afrancois Posted August 24, 2017 Share Posted August 24, 2017 On 8/20/2017 at 7:12 PM, Bamber said: I settled on using 5 x Oyaide DB-510 0.7m for the clock cables. They are 5N silver, triple shielding and were only £79 each. They don't sound any better than the Belden 1694/ Canare cables (£12 each) which I know quite a few studios use for their MCs. I still haven't ordered the Ref10, but I already ordered the coax and BNC plugs that will serve as future cables. NEOTECH NEI-3003 MK III Coaxial cable 75 Ohm UP-OCC Silver Plated Ø8.5mm OYAIDE SLSB-BNC Pure Silver 4N BNC Connector 75 Ohm Ø 9mm The Oyaide BNC connectors are the same as on your DB-510's and cost 57,5 euros/piece. So your cables are dirt cheap! Perhaps these cables won't make any difference in the end :-( The BNC plugs don't seem to be easy to solder, so I will have to ask a friend of mine to do it for me. What is interesting in building your own cables, is that you can keep them as short as possible. Link to comment
afrancois Posted September 8, 2017 Share Posted September 8, 2017 2 hours ago, SwissBear said: Some thoughts about the addition of SOtM sMS-200 Ultra + modded router to my system First I would like to thank very warmly and sincerely Peter, my audiophile friend, who has accepted to lend me his gears while he was flying to sunny beaches for holidays. Tremendous opportunity. Thank you so much System: Paul Hynes LPSU (SR7MR4) MacMini (late 2014) running Roon under Yosemite (and CAD scripts) Mutec MC-3+ USB with SPSU replaced by PH output Mutec REF-10 Devialet D900 (OdA) connected through AES/EBU input B&W 802D3 passive acoustic treatment of the room (acoustic ceiling) active treatment (see here: https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/32123-new-loudspeakers-room-digital-correction-service/) If I try to summarize my perceptions in relation to the optimization process of my system, the goal has been, over the months, to improve two families of parameters which were essential to me: the transparency of the system on one side, and the aptitude of the system to reproduce the atmosphere of the recording on the other side. The first axis has to do with signal/noise ratio, signal cleaning, room reverberation removal, aso... The second axis has more to do with correct restitution of the sound stage, separation between the instruments, the voices, texture of the sound, aso... If I try to classify the most important contributors of each of the elements of my system to these two axis, I would range, in decreasing order: Transparency: acoustic treatment of the room (ceiling) Devialet D900 + B&W 802D3 Paul Hynes LPSU (including the removal of the Mutec MC-3+ USB SPSU) SOtM sMS-200 (prior to the arrival of the PH) Atmosphere: active treatment, with frequency and time domain corrections Mutec Ref-10 Mutec MC-3+ USB The goal of this classification is to try to express my perception that each element of the system contributes to the two axis, but some are contributing much more than others in each direction. When I decided to remove the SOtM sMS-200 from my chain some weeks ago, I felt I had reached a level of transparency with the addition of the Paul Hynes LPSU which was allowing me to remove this component. I was therefore quite skeptical that the sMS-200 Ultra could significantly change my perceptions. This happened to be a big mistake as the integration of the SOtM sMS-200 Ultra and the modded router has proved to be a further significant step in the direction of transparency. I have very clearly perceived that the capacity of the system to reproduce the sound recorded with clarity and transparency was further enhanced by the SOtM gears. On the other side, I did not have the perception that this addition was providing a significant improvement in the direction of the atmosphere restitution. The soul of the music, which has been very significantly enhanced on my system with the arrival of the Ref-10, would be significantly altered if I was removing it of the chain, even while leaving the SOtM gears. So both elements have their respective contributions, each of them mainly in one direction, but it will be difficult for me to remove any of them... To bad for me, I shouldn't have tested them Pls note that I have not been able to test the clock input of the SOtM gears so far, due to a problem of 50 Ohm cables, which should be solved early next week. I can't comment on the REF10 yet, but I recently replaced my sMS-200 with the ultra version and I couldn't have been more surprised. Before the purchase, I was a bit skeptical. But was I wrong! To be complete, I have to admit that I have at the same time added an LPS-1 to my AQVOX. Anyhow these two new components have had a significant impact on my system. Link to comment
