Mutec REF 10 Masterclock

[auricgoldfinger]

1 hour ago, sam1000 said:

Did folks receive  Habst cable from group buy? any early impressions? I did not pull the trigger since I had no chance to hear it. cheers..

 

Daniel of Habst told me it will be another 1-5 weeks before the cables are produced and ready to ship.  They were already very busy and received more CA group buy orders than expected.

[flkin]

I ordered a couple of the Habst usb cables under the CA group buy and Daniel said they were already on the way.

[auricgoldfinger]

1 hour ago, flkin said:

I ordered a couple of the Habst usb cables under the CA group buy and Daniel said they were already on the way.

 

Did you order 75-ohm or 50-ohm?  I ordered the 50-ohm, and they have had some issues getting it produced to their specs.

[austinpop]

Apparently our group buy exhausted the availability of 50 ohm BNC connectors in Germany.

 

Who says CA Group Buys aren’t lucrative?!  

[Ralf11]

Were you guys buying the BNC's from the manf. or a distributor?

[flkin]

11 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

Did you order 75-ohm or 50-ohm?  I ordered the 50-ohm, and they have had some issues getting it produced to their specs.

 

I got their USB Ultra 3 cables instead not their BNC clock cable. Still undecided on how to go with external clocks since getting the Pink Faun 2.16x server. If I need to get the BNC, will get it as a package with the Mutec Ref10.

 

2 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

Were you guys buying the BNC's from the manf. or a distributor?

 

Daniel Steinert is the proprietor of Habst. HandArbeit By STeinert or Habst.

[Confused]

I thought this might be of interest to REF10 users, hence the link here:

 

 

 

[auricgoldfinger]

Big review of BNC cables by Jay at Audio Bacon

 

https://audiobacon.net/2018/08/11/the-audiophiles-short-list-the-best-digital-coaxial-cables/

 

[auricgoldfinger]

In case anyone is in the market for a cable upgrade...

 

https://www.usaudiomart.com/details/649455547-sotm-dcblbnc50-digital-cable-1-meter/?utm_campaign=new-classified-ad&utm_source=notification&utm_medium=email

 

[baconbrain]

I have been considering investing in a REF 10 for my system but am not certain if it would be a good fit.

 

My signal chain is currently setup with the Melco (connected to my router ) hosting the first ethernet bridge to the Zenith SE and acting solely as a NAS. The SE hosts the second ethernet bridge to the Trinnov (so to say a a bridge within a bridge) and is the Roon Server. The Trinnov functions as a Roon End Point. The Trinnov is then connected via AES to my Kii Threes.

 

Considering the benefits of RAAT from a clocking perspective, the most logical placement of the REF 10 would appear to be between the Trinnov and the Kii’s utilizing a Mutec Reclocker via AES. This also had the benefit of being able to sync the Trinnov via a Word Clock signal between the Mutec Reclocker and the Trinnov.

 

Curious as to your thoughts?

[Patatorz]

Hello Baconbrain, I think that if you want to use a ref10 the best solution is to reclock the signal (aes or spdif) between your amethyst and kii. It means that the ref10 would be linked to the mutec reclocker (mc3+ ?) with the bnc in order to provide the reference 10M signal and you can send the wordclock signal of the mc3 to the amethyst through a bnc. 

If you are looking for a ref10 i’m Selling one (PM)

 

Best regards

[baconbrain]

12 minutes ago, Patatorz said:

Hello Baconbrain, I think that if you want to use a ref10 the best solution is to reclock the signal (aes or spdif) between your amethyst and kii. It means that the ref10 would be linked to the mutec reclocker (mc3+ ?) with the bnc in order to provide the reference 10M signal and you can send the wordclock signal of the mc3 to the amethyst through a bnc. 

If you are looking for a ref10 i’m Selling one (PM)

 

Best regards

Hey Patatorz,

 

Thx for the response!

 

Yes agree, that would seem to be the most logical way of going about it. One thing that has me somewhat skeptical as how effective this would be is Kii's claim that there is no preferred sample rate when utilizing the AES signal path. Seems a bit skewed, given that the DAC's withn the Kii's must be working with a native (or common) rate. What has been your experience?

[Patatorz]

I dont know how the kii is working, for example if they are making some SRC (sample Rate conversion) on pcm to 192 or as some manufacturers to DSD...

