Topic: Clock question (knowledge base)

I have a question about clock, knowledge based, not exactly about the RME DAC.

My understanding, a CD or a piece of music file contains infomation of bit rate and sampling frequency, so a DAC reads it and the clock will adjust and lock/ sync it to make a precise reference thus prevent jitter.

Some of my friends suggest to have a re-clocker with a 1G clock to make sure the incoming signal re-clock to higher precision, washing out every possible jitter, they recommend a German brand name ( I do not name it here without permission), which is without a DAC chip inside. What they describe is when a source, for e.g. from a CD transport is not stable, so the re-clocker rebuilds it and then send to a separate DAC for decoding.

What I feel, those re-clocker are for professional use (could be recording?), I am not sure if it is for recording purpose or not, but why someone need this? The RME DAC is for D/A conversion and has a very precise clock.

Are those HiFi nerds doing something unrealistic by clocking twice? clocking twice will have no benifits at all or even worse?

Pacifist, dumb, not stupid
Listen music out from a box which sounds
Reading words on paper/ screen

2 (edited by ramses 2021-09-10 08:08:16)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

Morning Johannes,

you mean upsampling of digital content I assume, e.g. from 44.1 to 192 ?
Sorry, this doesn't bring anything, the original quality of audio content can't be made better by a higher sample rate.
You stick to the quality of the 1st A/D conversion of the audio content.

RME's steadyclock technology already takes care of removing any clock jitter and the ADI-2 DAC/Pro uses then the internal very precise Femto Second clock for the final D/A conversion. Something like this is not required.

You should really watch the video about RME steadyclock, in my blog article you find both, the english and the german version, whatever fits best for you:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … ses-EN-DE/

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro21H2, Cub10Pro, UFX+, XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT

3 (edited by Johannes AU 2021-09-10 08:20:27)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

ramses wrote:

Morning Johannes,

you mean upsampling of digital content I assume, e.g. from 44.1 to 192 ?
Sorry, this doesn't bring anything, the original quality of audio content can't be made better by a higher sample rate.
You stick to the quality of the 1st A/D conversion of the audio content.

RME's steadyclock technology already takes care of removing any clock jitter and the ADI-2 DAC/Pro uses then the internal very precise Femto Second clock for the final D/A conversion. Something like this is not required.

You should really watch the video about RME steadyclock, in my blog article you find both, the english and the german version, whatever fits best for you:
https://www.tonstudio-forum.de/blog/ind … ses-EN-DE/


Morning Ramses, no, not up sampling, they just said the use the same rate, but re-clock it to more precise by their 1G clock, they alsoo mention word clock and work clock.

I have no doubt abot the Femto clock at RME DAC, I did watched all RME videos before I recieve the DAC, I experienced no problem at all, could be only a small bit loss at the start of play a CD with a cheap external CD drive.

What is the purpose of a re- clocker to do with the same sampling rate?

I do not need such product, just to learn more about digital audio ......

Pacifist, dumb, not stupid
Listen music out from a box which sounds
Reading words on paper/ screen

4 (edited by ramses 2021-09-10 09:01:53)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

Watch the video of Steady clock, Mutec MC-3+ Smart Clock brings no benefit in here.
As you can hear in the video Steadyclock FS is doing a similar thing and refreshes any incoming clock signal.
Final D/A conversion is being done with it's (ADI-2 DAC/Pro) own FS clock.
Common sense is, that this is measurable, but not audible.

Also SNR / Dynamic range is already so low that ears can not recognize, now with FS clock it's even lower.

At least for a RME product such a product does not make sense in any way.

BR
Ramses
X10SRi-F, E5-1650v4, Win10Pro21H2, Cub10Pro, UFX+, XTC, 12Mic, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT

5 (edited by Johannes AU 2021-09-10 09:06:46)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

ramses wrote:

Watch the video of Steady clock, Mutec MC-3+ Smart Clock brings no benefit in here.
As you can hear in the video Steadyclock FS is doing a similar thing and refreshes any incoming clock signal.
Final D/A conversion is being done with it's (ADI-2 DAC/Pro) own FS clock.
Common sense is, that this is measurable, but not audible.

Also SNR / Dynamic range is already so low that ears can not recognize, now with FS clock it's even lower.

At least for a RME product such a product does not make sense in any way.

Thanks Ramses :-)

Thats exactly what I think, why need two separate clocks for the same source/job? and this is the point I argue with them, especially we have the Steadyclock Fs.