afrancois Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 17 minutes ago, mourip said: I have some information regarding putting BNC terminating plugs on our REF10s. I spoke to the US rep and he said that the recommendation in the manual was a mistake that would be corrected. They do not feel that adding the terminators will have any effect once that output has been turned off via the front panel. I did ask about the Mutec 3+ USB and was told that it could be helped by a terminator on an unused BNC. I guess that I will try my new 75ohm BNCs on my M3USB :-) Even with simple BNC caps I had a positive result. Link to comment
afrancois Posted October 11, 2017 Share Posted October 11, 2017 51 minutes ago, mourip said: On REF10 or M3USB? Thanks. MC3+ USB I still need to order the REF10. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 9, 2017 Share Posted December 9, 2017 Don't want to spoil the party, but highly regarded designers as Rob Watts from Chord and Paul McGowan from PS Audio are essentially saying that external clocks are worthless when it comes to enhancing audio quality. Paul is a bit more cautious: he says when you have better sound that it has nothing to do with the accuracy of the clock!. Nevertheless, some weeks ago I've ordered my REF 10 based on experiences from computeraudiophile members. It will probably be delivered next Monday or Tuesday. I know the subject remains highly controversial, but I will shortly have to opportunity to form my own opinion. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 1 hour ago, BigAlMc said: @afrancois, what DAC are you pairing your Ref-10 with? Best of luck with the experiment and I'll look forward to reading your thoughts on it. Cheers, Alan The Ref-10 will be connected to a MC3+ USB and the sMS-200 ultra. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 1 hour ago, BigAlMc said: Hi @afrancois, yes I get that it will be connected to those but what DAC are you using? Cheers, Alan Ruvox Upgraded Lyngdorf DPA-1 Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 5 minutes ago, BigAlMc said: Nice! I'd to Google it and read a couple reviews but looks like a great item. I'm sure I could do with room correction as well as many things theoretically 'wrong' with my room. Just not sure how to incorporate into my system. Or to wait for that winning lottery ticket so I can have a dedicated listening room when we move into a mansion Yes, I'm very satisfied with the DPA-1. The Ruvox upgrade made it even better. New op-amps and femto clock. http://ruvox47.blogspot.be/2016/05/lyngdorf-dpa-1-modificatie.html Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 21 minutes ago, zoltan said: Rob Watts: "You can't make assumptions as to something sounds different or not. You have to do the hard work and do the listening tests." Exactly what I did just now (again). Switched off the REF10 feeding an MC3+USB and a SOtM SM-200 ultra. Both back to their own clocks. Audibly less intimate details, 'liveness', dynamic sound, etc. It makes a difference for the better whether it should or shouldn't. I hope I will be experiencing the same thing as you. Only listening will tell. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 21 hours ago, One and a half said: Long term accurate clocks like Rhubidium types are worthless for audio was their point. Behind Rob Watts you see projected: "External clocks are a very bad idea - they actually increase noise floor modulation with skirting problems due to the need to use a local PLL which adds lots of lower frequency jitter" It doesn't say "External Rhubidium clocks"! Anyhow, I have a REF10 in my system since last Friday. It's too early to comment right now on how it performs in my system. Link to comment
Popular Post afrancois Posted December 18, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted December 18, 2017 On 12/10/2017 at 12:40 PM, BigAlMc said: Great stuff! Very impressive. Looking forward to hearing how your experiment goes. I have never had a harder time assessing a HiFi component before, then with the REF10. I've spent more than 2 hours switching between the internal clock of the MC3+ USB and the REF10 and I'm still having a hard time telling the differences. My opinion is all over the place. Sometimes I find the REF10 better, sometimes the internal clock. The REF10 is connected to the sMS-200 ultra and to the MC3+ USB. During my tests, the REF 10 remained connected to the sMS-200 ultra, while I switched between REF10 and internal clock on the MC3+ USB. I've made my own cables using: - OYAIDE SLSB-BNC Pure Silver 4N BNC Connector 75 Ohm - NEOTECH NEI-3003 MK III Coaxial cable 75 Ohm UP-OCC Silver Plated The cable to the MC3+ USB is 20 cm long The cable to the sMS-200 ultra is about 30 cm long The differences, if there are any, are very subtle: - overall I have the impression that the stereo image is larger with the internal clock (on the other hand, often I found the stereo image to be a bit exaggerated even before the REF10, so perhaps now it's more natural with the REF10?) - with drums, I find the decays sometimes to be better with the REF10 - the piano also sounds sometimes more natural with the REF10, but when I switch back to the internal clock I find the piano as natural