On my system, the impact have been « nice » in such configuration (with a mc3+ USB).

[sam1000]

How are people paying to Habst from USA? I tried "Zelle" transfer from Wells Fargo, but Habst said, the app to receive money is not available in Europe. Tried Tranferwise, and they ask for my username and password for my bank ? There's no way I'm going to share my bank credentials to a third party. Are folks simply wiring the money to Habst? 

[auricgoldfinger]

6 hours ago, sam1000 said:

How are people paying to Habst from USA? I tried "Zelle" transfer from Wells Fargo, but Habst said, the app to receive money is not available in Europe. Tried Tranferwise, and they ask for my username and password for my bank ? There's no way I'm going to share my bank credentials to a third party. Are folks simply wiring the money to Habst? 

 

If you don't want to give up banking information, a wire transfer is the only option.

 

This company offers reasonable retail Forex rates and transfers:  https://www.ofx.com/en-us/

[str-1]

I yesterday posted this question on the "A novel way to..." thread but then remembered this thread which I had read through part of last year, so thought I would post here as well.

 

It's about the aging of the crystals these reference clocks use.  How long under normal use would it be before I might expect to hear an aging crystal's contribution to a dropping off of performance from a Mutec REF 10 (or any other similarly specified reference clock)?

 

The aging figures quoted for the REF 10 and for other clocks I have looked at indicate very, very small deteriorations under normal use.  But can the aging process be accelerated by persistently adverse environmental factors, such as the increased heat from stacked and poorly ventilated equipment arrangements, or week on week of 30C degree summer heat in London where domestic air-conditioning is the exception rather than the rule?  I could also mention variation in power supply, but would do so accepting that Mutec and other clock manufacturers have taken steps to ensure that that should not be an issue.

 

I am interested in this because the benefits of using a reference clock with their equipment reported by many on CA and other forums range from the subtle to the profound, and I find myself wondering if I were to buy a REF 10 and found the benefits to be subtle, how long it would be before I lost even that due to deterioration of the crystal (accepting that other components would also degrade over time).

[baconbrain]

On 8/29/2018 at 8:08 PM, str-1 said:

I yesterday posted this question on the "A novel way to..." thread but then remembered this thread which I had read through part of last year, so thought I would post here as well.

 

It's about the aging of the crystals these reference clocks use.  How long under normal use would it be before I might expect to hear an aging crystal's contribution to a dropping off of performance from a Mutec REF 10 (or any other similarly specified reference clock)?

 

The aging figures quoted for the REF 10 and for other clocks I have looked at indicate very, very small deteriorations under normal use.  But can the aging process be accelerated by persistently adverse environmental factors, such as the increased heat from stacked and poorly ventilated equipment arrangements, or week on week of 30C degree summer heat in London where domestic air-conditioning is the exception rather than the rule?  I could also mention variation in power supply, but would do so accepting that Mutec and other clock manufacturers have taken steps to ensure that that should not be an issue.

 

I am interested in this because the benefits of using a reference clock with their equipment reported by many on CA and other forums range from the subtle to the profound, and I find myself wondering if I were to buy a REF 10 and found the benefits to be subtle, how long it would be before I lost even that due to deterioration of the crystal (accepting that other components would also degrade over time).

Certainly not an expert on this, but I believe the influence of external factors to the rate of deterioration must be a given. The question I would have back to you is: If the amount of benefit from the Ref10 is so subtle that one is concerned about a rate of deterioration +/-0.2 ppm (over 10 years), then is the total investment (Ref10 + cables + ....) warranted to begin with?

[str-1]

6 hours ago, baconbrain said:

Certainly not an expert on this, but I believe the influence of external factors to the rate of deterioration must be a given. The question I would have back to you is: If the amount of benefit from the Ref10 is so subtle that one is concerned about a rate of deterioration +/-0.2 ppm (over 10 years), then is the total investment (Ref10 + cables + ....) warranted to begin with?

 

I see that you have over 150 posts to your credit on CA, and may well have many more on other forums.  So I find it strange given the discussion you have been exposed to around this hobby that you would seek to have one person justify their personal sense of value, and especially when discussing a scenario that they as yet have no experience of.

 

Even if you have not experienced this for yourself, you must surely by now appreciate that even the smallest of improvements can have the potential to take you across a threshold into a higher level of personal listening satisfaction, leaving you with a sense of value well above what the size of improvement might suggest.  Your are familiar with the idiom ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back’?

