Mutec REF 10 Masterclock

[auricgoldfinger]

30 minutes ago, justubes said:

What i meant is that using another unused bnc is not griunded directly with the next bnc output which the cable is connected to.

 

Each bnc is isolated from each other.

 

So meanimg not a true or best ground...

 

I think you're missing the point of how cable shielding works.  The fact that signal and grounding cables are connected to separate, isolated outputs is irrelevant.  The "signal" is being grounded, not the chassis.  The REF 10 itself is properly grounded.  Based on my experience chassis grounding properly designed linear power supplies, as long as you're not experiencing ground loops, a chassis ground is likely to provide little to no audible benefit .

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, Arpiben said:

@austinpop

Please note that I am not arguing about Mutec good performances. But for several reasons, like the ones mentioned by @mansr, we should rather compare phase noise at DAC's output where it may matter. 

The advice is coming from somebody used to deal with phase noise and synchronization in Telecom industry. Feel free to delete.

 

I am not touching this. This is the same discussion that derails hundreds of threads here on AS.

 

It's up to OP @Octagon to decide the scope of this thread. If so, he can so state, and even request moderation privileges from @The Computer Audiophile if he likes.

[marce]

An interesting intro to clock distribution, low phase noise is desirable, why?

https://www.orolia.com/sites/default/files/document-files/Time_and_Frequency_Distribution_WP11-101_A.pdf

 

 

[MarkS]

15 hours ago, Tand said:

 

Hi Mark S

 

I am using a "half stack" - a Vivaldi dac and clock with a Mutec REF10 with Habst BNC.

 

First I was very happy when upgrading my Vivaldi dac with the Vivaldi clock. But it was when adding a REF10 it got really interesting. As I recall I thought the REF10 upgrade was much better than first adding the Vivaldi clock on its own. When Habst BNC cables where used compared to generic BNC it added a sense of focus, calmnes and better dynamics which connects me closer to the music.

 

Next step for me in january will be to upgrade my REF10 to REF10 SE-120 with -120 dBc/Hz😃.

 

Happy holidays!

 

i’m in for the upgraded unit. Seems intriguing. 
 

i’ve also emailed Habst about the bnc clock cables. I wonder how the Habst compare to the Nordost V2 cables I’m using for word clocking???

[mansr]

7 hours ago, Arpiben said:

@austinpop

Please note that I am not arguing about Mutec good performances. But for several reasons, like the ones mentioned by @mansr, we should rather compare phase noise at DAC's output where it may matter. 

The advice is coming from somebody used to deal with phase noise and synchronization in Telecom industry. Feel free to delete.

The easiest place to measure is probably at the clock input to the DAC chip.

 

7 hours ago, justubes said:

But in any case take it that any improvement in the phase noise of an external reference  will result in the same improvement at the dac.

That's anything but certain. For a PLL based design, phase noise below the loop filter bandwidth is passed through while higher-frequency jitter it attenuated. Then the intrinsic phase noise of the VCO is added. At low frequency offsets, such as the 1 Hz discussed above, the greater of the the two phase noise sources will dominate. For a -110 to -116 dBc/Hz improvement in the reference clock to make a notable difference, the phase noise added by the clock synthesiser has to be around the same level or better. If it is that good, there is no reason to use the external reference in the first place, except to synchronise multiple devices.

[auricgoldfinger]

15 hours ago, Tand said:

 

Next step for me in january will be to upgrade my REF10 to REF10 SE-120 with -120 dBc/Hz😃.

 

Has Mutec made an official announcement about an upgrade path, or even officially announced the REF 10 SE-120 is available for purchase?

[Tand]

12 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

Has Mutec made an official announcement about an upgrade path, or even officially announced the REF 10 SE-120 is available for purchase?

 

Hi auricgoldfinger and @LowMidHigh

 

I have not seen any announcement from Mutec but as I read about the SE-120 in here and WBF, I sent a mail to Mutec and was able to reserve one of the oscillators they had incoming. Very happy for this as I understand there is a very small numbers available right now. 

 

 

[Confused]

As an aside, but relevant to some of the Mutec related questions that have been posted over the last few pages, I notice that the formally very active and helpful on this forum @julian.david has not been seen here, and indeed has not even logged in, for just over one year now.

 

A shame, because in the past he made an extremely useful contribution to this forum.  Does anyone know why this might be?