with the internal clock For now, this doesn't justify a nearly 4000 euro upgrade, that's for sure. I hear you coming: let's now buy some cables costing a fortune! I'm wondering if those that experience clear differences, have upgraded the MC3+ USB with an LPS-1? What I mean is, that I suspect that the upgrade to the LPS-1 renders the internal clock that good, that perhaps an external clock doesn't make any difference anymore. Other possibilities of course remain: - I'm using bad BNC cables (or not good enough cables) - My femto clock upgraded Lyngdorf DPA-1 doesn't let me hear the potential of the REF10 BigAlMc and Confused 1 1 Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 21 minutes ago, zoltan said: I suspect this might be the issue. The Neotech cable you specified doesn't seem to be a 75ohm cable. I know that this is what it says on a French site that sells it but it is listed under interconnect cables on both Neotech's own site and on the US site too. Neotech's naming is not that straightforward but I believe NEI stands for NEotech Interconnects and for digital cables they use NEVD (which is NEotech Video & Digital). Check out their homepage http://www.neotechcable.com/product3_2.php Earlier, I had NS-2000 speaker cables that were quite good but recently I tried a 5N pure silver digital 75 ohm interconnect from them https://www.ebay.ie/itm/Neotech-NEVD-2001-ND-021080-Interconect-Cable-1m-long-/263378194250?hash=item3d52904f4a and the results were disappointing. I wanted to use it as a clock cable just yourself and tested it as a digital interconnect first. My Oyaide D-510 was way better, so I quickly sold and used the Oyaide as clock cable material. Hmm, the cable I use isn't a digital cable you think? What is actually the difference between an analog and digital 75ohm cable? I always thought that digital cables were 110ohm. Btw, I also have a 75ohm BNC clock cable from Canare. The same result as my home built cables. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 Just now, mourip said: Thanks for the cable referrals. I might look up the Oyaide as the Habst is pretty expensive. I did upgrade my M3USB with an LPS and also added an internal regulator board. Perhaps try another 75ohm cable just in case DIY digital cables are more of a challenge than analog ones. I make my own analog cables but think that digital ones might be more tricky. Are you sure that you have the REF10 front channel selected to the correct jack in back? The front panel number is reversed from the rear jacks if just looking from the front. I thought that mine was broken until I figured it out. Also two of the jacks are 50 ohm. Just checking. The M3USB will default to internal clock if it does not see a signal on ext even though you have set it for ext. Do you have the M3USB set to re-clock? 5 Yes, I've checked the numbering from the front panel with the ones of the back panel :-) I have both blue lights lit, so yes the MC3+ USB is reclocking using the external clock. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 1 hour ago, afrancois said: I have never had a harder time assessing a HiFi component before, then with the REF10. I've spent more than 2 hours switching between the internal clock of the MC3+ USB and the REF10 and I'm still having a hard time telling the differences. My opinion is all over the place. Sometimes I find the REF10 better, sometimes the internal clock. The REF10 is connected to the sMS-200 ultra and to the MC3+ USB. During my tests, the REF 10 remained connected to the sMS-200 ultra, while I switched between REF10 and internal clock on the MC3+ USB. I've made my own cables using: - OYAIDE SLSB-BNC Pure Silver 4N BNC Connector 75 Ohm - NEOTECH NEI-3003 MK III Coaxial cable 75 Ohm UP-OCC Silver Plated The cable to the MC3+ USB is 20 cm long The cable to the sMS-200 ultra is about 30 cm long The differences, if there are any, are very subtle: - overall I have the impression that the stereo image is larger with the internal clock (on the other hand, often I found the stereo image to be a bit exaggerated even before the REF10, so perhaps now it's more natural with the REF10?) - with drums, I find the decays sometimes to be better with the REF10 - the piano also sounds sometimes more natural with the REF10, but when I switch back to the internal clock I find the piano as natural with the internal clock For now, this doesn't justify a nearly 4000 euro upgrade, that's for sure. I hear you coming: let's now buy some cables costing a fortune! I'm wondering if those that experience clear differences, have upgraded the MC3+ USB with an LPS-1? What I mean is, that I suspect that the upgrade to the LPS-1 renders the internal clock that good, that perhaps an external clock doesn't make any difference anymore. Other possibilities of course remain: - I'm using bad BNC cables (or not good enough cables) - My femto clock upgraded Lyngdorf DPA-1 doesn't let me hear the potential of the REF10 I've found a song where the difference between REF10 and internal clocking is a bit more apparent. "Bo Stief Dream Machine, Heart". In the beginning, I clearly hear more micro-vibrations of the metal strings of the guitar. The problem I find is that everything with internal clocking sounds a tad louder, however, this is not true. I've checked with a good SPL meter. I think this is because it sounds a bit clearer with internal clocking. REF10 is less clear, but smoother. