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

@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.

@tjag   It is likely that Phoenix reclocker helped users who had outdated synchronous USB or provided some electrical isolation.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"  :)

@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.