Topic: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

Hello Guys

I wonder do I need a word clock between the units to get better sync, I also have a behringer ada8000.
now I have them linked with adat

I was looking at the black_lion_audio_micro_clock_mk2 but I see that this not have adat port.

I am kinda newbie but I want to extent my inputs on the RME.

Is a word clock device a solution to better sync, and does it matter if it has adat, or can I use jut its bnc for syncincing rme uff and Universal Audio 4-710d

Thanks!

2

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

You don't need an external clock for such a small setup. ADAT is enough. Just do it right, one unit master, the other two slave.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

thanks!

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

I am getting back to this
RME ufx has two adat outs and two inputs , also it has bnc word clock in and out
My other equipment are one behringer ada8000 and universal audio 4-710d
Behringer has bnc in and adat in and adat out
Universal audio 4-710d has bnc in bnc out and two adat outs.
My current connection is RME as master ( set as internal from computer ) universal audio set on wc , behringer set on wc , units are connected from their adat outputs uad to adat 1 in rme  and from adat out behringer to adat2 in RME
I am sending via bnc word clock from rme to both units from out RME to in bnc uad than out bnc from uad to in bnc behringer, both units are synced, green leds on all units.
Is it correct?
Thanks!

5 (edited by ramses 2020-02-14 06:25:43)

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

It will work.
But one comment, you always say "to better sync".
Word Clock is not better or superior compared to clocking via ADAT or another digital port.
If I remember right then somewhere in this forum has been mentioned, that the Word Clock implementation of the Behringer Unit is not that good (maybe because of the low price and the components being used in it).
As WC in general terms brings not better clocking quality, you are IMHO better of, to use WC only there, where required.

In your case I would connect it like this

UFX - ADAT1 <------------------------  Behringer
       - ADAT1 -------------------------> Behringer (getting clock from ADAT)
       - WC OUT -----------------------> WC IN - UA4-710D (75 Ohm term ON)

UFX 75 Ohm term activated
UFX clock source internal

You need no external 75 Ohm plugs and no BNC Ange T connection in this scenario, simply the 75 Ohm WC cabling like this here: https://www.thomann.de/de/sommer_cable_ … ohm_5m.htm

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, Win10 Pro 1909, Cubase, UFX+, Octamic XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS BE/R BE, RayDAT, ARC USB

6 (edited by vinark 2020-02-14 09:21:25)

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

In your case I would use the UA4 as master, slave the RME through adat to the UA4. Then connect both adat in and out to the Behringer and slave it to adat. No WC needed then and you will get best recording quality from your UA4 cause it is now master. The UFX has steadyclock so is good device to set to slave.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
HDSP9652+ADI-8AE  2X HDSP9632
Cubase pro10

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

now i am totally lost, the thing is that i need stability for every single input from rme uad and behringer smile

Thanks!

Adrian

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

vinark wrote:

In your case I would use the UA4 as master, slave the RME through adat to the UA4. Then connect both adat in and out to the Behringer and slave it to adat. No WC needed then and you will get best recording quality from your UA4 cause it is now master. The UFX has steadyclock so is good device to set to slave.

I also have some good external preamps (api, neve) hooked to the Rme aswell .

Thanks!

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

IMHO (humble) Steadyclock on the ufx is that good that it is better to slave the ufx with UA4 as master. It will make no difference for the Behringer if the ufx is master or slave in this scenario. In theory the UFX is better at being a slave then the UA4, but chances you will hear this are minimal.
Same goes for  clocking through adat vs WC. Adat is slightly better in theory but again the difference might be completely inaudible.
But honestly it will not make much difference (if at all) how you clock everything as long is everything is locked.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
HDSP9652+ADI-8AE  2X HDSP9632
Cubase pro10

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

lowbass5 wrote:

now i am totally lost, the thing is that i need stability for every single input from rme uad and behringer smile

Thanks!

Adrian

Stabilty...? If it works it is stable, all scenarios. Do you mean lowest jitter? Then use the advice I gave.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
HDSP9652+ADI-8AE  2X HDSP9632
Cubase pro10

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

thank you all  I will experiment smile

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

vinark wrote:

In your case I would use the UA4 as master, slave the RME through adat to the UA4. Then connect both adat in and out to the Behringer and slave it to adat. No WC needed then and you will get best recording quality from your UA4 cause it is now master. The UFX has steadyclock so is good device to set to slave.

Also good idea vinark.

I personally prefer to use the device as master, which is directly connected to the DAW.

If the sample rate changes in a DAW project, then the sample rate is being set automatically on the device
which is directly connected to the PC/Laptop by the ASIO driver.

Then all clock slaves can learn the new clock rate automatically from the master.

In your szenatrio you need to change the sample rate in the DAW and then also manually on the UA4.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, Win10 Pro 1909, Cubase, UFX+, Octamic XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS BE/R BE, RayDAT, ARC USB

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

That is true Ramses, if you need to chance sample rate on a regular basis this is something to consider. I did think about that but forgot to type it.
In my mind if you change sample rate on the UA4 the rest will follow and the daw will give a warning, at least cubase does.
I always work at 44.1k.

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
HDSP9652+ADI-8AE  2X HDSP9632
Cubase pro10

14 (edited by ramses 2020-02-15 10:16:38)

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

> I always work at 44.1k.

Usually me too, higher only when experimenting or for load tests on the PC.

What I question myself is whether there is a technical reason why you avoid to clock the UA4 by WC.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, Win10 Pro 1909, Cubase, UFX+, Octamic XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS BE/R BE, RayDAT, ARC USB

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

It all depends on how much effort and money UA spend on getting jitter free external clocking, which is unknown afaik. It is a given that the less is spend on this the more any device deteriorates with external clocking. And again afaik Adat has an 8X higher embedded clock then WC, which makes it easier to get a low jitter clock from. But if I am not right I am happy to be corrected by the trrue authority here (MC ;-))

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
HDSP9652+ADI-8AE  2X HDSP9632
Cubase pro10

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

> And again afaik Adat has an 8X higher embedded clock then WC, which makes it easier to get a low jitter clock from.

I also remember information like this, vinark.

On the other hand there are professional studio clocks for larger environments, but then in a studio you usually have the more expensive gear where a proper WC circuit design is much more likely.

If the UA4 would be a RME device then I would assume that Steadyclock would take care of that in the case of WC.

So it might boil down to that in this case he might be more on the safe side to implement your proposed setup to as we do not know how good the WC implementation of UA is.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, Win10 Pro 1909, Cubase, UFX+, Octamic XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS BE/R BE, RayDAT, ARC USB

Re: WORD CLOCK for RME UFX and UA4-710D

ramses wrote:

So it might boil down to that in this case he might be more on the safe side to implement your proposed setup to as we do not know how good the WC implementation of UA is.

Exactly, unless practical  issues are more urgent like changing sample rate on a regular basis. All in all there might not be much audible difference if at all. But of course we like to use he best option...

Vincent, Amsterdam
https://soundcloud.com/thesecretworld
HDSP9652+ADI-8AE  2X HDSP9632
Cubase pro10