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 18, 2017 Share Posted December 18, 2017 29 minutes ago, zoltan said: The finished cable uses this http://www.oyaide.com/ENGLISH/AUDIO/products_category/Cables_for_visual/pg526.html Check specs, you will see it is 75ohms. Make sure to get the one with BNC plugs, the model number is just a letter different from the RCA plug version. I've ordered the DB-510. I already have a pure silver digital interconnect from Oyaide and I'm very satisfied with it. "OYAIDE AR-910 XLR AES-EBU Cable 5N Pure Silver 0.70M". That's the one between the MC3+ USB and my DAC. Perhaps trying to make my own digital BNC cables was a mistake. The four oyaide BNC plugs weren't exactly cheap :-( To be continued... Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 16 hours ago, SwissBear said: A few remarks here: In general, and this has been observed by multiple listeners, including @romaz, the better the LPSUs in your installation, the more transparent the sound produced and the more the effect of additional improvements is perceptible in my own installation, I am using a Paul Hynes LPSU to power the MC-3+ USB, and I started to notice very significant improvements in terms of transparency at this stage I have A/B tested various devices powered by the Paul Hynes and by an LPS-1 from Uptone. And I have to underline that the LPS-1, when powered by the stock energizer, has not impressed me. Things are improving significantly if you replace the stock energizer by a LPSU (HDPlex for instance). And if I am not mistaken, you are using the LPS-1 in your system, aren't you ? I have not been impressed by the 75 Ohm BNC cables by Oyaide in the clock application. My best listening experience was provided using Pasternack triple shielded 75 Ohm cables (I gave the link somewhere up in this thread). So a few ideas which might help improve your experience: buy Pasternack cables, conform to the recommendation of Mutec in their user manual try an even better LPSU for the MC-3+ USB and possibly the sMS-200 Ultra. Just my 2c. In fact I have an sPS-500 that powers two LPS-1's. One LPS-1 is for the sMS-200 ultra and, the other for the MC3+ USB. So no cheep/nasty SMPS's in my system. I have another LPS that powers another two LPS-1's. One for the ISO Regen and the other for the AQVOX. I don't think I have any power supply issues. I hope I will have my new BNC cable by the end of the week, if not it will be for Next Tuesday. Link to comment
afrancois Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 1 hour ago, SwissBear said: Thank you for this precision. This removes the uncertainty surrounding the PSUs. What remains a mystery to me is this: I sincerely do not have the perception that the Ref-10 is affecting the transparency in any way. Apart from the smoothness you are referring to, it also brings a lot of additional dynamics, both macro and micro in my systems (I actually have one Ref-10 on my 2 systems, with similar benefits). Have you checked whether your femto clock upgraded Lyngdorf DPA-1 is processing the time signal of the S-P/DIF input or if it applies its own time signal ? Might be the reason why you are not hearing the benefit of the ref-10. But you should not hear the benefit of the MC-3+ USB either... Enjoy your new cables anyway. I can clearly hear that the re-clocking of the MC3+ USB does wonders to my system. When I unplug the REF10, the difference is not subtle. When the MC3+ USB is set for an external clock, unplugging the external clock means that the signal passes through the MC3+ USB without re-clocking (internal blue locking light is blinking). So yes, the DPA-1 picks up the re-clocking very well. I know that the DPA-1 has an asynchronous AES/EBU, but that doesn't make it insensitive to re-clocking. Link to comment
Popular Post afrancois Posted January 19, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted January 19, 2018 The unsatisfactory experience I had with the REF10 was due to bad DIY cables. I bought two Oyaide DB-510 (70 cm) and the problem was gone. What I now hear is : - increased bass control (no more sloppy bass even with highly compressed music) and new nuances in the bass - details (micro dynamics) - smoothness - airiness and sound stage I mentioned before that I have an upgraded Ruvox Lyngdorf DPA-1 DAC. One of the upgrades, was an upgrade of the clock to a Crystek CCHD-575 powered by a separate LPS placed in the chassis of the DPA-1. The true potential of the upgraded DPA-1 only became apparent, when I upgraded the internal clock LPS to an Uptone LPS-1. For the first time, I can say that the sound of the piano comes close to the sound of a real piano (Peter Lyngdorf told me during a conversation I had with him, that one of the more difficult instruments to reproduce was the piano). For me, the REF10 is a must have to expose the true potential of my system, however don’t underestimate the importance of the clock in the DAC! My ultimate goal would be to replace the Crystek CCHD-575 with a sCLK-EX board with external master clock connector, but first I will upgrade the LPS-1 that’s used to power the DAC clock, to a LPS-1.2. I’ve already placed an order. Confused, mozes, beautiful music and 1 other 1 2 1 Link to comment
