Mutec REF 10 Masterclock

[Johnseye]

I question whether a MR SR7 would be better than an LPSU designed specifically for the REF 10.  It would be nice if the supply was in a separate enclosure from the REF 10.

 

I have also heard from a bird who has an SR7, compared with OCX10 side by side and preferred the REF 10.  Apologies as I can not share who the individual is.

[Johnseye]

Just now, ElviaCaprice said:

Power supplies aside.  If so,  it sounds like the REF 10 is just better designed than the OCX10. 

 

Yes.  I don't think we'll ever know about the supply. Not even worth the thought considering it's an impossibility.

[Johnseye]

Just now, auricgoldfinger said:

 

The difference could be a result of the REF 10 square wave vs. the OCX10 sine wave.

 

Do you know what this means exactly, what the implications are, pros and cons?

[Johnseye]

8 minutes ago, ThenewGearPPK said:

 

Any mods that can isolate transformers that are bundled together inside a amp or DAC?

Like will Dynamat or copper tape help isolate the EMI/RFI from the transformers being so close together?

 

 

 

Yes you can build a Faraday Cage or use 3M EMI adhesive shielding sheets. 

[Johnseye]

8 hours ago, LowMidHigh said:

You make very compelling points, Julian. Thank you.

 

 Since I’m in the market, I’d like to ask a few public questions that might be to the benefit on others:

 

1. Your literature mentions the square signal and steel chassis as contributing factors to the REF10 performance. How influential are they? Crudely speaking, 5%, 10%? 
2. How many years for continuous use can one expect from the REF10? Roughly of course.
3. Is there a point in time in which a re-calibration is in order? Is that a service Mutec offers?
4. How far apart can I place the REF10 from the slave? I have 2 systems that could benefit from the REF10. One would demand a 14-meter word clock cable, though…

 

Thanks in advance!

 

All great questions I'd like to know the answers to.

[Johnseye]

5 hours ago, LowMidHigh said:

 

 

As far as I understand, the REF10 sends out an analog, square wave that the receiver uses to time its operation. The mechanism depends on the flip between the bottom and upper region of the wave (when the wave either drops or ascends, it opens and shuts a virtual gate on the receiver side).

 

Unless the cable in question is flawed, I can’t conceive how it can affect that mechanism. Mind you, those ref clocks are installed in mission-critical satellites, and I’m pretty darn sure basic cables are employed (I inquired once with a military engineer). 

 

You say you hear the difference? Run an honest AB/X. If you can still tell which cable is which, kindly offer a theory as to why those expensive cables do a better job in transmitting a repetitive analog square wave. I’m brimming with curiosity.

 

I can only guess that some cables are better at shielding than others.  Those that aren't may introduce some additional EMI/RF noise into the electronics.  Purely a guess on my part because otherwise what else could be going on?

[Johnseye]

34 minutes ago, baconbrain said:

Check out the following:

 

https://audiobacon.net/2018/10/25/mutec-ref-10-master-clock-the-digital-audios-heartbeat/

 

Jay makes a few recommendations in regards to cables in the review 

 

 

 

While a good article it is all subjective without explanation.  I often go with opinions like this when comparisons are made with low cost solutions in the mix because there very well may be a difference that is just unexplained by today's science or understanding.  It is very difficult to take bias out of the experiments and I suspect even the best of us are guilty of doing that despite our efforts.

[Johnseye]

5 minutes ago, baconbrain said:

 

In the end, one has to trust their own ears.

 

Yes, in the end that's all that matters