CLOCKS, what should we look for in next generation

[beerandmusic]

8 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

I am sorry, but he merely doesn't know what he is talking about. You call that unbiased. It's the same thing.

 

Can you elaborate on why he doesn't know what he is talking about?  I am open to reasons...seriously.

Is that true for everyone in the 200 page SOTM thread too that believes in the product too?

 

Have you played with the SOTM with the sCLK-ex?

 

 

 

[PeterSt]

Just now, beerandmusic said:

Can you quantify?  I am open to reasons...seriously.

 

Once you do know what matters of concern are about, it is the most easy to see how someone is BSing around. I'm afraid that is the downside of making video's - or talk to people live for that matter. And btw do not forget that I live in the same country as he does, so the interpretation is a kind of optimal (say the contrary of you and me understanding each other).

 

Quantify ? it is in each and every sentence. But if you look back into his small mistake on the Dragonfly and MQA sampling rate ... really, review that. This makes the most profoundly clear that this guy is making up ALL for a few clicks with his fake charisma.

And don't you dare to not review that. It is crucial for your belief.

 

PS: I am not good at preserving links, so I hope you have it yourself somewhere, or someone else has it. It has been posted in CA as well.

 

[beerandmusic]

12 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Once you do know what matters of concern are about, it is the most easy to see how someone is BSing around. I'm afraid that is the downside of making video's - or talk to people live for that matter. And btw do not forget that I live in the same country as he does, so the interpretation is a kind of optimal (say the contrary of you and me understanding each other).

 

Quantify ? it is in each and every sentence. But if you look back into his small mistake on the Dragonfly and MQA sampling rate ... really, review that. This makes the most profoundly clear that this guy is making up ALL for a few clicks with his fake charisma.

And don't you dare to not review that. It is crucial for your belief.

 

PS: I am not good at preserving links, so I hope you have it yourself somewhere, or someone else has it. It has been posted in CA as well.

 

 

I can find it....and I will watch it.  Even if he made a mistake though, that doesn't mean that much, i am sure you have made a few....hell, even i have made a few mistakes (grin).

 

So you don't think there is anything new here?  No meat, nothing that would get people excited about?

 

It will be a bummer if there isn't anything exciting here....but at least it is in network audio, and that is where my testing leads me. (but I also have stated many times, it is probably because i have a noisy pc, and i won't buy any usb toys).....i don't feel a need to buy any usb toys, because network sounds pretty good to me already....i was just hoping this would elevate me a little more.

 

 

[davide256]

1 hour ago, beerandmusic said:

^^^ Actually, i had to think about it, and what got me so excited after sitting on sidelines for over the last year....

I think, more than anything, it was the Hans channel review about the SOTM Ultra.  I have tried so much stuff over the past few years, only to be left unimpressed, with so many "OMG, best thing ever reviews" that i became numb to the audio hoopla. 

 

Hans video review here, kind of summed up my thoughts about the hoopla marketing that goes on in audio....but he is convincingly unbiased (as unbiased as a reviewer can be anyway), that when he seemed so excited about the SOTM ULTRA, and i see so much talk on this site (what are we at 200 pages now), and most having to do with clocking, I guess I am just excited about "HOPE", because of being let down so many times.

 

Anyways, regardless if this is just more hoopla, or if there really is any MEAT to any of this clocking stuff, I am very close to buying something, which i plan on not upgrading again....so if i seem overly excited, or hopeful, that is probably the best context i can put it in....

I am not dishing out $4K though, and so I just want to find something i can enjoy "with belief" that i have the best i can have with my limited budget.

 

All of you don't need to worry much more, i will likely slip back into hiding off of this site (i know, never too soon for many of you...don't let the door kick me on the way out)....it's been fun and interesting to me, and I am sorry i have offended so many...it was never my intention....

 

 

 

Don't get caught up in all the tech hoopla.. what matters is what can be heard. 30 years ago tech pundits were claiming we didn't need anything better than a Denon or a Technics direct drive for vinyl turntables, that belt drive, suspension products like Linn or Sota couldn't improve analog playback. The science of audio rarely keeps up with the art of audio.

[beerandmusic]

4 hours ago, JohnSwenson said:

I've been thinking about writing a primer on crystal oscillators and digital audio and this looks like the perfect place to put it. I promise I will leave out all the complex math that most articles are filled with. I'm NOT going to go into how it all works, since most people don't care, just what makes them different and how that matters for audio.