afrancois Posted January 19, 2018 Share Posted January 19, 2018 1 hour ago, mozes said: Just keep in mind that SOTM doesn’t mod other audio products. I know, I will ask Ruvox to do the mod for me. Link to comment
Popular Post afrancois Posted January 19, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted January 19, 2018 3 hours ago, beautiful music said: @afrancois would you post from where you bought Oyaide DB-510 cable, and May I know how much it costs you? https://www.audiophonics.fr/en/cables-numeriques-cables-numeriques-coaxial/oyaide-db-510-coaxial-bnc-cable-75-ohm-silver-07m-unit-p-9117.html mozes and beautiful music 2 Link to comment
afrancois Posted February 2, 2018 Share Posted February 2, 2018 On 1/29/2018 at 11:47 PM, seeteeyou said: Major, and I really do mean MAJOR kudos to @Beolab who discovered this serious giant killer that managed to "smoke" much more expensive 75Ω clock cables such as Oyaide DB-510, Nordost Valhalla, and Wireworld Gold Eclipse http://www.hiendy.com/hififorum/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=114195&page=1#pid2736961 https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/29650-dcs-network-bridge/?page=19&tab=comments#comment-765520 Canare D5.5UHDC01E @ 1.0 meter should be cheapest in Japan https://item.rakuten.co.jp/k-material/d55uhdc01e/ https://item.rakuten.co.jp/denchiya-bekkan/d55uhdc01e/ https://www.system5.jp/products/detail84157.html https://www.fujiya-avic.jp/products/detail137557.html https://www.soundhouse.co.jp/products/detail/item/239127/ Also available in France Câble vidéo 12G-SDI de 0,9 m BNC male/male http://www.atreid.com/cable-video-12g-sdi-de-0,9-m-bnc-male-male.html For those of us who live in US, we could order 3' ones from these sites Canare 12G-SDI 4K UHD Single-Channel BNC Cable (3')https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1338226-REG/canare_cal55cuhd003_12g_sdi_4k_uhd_single_channel_bnc_cable.html Laird 12GSDI-B-B-003 12G-SDI 4K UHD Video Coax BNC Cable - 3 Foot http://www.lairddigitalcinema.com/Product.asp?cat=CABLES&subcat=VIDEOCAB&prodclass=VBNCBNC&baseitem=12GSDI-B-B-003 Laird Digital Cinema BNC to BNC 12G-SDI 4K UHD Video Coaxial Cable (3') https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1342591-REG/laird_digital_cinema_12gsdi_b_b_003_12g_sdi_4k_uhd_video.html Laird 12GSDI-B-B-003 12G-SDI 4K UHD Video Coax BNC Cable - 3 Foothttps://www.markertek.com/product/12gsdi-b-b-003/laird-12gsdi-b-b-003-12g-sdi-4k-uhd-video-coax-bnc-cable-3-foot BNC connectors and bulk cables Canare BCP-D55UHD 12G-SDI 4K UHD 75-Ohm Crimp Plug BNC Connector for Canare L-5.5CUHDhttps://www.markertek.com/product/bcp-d55uhd/canare-bcp-d55uhd-12g-sdi-4k-uhd-75-ohm-crimp-plug-bnc-connector-for-canare-l-5-5cuhd Canare L-5.5CUHD 12G-SDI 75 OHM Video Coaxial Cable - Per Foothttps://www.markertek.com/product/l-5-5cuhd-ft/canare-l-5-5cuhd-12g-sdi-75-ohm-video-coaxial-cable-per-foot Canare also made L-3.3CUHD that's similar to L-5.5CUHD but the latter one should be better as shown below http://www.canare.co.jp/en/prod.php?f=coax Canare BCP-D33UHD 12G-SDI 4K UHD 75-Ohm Crimp Plug BNC Connector for Canare L-3.3CUHDhttps://www.markertek.com/product/bcp-d33uhd/canare-bcp-d33uhd-12g-sdi-4k-uhd-75-ohm-crimp-plug-bnc-connector-for-canare-l-3-3cuhd Canare L-3.3CUHD 75 Ohm Coaxial Cable for 12G-SDI - Black - Per Foothttps://www.markertek.com/product/l-33cuhdbk-ft/canare-l-3-3cuhd-75-ohm-coaxial-cable-for-12g-sdi-black-per-foot Canare L-3.3CUHD 12G-SDI / 4K UHD BNC Male to Male Cable - 1 Foothttps://www.markertek.com/product/l33cuhd-b-b-001/canare-l-3-3cuhd-12g-sdi-4k-uhd-bnc-male-to-male-cable-1-foot Canare L-3.3CUHD 12G-SDI / 4K UHD BNC Male to Male Cable - 2 Foothttps://www.markertek.com/product/l33cuhd-b-b-002/canare-l-3-3cuhd-12g-sdi-4k-uhd-bnc-male-to-male-cable-2-foot Canare L-3.3CUHD 12G-SDI / 4K UHD BNC Male to Male Cable - 3 Foothttps://www.markertek.com/product/l33cuhd-b-b-003/canare-l-3-3cuhd-12g-sdi-4k-uhd-bnc-male-to-male-cable-3-foot Besides, Belden 4794R is also rated @ 12GHz and it's also VERY affordable https://www.belden.com/products/new-products/4k-coaxial-cable 12 GHz, 4K UHD Precision Video Cable, 75 Ohm, 16 AWG solid 0.051" silver-plated copper conductor, gas-injected foamed high-density polyethylene insulation, Duofoil® bonded to the core + tinned copper braid shield (95% coverage) plus