Mutec REF 10 Masterclock

[rickca]

24 minutes ago, romaz said:

Steep price and despite my initial skepticism based on experience with other master clocks, I found myself already reaching for my wallet for what I now consider a must have.

What is the price?

[rickca]

1 hour ago, 4est said:

this 10MHz product is not a master clock in any way, shape or form

OK now I'm confused.  What 10MHz product are you talking about?  Mutec calls the REF10 a reference master clock.

The SOtM sCLK-EX  can optionally have a master clock input connector at either 75 ohms or 50 ohms. 

[rickca]

51 minutes ago, JohnSwenson said:

I guess that is enough for now.

Terrific post, very helpful.

 

John, when you have some more time ... SOtM claims there's an advantage to having the 4 clocks on an sCLK-EX board share an internal reference oscillator.  IOW these clocks are in some sense synchronized even though the 4 outputs can be programmed to different frequencies.

 

Does this make sense to you?

 

@romaz please advise if I have misinterpreted what SOtM has said about this.

[rickca]

7 hours ago, JohnSwenson said:

Yes they definitely are synchronized, there is one PLL that syncs to the reference clock then four fractional/N dividers, since the dividers all run off the same PLL they definitely are all synchronized, whether this is a good thing is debatable.

Thanks, John.  That helps me understand what's going on.  I don't have the technical background to appreciate a 20-page dissertation!

[rickca]

On 6/21/2017 at 9:22 PM, JohnSwenson said:

Very few DACs actually use word clocks any more

In the beginning was the word clock ...

[rickca]

@julian.david is it not possible for Mutec to significantly improve the performance of the MC-3+ Smart Clock USB to yield something more cost effective than the REF 10 Masterclock?

 

[rickca]

33 minutes ago, vortecjr said:

I don't think it's appropriate for you to include Sonore in an attempt to validate your findings especially since you are well aware that we are skeptical of your findings. 

I knew that was coming. 

[rickca]

26 minutes ago, romaz said:

While it appears Sonore has not yet substantiated the impact of clocking in these "spaghetti" devices, I would encourage you guys to give it a go.  Where there's smoke, there's usually fire, and so I believe you will find that the many who have gone down this path are not just listening to placebo.

When someone comes up with a better integrated solution ... let's call it a meatball ... maybe we won't need as much spaghetti to satisfy our appetite for enhanced sound quality.

[rickca]

8 hours ago, julian.david said:

Hope this helps!

Thank you, Julian.  I'm very impressed with the attention to detail in every aspect of engineering in the REF 10.  There are just some functional things in both the REF 10 and the Mutec MC-3+ Smart Clock USB that are overkill for those of us who are more prosumer than pro.

[rickca]

2 hours ago, rickca said:

When someone comes up with a better integrated solution ... let's call it a meatball ... maybe we won't need as much spaghetti to satisfy our appetite for enhanced sound quality.

Here's the only spaghetti we need to worry about in Florida

https://www.sebastiandaily.com/news/local/tropical-storm-maria-spaghetti-models-show-hope-for-florida-8126/

[rickca]

@julian.david I think the question is this ... if you're using a REF10 into an MC-3+ USB, would there be any benefit to having a better (lower phase noise) clock in the MC-3+ USB than the one in the current product?  I guess the speculation is that an Empyreal class version of the MC-3+ USB might have a better clock than the current product.