 

A crystal oscillator is a combination of a special piece of quartz crystal and an electronic circuit, the combination produces periodic signal at a specific frequency, several things can change this frequency:

 

Thickness of the quartz piece, this is the primary determining factor in the frequency

 

Temperature of the crystal,  this is called the temperature coefficient (TEMPCO for short), it is the change in frequency for a small change in temperature. It is not constant but changes with temperature, this is the TEMPCO curve. All TEMPCO curves have a temperature where the TEMPCO is zero, this is called the inflection point. If you run the crystal at this temperature, small changes in temperature produce no change in frequency, THIS point is where you want to run a crystal oscillator. If the temperature is far away from this point a small change in temperature makes a big change in frequency, you do not want to be here.

 

Capacitance across the crystal, all crystal oscillators need some capacitance across the crystal to work, changing that capacitance changes the frequency.

 

Power flowing through the crystal. The oscillator circuit works by running power (in the form of an AC signal) through the crystal, changing the power changes the frequency.

 

TEMPCO is THE most important characteristic besides the thickness, so a lot of crystal oscillator design has to do with this.

 

Now on to "cut", this is how a slice of crystal is cut out of a block of quartz. This is all very complicated so I won't go into the details, just to say there are many ways to do this and the exact cut determines the properties of the oscillator.

 

The most common cut (BY FAR) is called the AT cut. Almost all the oscillators in your electronics devices use the AT cut. The primary reason for this is that the inflection point of its TEMPCO curve is at 25-35C, right around "normal" room temperature, especially in a box where the electronics warm it up slightly. With this cut you usually do not need to apply any temperature stabilization since it is at a point where a change in temperature makes a very small change in frequency.

 

The other cut we need to talk about is the SC cut, this is used in OCXOs, I'll talk about that later. This cut has much higher Q than the AT cut, which means much lower phase noise, BUT in order to get that the inflection point of the TEMPCO curve is at 95C. THIS is why an oven is needed, not so much to stabalize the temperature but to get the crystal to the inflection point where a change in temperature makes an extremely small change in frequency. The slope of the TEMPCO cut around the inflection point is much shallower than the AT cut, so a given change in temperature makes a much smaller change in frequency, IF it is at 95C, outside of that and it is worse than an AT. So you ONLY want to use an SC cut in an oven.

 

So what aspect of this is really important for digital audio? Most oscillator spec sheets spend a lot of time talking about their long term stability. It turns out crystals will change frequency over time (called aging). Some applications need this, digital audio does not. A 1 part per million change in frequency over  years time is completely irrelevant. Another spec that is important for some application is the TEMPCO, how much the frequency is going to change as the heater turns on and off. Again, irrelevant to digital audio. What DOES matter is phase noise. I'm not going to go into any detail on this but that is what matters. It is not a single number but a graph, you have to see the graph to really get an idea of what it is.

 

The manufacturers are starting to realize this and are now making some fairly inexpensive AT cut crystals with extremely low phase noise. They don't have great aging or great TEMPCO but they DO have great phase noise.

 

There are three common crystal oscillator configurations you will come across in digital audio:

 

XO - basic simple crystal oscillator, always uses an AT cut crystal, susceptible to the ambient temperature (remember that 25-35C) changes a fair amount over the years, has a huge range of phase noise from one model to the next. Anywhere from $0.35 to $25.

 

TCXO- Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillator. Standard AT crystal with a temperature sensor that feeds a voltage variable capacitor across the crystal. In order to have a large enough "pull range" to handle large changes in temperature the crystal is modified so the frequency changes a lot with a given capacitance change. Unfortunately this radically increases the phase noise of the crystal. Thus TCXOs are about the worst clock you can use for digital audio. You get much better temperature stability, which you don't care about, in exchange for much worse phase noise which you DO care about. A very bad trade off. So if you see  a digital audio device with a TCXO, stay away.

 

OCXO Oven Compensated Crystal Oscillator. The oscillator sits in an oven that brings its temperature to 95C. Most writing you find on the net will say this is to stabilize the temperature, but the real reason is to bring an SC cut crystal up to 95C where its built in TEMPCO is zero. This gives extremely low frequency change with temperature, but the SC also has MUCH lower aging than the AT AND much lower phase noise than the AT. Thus the OCXO is great for both systems that require extremely low drift but also systems that require extremely low phase noise.