Beldfoil® with shorting fold, PVC jacket.https://www.bluejeanscable.com/pages/technicaldocs/4794R.pdf BJC charges $15 for 1' / $18 for 2' / $21 for 3' https://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/sdi-cables/index.htm Laird 4794R-B-B-003 12G-SDI/4KUHD Single Link BNC to BNC Camera Cable - 3 Foothttps://www.markertek.com/product/4794r-b-b-003/laird-4794r-b-b-003-12g-sdi-4kuhd-single-link-bnc-to-bnc-camera-cable-3-foot Laird Digital Cinema 4794R-B-B-003 | 3ft 12GHz 4K/UHD BNC to BNC Cable Assembly https://www.amazon.com/Laird-Digital-Cinema-4794R-B-B-003-Assembly/dp/B01MTOKUFI 3 Foot Belden 4794R 12G UHD-SDI RG7 BNC Cable (75 Ohm) Black for 4K / UHDTV (12G-SDI) by Custom Cable Connection https://www.amazon.com/Belden-4794R-UHD-SDI-Cable-12G-SDI/dp/B06XSJC426 Digi-Key https://www.digikey.com/products/en?t=456&pv91=513&pv321=337 Newark http://www.newark.com/c/cable-wire-cable-assemblies/cable-assemblies/rf-coaxial-cable-assemblies?coaxial-cable-type=belden-4794r Dunno where to get Canare and Laird in UK, though I managed to find something else that might be comparable https://www.amazon.co.uk/Alvins-Cables-Coaxial-Neutrik-Camera/dp/B074DDXGDS http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CGPro-12G-SDI-BNC-to-BNC-4K-UHD-Single-Channel-Camera-Cable-1FT-30CM/172989755167 http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CGPro-12G-SDI-BNC-to-BNC-4K-UHD-Single-Channel-Camera-Cable-2FT-60CM/391930258668 http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CGPro-12G-SDI-BNC-to-BNC-4K-UHD-Single-Channel-Camera-Cable-3FT-90CM/172989750782 3 I have a Canare L-5CFB and it's clearly not good enough for the REF10. So the L-3.3CUHD will not be enough too. So if you get one, get the L-5.5CUHD. For the moment I'm satisfied with my Oyaide DB-510, but one day I will try the L-5.5CUHD. Link to comment
Popular Post afrancois Posted February 26, 2018 Popular Post Share Posted February 26, 2018 I found a superb explanation on youtube about clock signals, ringing, jitter, interference and signal integrity using a scope. Helps you to understand why clock precision, clean power, and EMI/RFI are so important. Recently, I got myself some gear to start learning something about electronics. I have a degree in computer science but deep down I always wanted to understand how things actually work. I still got a long way to go, however. mourip, mozes, flkin and 1 other 2 2 Link to comment
afrancois Posted May 6, 2018 Share Posted May 6, 2018 On 5/5/2018 at 9:29 AM, Octagon said: Dear all, there has been several quite interesting knowledge exchange started within this REF 10 thread on different topics which is good news. On the other hand we are loosing track and others will not be able to recognize the valuable discussion eg about power supply optimization because they will not search for that in a REF 10 thread, will they? @ Chris: May I ask to move all power supply comments not referring to REF 10 to look&listen's thread "audio power supply optimization" @look&listen: Thank you for starting an own thread on this topic. Maybe you could help Chris recognizing the right postings with naming them to him? Back to our topic: The measurements of the final REF 10 which is in production since a while has been improved against the data I have had available in my starting post a year ago: Here are the actual measurements: REF 10 phase noise: 1 Hz: ≤ -116 dBc/Hz 10 Hz: ≤ -145 dBc/Hz (old: -142 dBc/Hz) 100 Hz: ≤ -160 dBc/Hz (old: -155 dBc/Hz) 1000 Hz: ≤ -166 dBc/Hz (old: -160 dBc/Hz) Noise floor: ≤ -170 dBc/Hz (old: -166 dBc/Hz) My own experience with the REF 10 is very positive. The improvement in music flow, clarity and soundstage is clearly recognized wether with my unmodified MC3+ USB or my modified MC3+ USB which has a floating 6V power supply unit attached. If you have a chance you might take (hear) a look at the High End Munich if you visit Mutec's team. Many thanks for helping us keeping on track Enjoy the music and relax Thomas Thanks, Thomas for this update. You must have access to some very sophisticated/expensive equipment! I sure hope that my REF10 measures +/- the same. I've bought mine begin December last year at thomann.de. It surely does a fine job in my system. I also modified my MC3+ USB. It is now powered by an Uptone LPS-1.2. Link to comment