 

Let’s leave personal perspectives on value out of it.  My question was about the ageing of crystals and when the impact of this might become audible.  Pitching the question at the level of subtle improvement seemed to me to be the best way of getting some kind of handle on this.  But I am happy to have any changes described/explained in whatever context is helpful.

 

Perhaps if I put the question another way.  At what level of aging, as a ppm value, would we likely start to hear a drop off in performance from the crystal given average hearing and a highly optimised music system - 0.5ppm, 1.0ppm, 5.0ppm, or more than this?  This consideration would of course need to take account of the fact that the performance of other components within the clock (Mutec, SOtM, or any other clock) would also drop off over time.  I am assuming the aging figures quoted are for constant use (24/7) but it would be nice to have that confirmed, or to have more information if that was not the case.

 

For any value offered in answer to that question, the next question would be, was there any reasonably foreseeable usage-case (including environmental factors) that could reach that level of aging over periods the buyer would be interested in - e.g. 2 years, 5 years, 10 years etc.  Just to be clear, in asking this I do mean aging and not the purely temporary impact of external factors.

 

[mourip]

Warning: Subjective evaluation, opinion and speculation based upon personal experience to follow...

 

I have owned a Ref10 for almost two years. The effect in my system is neither subliminally subtle or jaw-droppingly profound but is indeed rewarding and worthwhile. When I reboot my RedNet D16 which gets wclk from a Mutec USB which in turn gets master clock from my REF 10, the D16 seems to forget the external wclk setting and return to internal clocking. I in turn usually forget that it does that. Always within a matter of minutes I feel that something in the music is missing and finally remember that I need to go into RedNet Control and re-choose external clock. Once done the music is much more satisfying. It gets a sense of ease and "correctness" for me.

 

I would like to suggest that no one here can answer the question regarding the audible effects of timing degradation. My own personal, subjective, partially informed, and possibly irritating guess is that it is so slow and subtle that you will never notice it and possibly might be dead or moved on to other equipment before it is objectively perceptible.

 

I did warn everyone ?

 

 

 

[baconbrain]

1 hour ago, str-1 said:

 

I see that you have over 150 posts to your credit on CA, and may well have many more on other forums.  So I find it strange given the discussion you have been exposed to around this hobby that you would seek to have one person justify their personal sense of value, and especially when discussing a scenario that they as yet have no experience of.

 

Even if you have not experienced this for yourself, you must surely by now appreciate that even the smallest of improvements can have the potential to take you across a threshold into a higher level of personal listening satisfaction, leaving you with a sense of value well above what the size of improvement might suggest.  Your are familiar with the idiom ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back’?

 

Let’s leave personal perspectives on value out of it.  My question was about the ageing of crystals and when the impact of this might become audible.  Pitching the question at the level of subtle improvement seemed to me to be the best way of getting some kind of handle on this.  But I am happy to have any changes described/explained in whatever context is helpful.

 

Perhaps if I put the question another way.  At what level of aging, as a ppm value, would we likely start to hear a drop off in performance from the crystal given average hearing and a highly optimised music system - 0.5ppm, 1.0ppm, 5.0ppm, or more than this?  This consideration would of course need to take account of the fact that the performance of other components within the clock (Mutec, SOtM, or any other clock) would also drop off over time.  I am assuming the aging figures quoted are for constant use (24/7) but it would be nice to have that confirmed, or to have more information if that was not the case.

 

For any value offered in answer to that question, the next question would be, was there any reasonably foreseeable usage-case (including environmental factors) that could reach that level of aging over periods the buyer would be interested in - e.g. 2 years, 5 years, 10 years etc.  Just to be clear, in asking this I do mean aging and not the purely temporary impact of external factors.

 

Hi str-1,

 

No offence intended and I understand your point regarding the merit of leaving personal perspectives around value out of the discussion. Personally, I am more concerned about the deterioration of my human hearing over the next 10 years... ? 

[str-1]

30 minutes ago, baconbrain said:

Hi str-1,

 

No offence intended and I understand your point regarding the merit of leaving personal perspectives around value out of the discussion. Personally, I am more concerned about the deterioration of my human hearing over the next 10 years... ? 

