Mutec REF 10 Masterclock

[BigAlMc]

Hi @afrancois,

 

Thanks for sharing. 

 

I asked Ted Smith (the genius designer behind the Directstream DAC) for his thoughts on whether the so called Trifecta and Mutec Ref 10 were likely to improve the SQ. Here were his comments. 

 

Cheers, 

Alan 

 

"The LAN clocks aren’t related to the audio clock.  Still having them synchronous with the audio clock can help: “all” of the noise comes at the same point in each clock cycle so the DAC can (in theory) stay away from those points.  In practice this isn’t really what happens, but it shouldn’t hurt and can help (as long as it doesn’t add unfortunate groundloops.)

The architecture of the DS’s clock won’t allow it to synchronize too closely with an incoming clock (after all, synchronizing closely means following the jitter closely.)  But if the input clocking to the DS has a narrow frequency excursion there might be small benefits.

I suspect that paying close attention to the power of the devices upstream will have similar, if not a bigger effect in a system with a DS."

[BigAlMc]

Link to the above conversation:

 

http://www.psaudio.com/forum/directstream-all-about-it/ds-clock/#p74655

[BigAlMc]

@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 

[afrancois]

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.

[BigAlMc]

Hi @afrancois, yes I get that it will be connected to those but what DAC are you using?

 

Cheers, 

Alan 

[afrancois]

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

[zoltan]

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. The REF10 makes a difference for the better whether it should or shouldn't. 

[BigAlMc]

3 minutes ago, afrancois said:

Ruvox Upgraded Lyngdorf DPA-1

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 

 

 

[afrancois]

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

 

[afrancois]

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. 

[BigAlMc]

33 minutes ago, afrancois said:

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

 

 

Great stuff! Very impressive. 

 

Looking forward to hearing how your experiment goes. 

[barrows]

4 hours 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. The REF10 makes a difference for the better whether it should or shouldn't. 

Are you using SPDIF/AES output to the DAC?  If so I am not surprised that generating the SPDIF feed via a better clock makes a difference, as this is the audio clock.  Even with a DAC which re-clocks onboard, there will be less jitter created artifacts the lower the jitter of then coming SPDIF signal.  This is a quite different situation than if one was just using USB input to the DAC. 

[zoltan]

2 hours ago, barrows said:

Are you using SPDIF/AES output to the DAC?  If so I am not surprised that generating the SPDIF feed via a better clock makes a difference, as this is the audio clock.  Even with a DAC which re-clocks onboard, there will be less jitter created artifacts the lower the jitter of then coming SPDIF signal.  This is a quite different situation than if one was just using USB input to the DAC. 

Yes, that is correct. I use the AES/EBU connection to the DAC. 

[mitch751]

MC3+USB and Ref 10 finally arrived.

 

Have a run for 5 hours .....

 

I have a Goldmund Reference EDIOS CD and LIO Dac version 2, and I believed that they were excellent and did not need an extra reclock (Both of them do not have wclck in/out), since, my friend strongly recommend this combo for the CAS (MacBook Pro to LIO via USB), also I got a discount from the local agent before the Christmas, why not have a try.

 

My english is not good, therefore bear with me ....

 

First I tried from Mac to Mutec combo then LIO via SPDIF, the improvement is really night and day, bass, treble, soundstage have significant improvement, very airy and also very focus .. overall almost 60-70% improvement 

 

How about without Ref 10? the improvement is not significant ... may be around 25% ..  much less clarity from the combo,  however, i must say still worth to have MC3 with this pricing.

 

Secondly, my Goldmund supposed to be very good, but when I connected to the Mutec Combo, i was totally shocked with the improvement, do not ask me the reason as i am not a techical person nor having a good hearing of audiophile, I can say it is really a night and day of differnece.

 

 

[Tand]

Nice review  MItch751. My Ref10 should arrive next week. Looking forward to it,

 

 

[One and a half]

Thanks Mitch for the review!

[mourip]

On 12/10/2017 at 5:54 AM, 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. The REF10 makes a difference for the better whether it should or shouldn't. 

 

Funny you should mention this. I use a Focusrite Rednet D16 as an ethernet to AES converter. You can give it an external wordclock which I do from my M3USB, which is also reclocking the data stream, and which is connected to a REF10. If I am working on my system and the D16 gets power cycled it reverts to it's internal clock, a setting that needs to be set once again via a software control panel called Rednet Control.

 

Invariably I will power it back on, forgetting to set it to external clock. After listening for not too long a time I start to get restless, thinking that the music is missing something. It then dawns on me that I forgot to set it to external clock. That brings the magic back.

 

For me this is pretty conclusive evidence that it does indeed add something that improves the sound. It works out to being an unintentional blind test.

[beautiful music]

On 12/9/2017 at 3:02 PM, afrancois said:

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.

 

 

 

Looking expectantly for your review and opinion 

[Confused]

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? Indeed so.  It then occurs to me that some other respected designers must have a different view.  Take for example dCS.  This is a company that offers a range of 'Master Clocks' at a variety of price points.  Furthermore, dCS are now associated with Aurender, which leads to an official proposal to use the Vivaldi clock with the Aurender W20 music server.  Looking forward, the Auralic G2 range will offer the Leo G2 Femto Reference Clock.  

 

So are dCS and others offering something 'worthless' in the hope that gullible audiophiles will buy anyway?  Personally, I think that there are different design philosophies, and getting the best clock integrated into the DAC is one of these and arguably the best approach from a pure design perspective.  Are there alternative approaches utilising high performance external clocks that can also perform well and offer a degree of value for money at the respective price point?  It looks like this is true also.

[One and a half]

6 minutes ago, Confused said:

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?

Long term accurate clocks like Rhubidium types are worthless for audio was their point.

[Confused]

9 minutes ago, One and a half said:

Long term accurate clocks like Rhubidium types are worthless for audio was their point.

Yes, and logically that is a very easy point to agree with, I would think.

[seeteeyou]

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/31857-mutec-ref-10-masterclock/?page=21&tab=comments#comment-752308

 

FYI - here's the direct link to the "clock jitter" part @ the 0:24:42 mark

 

https://youtu.be/BXyjsSYjnL8#t=1482

As pointed out in another thread before, we better be aware of what kinda clocks (i.e. word clocks / system clocks / reference clocks) we're talking about without lumping all of them together

 

https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/30376-a-novel-way-to-massively-improve-the-sq-of-computer-audio-streaming/?page=211&tab=comments#comment-754446

 

Rob Watts should be focusing on word clocks inside a DAC alone while REF 10 could actually be connected to system clocks with an input for 10MHz reference clocks (e.g. SOtM sCLK-EX) directly. In other words, we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater because in some cases REF 10 is indeed a worthy investment for bringing further improvements to system clocks.

 

Anyways, some manufacturers like Esoteric and TEAC actually made DACs with inputs for an external 10MHz reference clock. They aren't doing that for the sake of ONLY improving the word clocks since other system clocks inside their DACs could also benefit from a superior reference clock.

 

BTW, I wholeheartedly agree with the 'worthless' part if the clock cables and PSUs were connected to a clock. Don't even bother with upgrading a clock if we weren't prepared to invest in clock cables (especially the length) and PSUs since both of them are mission critical.

[zoltan]

1 hour ago, seeteeyou said:

BTW, I wholeheartedly agree with the 'worthless' part if the clock cables and PSUs were connected to a clock. Don't even bother with upgrading a clock if we weren't prepared to invest in clock cables (especially the length) and PSUs since both of them are mission critical.

 

Makes me wonder again if a clock cable is any different from a digital 75 Ohms cable. If a cable performs better than another as a digital interconnect, will it perform better as a clock cable too? Are the criteria any different for good performance? (Apart from being short.)

[afrancois]

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.

 

[One and a half]

14 minutes ago, afrancois said:

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.

 

I would have thought a clock needs to go through a PLL and compare this to the incoming data, whether the clock is external or internal, the function is the same.

An external clock has the plus of its PSU removed from the DAC, so this bodes well for the REF10