afrancois Posted September 10, 2018 Share Posted September 10, 2018 1 hour ago, JohnSwenson said: I'm NOT from Mutec, but I have a little bit of knowledge about crystal oscillators so I hopefully can offer some insight as to what aging is. First off we need to understand that there is not just one aspect about crystal oscillators that have numbers, people here tend to like to latch onto numbers as figures of merit, but this can be fraught with danger since there are at least there different aspect of crystal oscillators that have numbers, before you start comparing numbers you ABSOLUTELY HAVE to understand which aspects those numbers refer to otherwise you are comparing surface tension to the color of the peel of an orange. There are two primary aspects of a crystal oscillator: 1) phase noise (I have written exhaustively about this early in this thread so I will not duplicate it all here) This is not a single number, it is a graph. This graph is the phase noise as an off set from the "carrier", which is the frequency of the signal coming from the oscillator. In a nutshell no oscillator produces a perfectly "pure" frequency. They all vary a little bit over time. Phase noise looks at the rapidly varying frequency changes. It is plotted in regards to frequency. If the output frequency varies a little higher, then a little lower, then a little higher and does this at a regular rate, this will show up as a spike in the graph (refered to as a "spur"). Real oscillators rarely do this, they kind of randomly fluctuate in frequency, such that this plot looks like a jagged continuous line. USUALLY much higher in value at the lower frequencies than the higher frequencies. From listener reports it seems that the lower offsets, (around 10Hz), seem to be the most import for audio. Unfortunately these are usually the most difficult to improve. 2) Actual frequency of the output. Due to above there is no such thing as AN actual frequency, it is wandering around. So the term "frequency of the output" is some form of averaging over time. That process can vary all over the place and is very rarely specified. Which of course makes comparing numbers rather difficult unless the same test equipment is used in exactly the same way. For example I have a frequency counter which has at least 30 different ways of measuring frequency, which will all give slightly different numbers. #2 has several different subcategories: #2.1) Accuracy. This is just the frequency out of the box. A high accuracy oscillator might be within 10 Hz of the number specified on the can and a lower accuracy one might be within 200Hz of the number on the can. Usually specified in Parts Per Million (PPM), thus a 1 PPM 10MHz oscillator can be up to 10Hz off the specified 10MHz. Some are so good they are specified in parts per billion (PPB). Unless it is pretty grossly off, this is pretty much unimportant for audio. #2.2) Temperature coefficient. All oscillators will change their frequency with a change in temperature, the Temperature coefficient (Tempco) specifies how much. It is usually measured in PPM per degree C. Unfortunately it is not a single number. Take an oscillator at 25C, raise the temp 1C and you will have a certain change in frequency, Start with the oscillator at 50C and change it one degree and you will get a VERY different change in frequency. All crystal oscillators have some temperature where a small change in temperature makes almost no difference in frequency, if you are significantly away from this temperature the change can be VERY large for even a fairly small change in frequency. Because this is measured in PPM/C a lot of people confuse it and accuracy since they both have PPM in the units but they are VERY different things, You can have high accuracy and lousy Tempco, or lousy accuracy and low Tempco. This has SOME affect on audio, but not a lot. The primary effect is at warm up, when a device is is turned on and the temperature inside the box is increasing. During this time the changing frequency can make a small audio difference. After reaching thermal equilibrium the Tempco has almost no effect on audio. #2.3) Aging. This is the long term change in frequency over long time periods (measured in years). Most crystal oscillators have a fairly large change in frequency from year to year. During the first few years this is fairly large, then slowly goes down to almost no change after about say 15 years or so. Aging has essentially zero impact on audio. #1 is the only one that has any significant impact on audio. Of the #2 categories Tempco is the only one which will have some impact on audo, but only during warmup. After the temperature settles down, almost no impact. So in summary, spend money on low close in phase noise, money spent on high accuracy, low Tempco or low aging, is usually just throwing away your money. The OCXO is an exception to this, see below. In particular a TCXO (temperature compensated crystal oscillator) is almost never a good thing for audio. A TCXO, has a normal crystal oscillator and a temperature sensor of some sort. The voltage from the temperature sensor is fed into a port on the crystal oscillator which causes its frequency to change with a varying voltage. This setup so it does some degree of cancellation of the crystal Tempco. So now we have a temperature sensor with almost always some degree of noise on the voltage output, feeding an input port which changes the frequency, thus rapidly varying the frequency, what is this called? Phase noise. Thus TCXOs ALWAYS have higher phase noise than a regular crystal oscillator using the same crystal and circuit minus the compensation. Yes it might have a smaller