sugarfree wrote:What would be the most reliable way to clock the following setup?
HDSPe MADI FX is in a Mac and connects to a rack (which is approx. 10m away) via two fiberoptic MADI lines.
Would you advise to sync everything with WC in star configuration from the Micro Clock, or through a daisy-chained hybrid WC/MADI/AES?
Regarding devices which are not from RME. Could you please deliver a URL, for some products it was not clear to me whether I got the correct product. Then it would be easier to take a closer look at the connection options of those devices for clock synchronization, whether they offer either digital inputs or word clock.
Generally spoken. The RME devices use SteadyClock [FS] to remove any clock jitter from every clock signal (whether received via WC or a digital input) and forward the refreshed clock signal to WC and digital outputs. This makes RME devices with FS suitable as clock masters, but also as clock slaves because of SteadyClock FS.
Whether you really have to work with an external word clock (micro clock) remains to be seen. It can generally be an advantage if you make the recording interface the clock master, in case you frequently work with music material of different sample rates. Then the application tells the driver what the sample rate in the project is, the driver sets the device to the correct sample rate and if it is clock master, the slaves automatically learn the sample rate.
This is a very convenient way of working if you would rather not keep changing things all the time.
But if you would like to use your micro clock because the switching might be faster, the RME devices will definitely free the clock signal with SteadyClock (SteadyClock FS has only the M32-Pro II) from any clock jitter to a very high degree.
You can setup with, without or only partially with WC. WC is not in any way superior "per-se" compared to clock distribution via digital links.
What's really better, who knows, many combinations are possible. One would perhaps have to measure what's better.
From the quality of the devices I think there is not really a right or wrong.
What I would do, my personal preference, so to say:
[ note: I didn't have URLs to all products, this is just a guess how it might perhaps fit connection-wise,
not knowing all devices ]
HDSPe MADI FX as clock master. Operational benefits to make it master.
- RME M-32 Pro II AD gets clock via MADI.
Steadyclock FS removes any potential clock jitter from the clock signal.
- SSL as slave to M-32 Pro II via WC.
- The rest of the devices either slave to the SSL via digital links or via WC from M-32 Pro II (alternatively SSL).
- I trust RME's clocks and SteadyClock [FS] in particular, I personally see no demand for external clock
I wouldn't "put my hands into fire" whether this is really the best possibility for each of the devices.
But I think it's something that might make sense:
- smooth operation, all devices follow the sample rate of the master and
- and you are using the capabilities of SteadyClock FS to remove clock jitter to a high degree
The HDSPe MADI FX acts in this setup as pure digital card.
All other devices will benefit from the refreshed clock signal of the M-32 Pro II AD
In the diagram below I focus on the clock distribution, the intention is not to show the setup in terms of audio connections.
HDSPe MADI FX [cm]
|
| MADI
|
M32 Pro II AD[cs via MADI]---WC----Weiss AD [cs via WC]
|
| WC
|
SSL ALPHA LINK [cs via WC]---Eventide H8000 [cs via AES or WC]
[cm=clock master, cs=clock slave]
BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub14