What is the advantage of using DDS except that you can alter the clock speed?
Is it anymore stable and jitterfree than the normal clock mode?

No.

It's just as good when it's master... And since the clock from the FF is just fine, the MF will not need Steadyclock...

The DAW tells the driver which sample rate to use. QT is not involved.

Regards
Daniel Fuchs
RME

I am missing a bit info from the manual of the FF400 regarding the clocking..

What is the advantage of using DDS except that you can alter the clock speed?

Is it anymore stable and jitterfree than the normal clock mode?

when i use a fireface on one computer.. that delivers the master timecode and midi clock.. and link it with a multiface II from another computer that is timecode slave..

i tend to have the fireface as wordclock master aswell.. i read some forum posts here that the FF4000 might be the better wordclock slave...  because of the steady clock technology.. is that true?
And are there no negative side fx for the timecode generation when the fireface is in slave mode?

ANd one last question regarding how the drivers on os x clock the daw?s..

all clocking is done from the RME interfaces than and no quicktime samplerate conversion can cick in..
wright?

thanks
Sven R?hrig