impact during warm up, but sound worse otherwise. Not usually a good use of money. The type of crystal used in common crystal oscillators is what is called an AT cut. Its primary claim to fame is that the temperature where the zero Tempco appears ( sometime called the Tempco threshold or "knee" of the Temcp curve) happens near normal room temperature. This gives pretty good temperature behavior without doing anything else. But they do not have the best performance in other parameters. In particular for audio the phase noise of a different cut, called the SC cut, is much lower. BUT the knee in the Tempco curve is way up in the 90C range, at room temperature the Tempco is so bad that even a small temperature change drastically changes the frequency, so even for audio it is useless. This is where the OCXO comes in, the primary purpose is to raise the temperature of the SC cut crystal so it is sitting right at the knee of the Tempco. This gives an oscillator with a very low Tempco, very low aging and very low phase noise. Not all OCXOs are created equal, in particular the less expensive OCXOs (say less than $100) do not use a crystal and circuit with particularly low phase noise, but they DO have very low Tempco and low aging, but the phase noise is no better than a $10 regular crystal oscillator. Again this is just a waste of money, you are spending money on something that doesn't make sound better. (note this is "new" price, not what you can get on ebay for a used one). BUT if you spend the money on a very special SC cut crystal and very special circuitry you can get the lowest phase noise of any oscillator known. It is not cheap, but this type of OCXO IS the way to get the lowest phase noise. OCXOs at this level also give you very low aging and very low Tempco, but these are not primarily the main reason for getting one of these OCXOs. Unfortunately for audio, most applications (other than audio) want very good specs for ALL the parameters, it should be possible for the manufacturers to optimize for phase noise only, thus giving us lower cost oscillators since they are not trying get say extremely low aging. One other VERY important aspect about phase noise: comparing charts can ONLY be done if the frequencies are the same. The phase noise for an oscillator increacess by 6dBc/root Hz per octave of the oscillator frequency. Thus of you have plot for a 10 MHz oscillator and one for the same model oscillator at 20 MHz, the numbers will be 6 dBc/ root Hz higher. If you take that 20 MHz output and run it through a good flip flop, dividing the frequency by two, you will get the same phase noise plot as the 10MHz version. So be VERY careful when comparing phase noise from different oscillators , they either need to be at the same frequency or you apply the 6 dBc/ root Hz rule. (explaining that rule is a little complicated so just take my word for it) Sooo as far as aging is concerned, spec sheet aging has nothing to do with audio. John S. Thank you John. Another example of UpTone sharing their knowledge. A real example for the HiFi industry. Looking forward to the answer from Mutec as well. Link to comment
afrancois Posted October 20, 2018 Share Posted October 20, 2018 On 10/19/2018 at 8:26 AM, Tand said: Hi I jumped on the Habst CA group buy this summer and here is my short report after about 2 weeks of listening. First listening: 2 weeks ago. Connected Habst BNC 75 ohm, 2 brand new cables in my system.. The cables were connected to the Clock Outputs (44.1 and 48 khz) from my Vivaldi Master Clock to Vivaldi Dac. Steaming from Tidal. In the system before Habst: 2 x Canare 12G SDI-4K cable 3 feet Fist impresions after about 30 min. Clean, airy. Velvet midrange, very detailed maybe less body in midrange than before - this could be an abscence of coloration, I think. Tight, dynamic, deep bass. Detalis in the background never heard before. Image and instruments between speakers are laser stable. Very “black” background. And all this with just cables from clock to dac. Very impressive. I felt this was a major upgrade allready! After 50 hours burn in: Now 3 Habst BNC scables in my system: 2 from dCS Vivaldi Clock to Vivaldi Dac 1 from Ref10 to MC3+ USB The sound is really, really good now! Black background. Lots of details but never in a bad way, sounds very musical. The music has a rhytm and drive with deep soundstage. It is very easy to let the music engage you in a way that never before. So far: The conclusion so far is that the Habst cables let the Ref10 really shine. For me it has been a big upgrade. I expect the next mind blowing level will be when I change the generic clock cables for the Ref input on the Vivaldi clock and to my 2 x sCLK cards from SOtM feeding the RedNet 16 R+switch and my clocked (4 tabs) Mac mini. Exciting times ahead! Tommy I had the same feeling of loss of weight in the midrange after I had upgraded my BNC cables. Base was even more refined than before, however. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now