I rather spend money on a better headphone or speakers.


By the way, what are those re-clocker designed for? some specific purpose?

Pacifist, dumb, not stupid
Listen music out from a box which sounds
Reading words on paper/ screen

6 (edited by KaiS 2021-09-10 15:23:38)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

Johannes AU wrote:

I have a question about clock, knowledge based, not exactly about the RME DAC.

My understanding, a CD or a piece of music file contains infomation of bit rate and sampling frequency, so a DAC reads it and the clock will adjust and lock/ sync it to make a precise reference thus prevent jitter.

Some of my friends suggest to have a re-clocker with a 1G clock to make sure the incoming signal re-clock to higher precision, washing out every possible jitter, they recommend a German brand name ( I do not name it here without permission), which is without a DAC chip inside. What they describe is when a source, for e.g. from a CD transport is not stable, so the re-clocker rebuilds it and then send to a separate DAC for decoding.

What I feel, those re-clocker are for professional use (could be recording?), I am not sure if it is for recording purpose or not, but why someone need this? The RME DAC is for D/A conversion and has a very precise clock.

Are those HiFi nerds doing something unrealistic by clocking twice? clocking twice will have no benifits at all or even worse?

These devices are about 2 or 3 kind of things:


1. Sample Rate Conversion:

If a file is resampled to a higher sample rate (= Sample Rate Converted) it’s content is changed, without getting new information into it.
This is in fact a degradation of the signal.


2. Jitter removing, “Reclocking”:

A DAC needs an as stable as possible reference clock (“low jitter”) to do it’s work as good as possible.

ADI-2 has it’s own, superior reclocking built in.

This is much better than using external devices, as every cable connection introduces jitter, so an external de-jittering doesn’t survive a cable interfacing of any kind.


3. Some magic mystery sound processing.
???


These things are for people with too much money, and a strong belief that it will improve anything. Without the belief it doesn’t work.

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

KaiS wrote:
Johannes AU wrote:

I have a question about clock, knowledge based, not exactly about the RME DAC.

My understanding, a CD or a piece of music file contains infomation of bit rate and sampling frequency, so a DAC reads it and the clock will adjust and lock/ sync it to make a precise reference thus prevent jitter.

Some of my friends suggest to have a re-clocker with a 1G clock to make sure the incoming signal re-clock to higher precision, washing out every possible jitter, they recommend a German brand name ( I do not name it here without permission), which is without a DAC chip inside. What they describe is when a source, for e.g. from a CD transport is not stable, so the re-clocker rebuilds it and then send to a separate DAC for decoding.

What I feel, those re-clocker are for professional use (could be recording?), I am not sure if it is for recording purpose or not, but why someone need this? The RME DAC is for D/A conversion and has a very precise clock.

Are those HiFi nerds doing something unrealistic by clocking twice? clocking twice will have no benifits at all or even worse?

These devices are about 2 or 3 kind of things:


1. Sample Rate Conversion:

If a file is resampled to a higher sample rate (= Sample Rate Converted) it’s content is changed, without getting new information into it.
This is in fact a degradation of the signal.


2. Jitter removing, “Reclocking”:

A DAC needs an as stable as possible reference clock (“low jitter”) to do it’s work as good as possible.

ADI-2 has it’s own, superior reclocking built in.

This is much better than using external devices, as every cable connection introduces jitter, so an external de-jittering doesn’t survive a cable interfacing of an kind.


3. Some magic mystery sound processing.
???


These things are for people with too much money, and a strong belief that it will improve anything. Without the belief it doesn’t work.

Thank you KaiS for the infomation,  I am a non believer of so call audio magic .... I trust physics :-)

Pacifist, dumb, not stupid
Listen music out from a box which sounds
Reading words on paper/ screen

8 (edited by Curt962 2021-09-11 04:30:49)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

Hi Johannes!

Indeed, Close Timing Synchronization of Digital Data flow is essential if our Systems are to function optimally.

Sometimes though I think a good Analog example is the Key to better understanding, and this Humorous Classic immediately came to mind.

Watch this!

https://youtu.be/NkQ58I53mjk

Now, You clearly see what happens when Data Rate (or Chocolates) Timing varies. wink    (aka:Jitter)

RME's Superb "Steady Clock" ensures that the Data Flow/Processing is without fail.  No lost Data (Candy)

No need IMO for costly "gadgets" when your RME already has such an advanced Clocking Mechanism built-in.  I also agree that better Phones/Speakers are a far better investment.