[Abyss Man]

On 12/23/2019 at 2:04 PM, austinpop said:

Mark,

 

One of the key metrics to look at is the published phase noise @1Hz offset at 10MHz. The lower this number, the higher the quality of the clock. This is a gross simplification, but as a first pass it’s a good metric.

 

The Ref 10 is -116 dBc/Hz. This clock seems to be -110. That’s quite a gulf in favor of the Mutec. 

Hi Rajiv,

May I know what's the reading for the soTm Master clock? I cannot find the numbers sir. Thank you so much.

 

[auricgoldfinger]

1 hour ago, Tand said:

 

Hi auricgoldfinger and @LowMidHigh

 

I have not seen any announcement from Mutec but as I read about the SE-120 in here and WBF, I sent a mail to Mutec and was able to reserve one of the oscillators they had incoming. Very happy for this as I understand there is a very small numbers available right now. 

 

 

 

Will you be getting a brand new unit or sending yours to Mutec for an oscillator and case upgrade?

[LowMidHigh]

1 hour ago, Tand said:

 

Hi auricgoldfinger and @LowMidHigh

 

I have not seen any announcement from Mutec but as I read about the SE-120 in here and WBF, I sent a mail to Mutec and was able to reserve one of the oscillators they had incoming. Very happy for this as I understand there is a very small numbers available right now. 

 

 

 

Can you share the uncharge?

[austinpop]

3 hours ago, Abyss Man said:

Hi Rajiv,

May I know what's the reading for the soTm Master clock? I cannot find the numbers sir. Thank you so much.

 

it’s on the product page: https://www.sotm-audio.com/sotmwp/english/portfolio-item/sclk-ocx10/#toggle-id-1

 

They don’t appear to publish their phase noise at 1 Hz offset. You can compare the rest with the Ref 10.

[6aardvark9]

Holy crap, just got a quote from Mutec for upgrading from REF10 to REF10 SE-120 >>> €2,400 !!

[auricgoldfinger]

5 hours ago, 6aardvark9 said:

Holy crap, just got a quote from Mutec for upgrading from REF10 to REF10 SE-120 >>> €2,400 !!

 

What exactly do you get for €2,400?  Does this include a new case in addition to the improved clock?  Any other internal changes?

[6aardvark9]

21 minutes ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

What exactly do you get for €2,400?  Does this include a new case in addition to the improved clock?  Any other internal changes?

 

I presume the case is the same, since I have seen a picture of the SE-120. Regarding other internal changes beyond the clock, I have no idea... I subsequently asked for the retail price of the SE-120 version to have an idea whether the upgrade is worthwhile (ie. is the price of the REF10 (€3,500) plus the upgrade (€2,400) less than the price of a new REF10 SE-120. I'm awaiting an answer from Mutec.

[LowMidHigh]

Does it actually gives a discernable bump? Back in the day, both Mutec and the Japanese enterprise swore anything below - 116 makes no difference.... 

[auricgoldfinger]

32 minutes ago, 6aardvark9 said:

 

I presume the case is the same, since I have seen a picture of the SE-120. Regarding other internal changes beyond the clock, I have no idea... I subsequently asked for the retail price of the SE-120 version to have an idea whether the upgrade is worthwhile (ie. is the price of the REF10 (€3,500) plus the upgrade (€2,400) less than the price of a new REF10 SE-120. I'm awaiting an answer from Mutec.

 

The SE-120 case is different.  It has a grounding post on the back for people who want to earth ground the case.

[LowMidHigh]

On 2/19/2020 at 9:51 PM, 6aardvark9 said:

 

I presume the case is the same, since I have seen a picture of the SE-120. Regarding other internal changes beyond the clock, I have no idea... I subsequently asked for the retail price of the SE-120 version to have an idea whether the upgrade is worthwhile (ie. is the price of the REF10 (€3,500) plus the upgrade (€2,400) less than the price of a new REF10 SE-120. I'm awaiting an answer from Mutec.

 

I've been in touch with Mutec on the matter of upgrading to the SE-120.

 

There are 3 differences between the basic and special editions:

* Oscilliator

* The S sports a ground stub

* Different screen printing (logos) 

 

The electronics are identical, and good enough for the lower phase oscillator to show through. 

 

The upgrade includes swapping oscillators only. The case is left untouched, so expect no ground stub and unchanged screen printing. 

