720 or 1612 they suck ( that's a technical term).  So back to Daniel and his quote..... (from many posts ago).

Anyway, for all this I may surprise many in that i generally prefer digital to analog, and get great results, by paying attention to basics.

 

More to discover