No offence taken.  And the chances of me feeling a Mutec REF 10, or any other reference clock, was not worth buying if all I heard was a subtle improvement would be high.

[baconbrain]

12 minutes ago, str-1 said:

No offence taken.  And the chances of me feeling a Mutec REF 10, or any other reference clock, was not worth buying if all I heard was a subtle improvement would be high.

Great! Then we are on the same page.

[Confused]

An interesting question regarding aging from @str-1  One thing that has been mentioned in this thread a number of times is that absolute clock accuracy (over time) is not important for an audio clock, what is important is the phase noise, something for which the REF10 has very impressive specifications.  So this begs a question, from the specs the phase noise of the REF10 at, say, 10 Hz is less than -145dBc/Hz.  So what happens to this figure after +/- 0.2 ppm aging after 10 years?  OK, the figures are there, but I do not have a clue as to how significant this is in practice.

 

OK - let's assume there is some unwanted degradation of performance over time.  This then begs a second question, how best to mitigate this?  To take my own use of the REF10 as an example.  I know there is a warm-up time to achieve optimum clock stability, so I simply leave mine powered up and running 24/7, also, I am sure that powering up / down must cause some aging.  However, in a typical week for me, the system may not be used between Monday morning and Friday evening.  So some weeks, I could turn the REF10 off on Sunday night and then power it up again for the weekend on Friday evening.  Over the year, this would mean the unit is powered up / down maybe 50 times, which in itself may cause degradation, but on the other hand, I would save maybe 6000 hours running per year.  So which causes the most aging, 50 power cycles per year, or 6000 hours running per year?  This might seem a bit of an obsessive question, but it would be easy enough for me to use the REF10 either way, and if one way was better for design life than the other, then that is the way I would go.  Why not?  I suspect that there would be very little in it either way, but it would be good to know.

 

On the two points above, I would be very grateful if @julian.david could provide some insight.  

[Confused]

17 hours ago, mourip said:

Warning: Subjective evaluation, opinion and speculation based upon personal experience to follow...

 

I have owned a Ref10 for almost two years. The effect in my system is neither subliminally subtle or jaw-droppingly profound but is indeed rewarding and worthwhile. When I reboot my RedNet D16 which gets wclk from a Mutec USB which in turn gets master clock from my REF 10, the D16 seems to forget the external wclk setting and return to internal clocking. I in turn usually forget that it does that. Always within a matter of minutes I feel that something in the music is missing and finally remember that I need to go into RedNet Control and re-choose external clock. Once done the music is much more satisfying. It gets a sense of ease and "correctness" for me. 

 

I would like to suggest that no one here can answer the question regarding the audible effects of timing degradation. My own personal, subjective, partially informed, and possibly irritating guess is that it is so slow and subtle that you will never notice it and possibly might be dead or moved on to other equipment before it is objectively perceptible.

 

I did warn everyone ?

 

 

 

5

 

Back on subjective observations, I was struck by your description "Once done the music is much more satisfying. It gets a sense of ease and "correctness" for me."

 

This is something I wrote a couple of weeks ago on another forum regarding a comparison with Devialet AIR streaming:

 

So to the listening.  Today, I have no doubt that the mR/MC3+USB/REF10 combo is a step up from AIR.  In my head, I know exactly why and exactly how it sounds better, it is difficult to put into words though.  The best way I can describe it is that it is a step away from music produced by a digital audio system and one step towards the actual music.  So when listening very intently via AIR, you are aware of those little things that niggle sometimes with reproduced music, with the mR/Mutec you start to notice magic in voices, ambiance within the music.  So the stuff that might induce listener fatigue is diminished, it sounds more organic, less digital, more like real instruments producing music, choose your description.  I do not think I have actually managed to fully describe how all this manifests as sound in my head, but I am sure you get the general idea.

 

Sounds a bit like "a sense of ease and correctness" wouldn't you say?  It is hard to describe, and it is subtle, but it is a subtle difference that I feel is worth a lot in terms of how much you can enjoy the music.

[Confused]

On 9/1/2018 at 8:12 AM, Confused said:

 

On the two points above, I would be very grateful if @julian.david could provide some insight.  

I have just noticed that @julian.david has not posted on CA since the start of the year.  A shame, because he has provided some great insight with many of his posts.

 

Anyway, it therefore looks like we are unlikely to get a direct answer to the clock aging question any time soon.