Had to add my $0.02

Curt

Vintage 2018 ADI-2 DAC. "Classic AKM4490 Edition"
Cables:  Red, and White Ones.
Speakers:  Yes

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

Curt962 wrote:

Hi Johannes!

Indeed, Close Timing Synchronization of Digital Data flow is essential if our Systems are to function optimally.

Sometimes though I think a good Analog example is the Key to better understanding, and this Humorous Classic immediately came to mind.

Watch this!

https://youtu.be/NkQ58I53mjk

Now, You clearly see what happens when Data Rate (or Chocolates) Timing varies. wink    (aka:Jitter)

RME's Superb "Steady Clock" ensures that the Data Flow/Processing is without fail.  No lost Data (Candy)

No need IMO for costly "gadgets" when your RME already has such an advanced Clocking Mechanism built-in.  I also agree that better Phones/Speakers are a far better investment.

Had to add my $0.02

Curt


Thank you Curt, and happy to read you again, how is everything?

A great video indeed, very good example explaining data flow.

Well, those 'jitter creator" of HiFi world still fooling others, they claim they heard a difference with re-clocker, YES, I heard it too, it is because their source equipment is bad but expensive .... connect my RME DAC and compare, their face turns red.

When I ask them to explain what is word clock and what is work clock, they are speechless .... So I ask them, why you wear two watches if both are as precise as GPS or atomic clock?

By playing a CD with an external CD Drive plus RME DAC via a noisy computer, they finally shut up. But I am sure they will cheat some other people.

Pacifist, dumb, not stupid
Listen music out from a box which sounds
Reading words on paper/ screen

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

Since the RME DAC is designed also for HiFi use, with the nice headphone amp built, we also test it at that gathering.

They are all believers of  "the more power the better". We tested their USD 1,000+ cost IEMs. Before the test they insist the 6.3mm output is better, the IEM output is too weak.

After blind test, they fail, they tried many times with higher output (even Hi-Power), I do not care if they overheat the coil of  their expensive IEM or not, it is not my fault.

I just smile, but laugh out loud inside. I remember an advertisement of car tires: Power is nothing without control.

Pacifist, dumb, not stupid
Listen music out from a box which sounds
Reading words on paper/ screen

11 (edited by KaiS 2021-09-11 11:10:06)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

The audiofools concept of higher “control” of speakers / headphones by some amps vs others is a sign for lack of knowledge:

A (power) amplifier works linear up to it’s max. power.
Up to this point, it’s output exactly follows the input signal, even “eats” the (little!) back current headphones deliver, has 100% “control” over the headphones.

Only when running out of power, a SS amp audibly distorts and this point is clearly audible.

Typical headphones need a few mW (1/1000 of a Watt) only, for 100 dB SPL and more.
IEMs typically are even much more sensitive, over 100 dB SPL with 1 mW.

If one runs them with more than a few mW, permanent hearing damages is certain.

Then one needs another type of in-ears, all day long.
These are delivered by the audiologist.

12 (edited by Johannes AU 2021-09-11 13:03:56)

Re: Clock question (knowledge base)

KaiS wrote:

The audiofools concept of higher “control” of speakers / headphones by some amps vs others is a sign for lack of knowledge:

A (power) amplifier works linear up to it’s max. power.
Up to this point, it’s output exactly follows the input signal, even “eats” the (little!) back current headphones deliver, has 100% “control” over the headphones.

Only when running out of power, a SS amp audibly distorts and this point is clearly audible.

Typical headphones need a few mW (1/1000 of a Watt) only, for 100 dB SPL and more.
IEMs typically are even much more sensitive, over 100 dB SPL with 1 mW.

If one runs them with more than a few mW, permanent hearing damages is certain.

Then one needs another type of in-ears, all day long.
These are delivered by the audiologist.


Next Thursday I will be 61, I still can enjoy the highs and lows of a music piece, I never bring up the volume too much, sometimes listen at low volume is more enjoyable and will not get tired.

Someone owns expensive headphone said he enjoys more from a true wireless BT in ear, because the power was limited by the BT in ear electronics. Quite a lot of headphone manufacturers warned hearing loss can result by playing music too loud, but some user never listen, until they cannot listen.

Pacifist, dumb, not stupid
Listen music out from a box which sounds
Reading words on paper/ screen