 

Mutec believes that the only occasion to earth their device is if ground loops are present, manifested in the form of hum. If it doesn't hum, don't touch it. 

 

They should have sufficient quantities of oscillators to meet demand in August. 

[6aardvark9]

20 minutes ago, LowMidHigh said:

 

I've been in touch with Mutec on the matter of upgrading to the SE-120.

 

There are 3 differences between the basic and special editions:

* Oscilliator

* The S sports a ground stub

* Different screen printing (logos) 

 

The electronics are identical, and good enough for the lower phase oscillator to show through. 

 

The upgrade includes swapping oscillators only. The case is left untouched, so expect no ground stub and unchanged screen printing. 

 

Mutec believes that the only occasion to earth their device is if ground loops are present, manifested in the form of hum. If it doesn't hum, don't touch it. 

 

They should have sufficient quantities of oscillators to meet demand in August. 

The price for a new SE-120 in Europe is €5,498 (including tax)

The price to upgrade a standard REF10 to SE-120 specs is €2,398 (including tax)

... quoted to me directly from Mutec

[MarkS]

On 12/22/2019 at 12:28 PM, austinpop said:

 

 

Hi Mark,

 

@auricgoldfinger gave you very useful info and covered most of the bases.

 

I have certainly found BNC cables to make a difference. I've only tried a few, but can say that the Habst is the best I've tried, followed by the SOtM. The Habst is more natural, full-bodied, and has cleaner transients, while the SOtM is smooth, with a rich tonality. Both are a big step up from generic cables.

 

Best I can tell, the rules of thumb regarding optimal length of BNC cables are in the context of S/PDIF and word clock applications, where we are talking about digital audio sample rates (frequencies from 44.1 to 768kHz). Since the Ref-10 cables carry 10 MHz, I don't know if this holds. Based on my very limited experiments, the shorter seems to be the better. I have 0.5m cables in my setup. 

 

Anyone know how to actually buy these Habst bnc clock cables.  The company doesn't answer my inquiries.

[6aardvark9]

You could also consider Clearer Audio Silver Optimus Reference as an alternative to Habst...

[auricgoldfinger]

2 hours ago, MarkS said:

 

Anyone know how to actually buy these Habst bnc clock cables.  The company doesn't answer my inquiries.

 

They're a bit difficult to deal with.  I have always used this email to correspond and place orders:  [email protected]

[MarkS]

Thanks. 

[LowMidHigh]

1 hour ago, MarkS said:

Thanks. 

 

Mark,

I suggest you consider the whole cable upgrade carefully. Those companies don't publish any measurements to substantiate their claims, nor do they conduct AB/X to decisively demonstrate the superiority of thier products. It stands to reason they would do one of the either, if not both, to boost sales and allay thier critics. Ergo, you should exercise caution.

(Know that one massive player in that marketplace was caught cheating in demos more than once.) 

As for the 10Hz signal, it's sole purpose is to trigger a gate on the receiving side. A cable may pick up interferences that would inject jitter into the receiver. However, if the environment isn't saturated with EMR, and the cable is short, any properly shielded cable would do. Belden builds good cables and so does Canare and many others.

Lastly, for the price of some of those "hi-end" cables, you could purchase a 2nd ER and create a chain with perceivable aural improvement. Food for thought. 

P.S., not looking to duke out the cable thing. Just to give a fellow man another perspective. For the believers, enjoy your cables and all the great music.

[MarkS]

1 hour ago, LowMidHigh said:

 

Mark,

I suggest you consider the whole cable upgrade carefully. Those companies don't publish any measurements to substantiate their claims, nor do they conduct AB/X to decisively demonstrate the superiority of thier products. It stands to reason they would do one of the either, if not both, to boost sales and allay thier critics. Ergo, you should exercise caution.

(Know that one massive player in that marketplace was caught cheating in demos more than once.) 

As for the 10Hz signal, it's sole purpose is to trigger a gate on the receiving side. A cable may pick up interferences that would inject jitter into the receiver. However, if the environment isn't saturated with EMR, and the cable is short, any properly shielded cable would do. Belden builds good cables and so does Canare and many others.

Lastly, for the price of some of those "hi-end" cables, you could purchase a 2nd ER and create a chain with perceivable aural improvement. Food for thought. 

P.S., not looking to duke out the cable thing. Just to give a fellow man another perspective. For the believers, enjoy your cables and all the great music.

thanks.