 

The problem is that OCXOs are not cheap, $100 and up (WAY UP). The cheapest OCXOs have about the same phase noise as the best AT cut XOs, for about 4 times the price. So for digital audio at least a low end OCXO is not particularly useful. You have to get in the $300 range to get OCXOs with significantly lower phase noise. As you go up from there you can get WAY better phase noise, but you really have to pay for it. So when looking at OCXO specs, all you need look at is the phase noise, all the stuff in PPB etc is irreverent. Don't waste money on getting the best in those specs. If a manufacturer just shows the PPB numbers and doesn't give phase noise, stay away.

 

Another thing that has been talked about is "atomic clocks". The "inexpensive" ones (less than $10k) are rubidium. These have EXTREMELY low long term drift, but very bad phase noise. There is NO reason to get one of these for digital audio. Sometimes a rubidium oscillator is paired with an OCXO, the rubidium "disciplines" the OCXO, this gives the best of both worlds, but if you spent the same amount of money on just the OCXO you could get much lower phase noise which is what matters.

 

In the next installment I'll go into frequency synthesizers and how recent changes are changing the landscape of clocks for digital audio.

 

John S.

 

 

 

So, to summarize, are you suggesting that for "nextgen" players, we should look for OCXO with a phase noise spec of ________??  Did these OCXO clocks not exist in lower end gear previously?

 

I started googling OCXO and delighted to see some of the gear that i have heard at shows (e.g. the aurender w20 advertises):::::::::::::::::::::::::::

In digital audio, jitter and noise in the audio signal can seriously affect the performance of digital-to-analog converters. The Aurender W20 is the world’s first music player to completely eliminate noise from AC power supplies and AC mains through the use of LiFePO4 (LFP) batteries to power audio components. An FPGA-based All Digital Phase Locked Loop system with an Oven-Controlled Crystal Oscillator (OCXO) clock is used to maintain long term jitter to below negligible levels, and specially designed circuitry provides clean, noise-free power to the dedicated USB digital audio output. A solid-state drive cache for playback and extensive shielding using thick aluminum partitions also minimize and eliminate the many types of jitter and noise associated with the use of disk drives for playback.

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

I also found another dac which is first that I heard that made me fall in love with DSD about 4 years ago....the antelope advertises similarly.

 

Maybe this OCXO with a phase noise spec__________ is one of the magic ingredients that can be implemented in network players to get good sound for a reasonable price......fingers crossed, and hoping the naysayers are wrong.

 

 

[PeterSt]

2 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

So, to summarize, are you suggesting that for "nextgen" players, we should look for OCXO with a phase noise spec of ________??

 

You did not read in between the lines.  Unless you incorporate the implied advice that your budget will be consumed by the "clock" only.

 

[beerandmusic]

25 minutes ago, davide256 said:

Don't get caught up in all the tech hoopla.. what matters is what can be heard. 30 years ago tech pundits were claiming we didn't need anything better than a Denon or a Technics direct drive for vinyl turntables, that belt drive, suspension products like Linn or Sota couldn't improve analog playback. The science of audio rarely keeps up with the art of audio.

 

THe people in the 200 page SOTM thread seem excited too?  They can't all be wrong? 

[beerandmusic]

7 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

You did not read in between the lines.  Unless you incorporate the implied advice that your budget will be consumed by the "clock" only.

 

Maybe i need to re-read....i thought it said $100 to $300 for the clock only.....hell the SOTM ULTRA is only $1400 and it is brand new without much competition.  I know the last clock he mentioned was very high priced but stated overkill...i will re-read.  But I could afford the SOTM ultra w/sCLK-ex and upgrade dac later...but again, i am not ready to jump on any bandwagon yet....i think competition will drive price down soon....really hoping for a network player dac with ocxo for under $2k within a year.

[PeterSt]

1 minute ago, beerandmusic said:

Maybe i need ot re-read....i thought it said $100 to $300....

 

Yes, and then you have nothing (good) for Phase Noise. You really are better off with the $25 Crystek (mentioned by jabbr as costing $20).

 

If John Swenson writes you a nice essay, if I were you I'd read it, read it again, start investigating and come back when you understood it ALL which will be in a few months of time. Not in 10 minutes.

 

By now you try to dive in so many subjects that you can only gather superficial knowledge and end up with nothing. As I said elsewhere : you will push the power button for the first time and all appears to be in vain in one blast.

 

7 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

and it is brand new without much competition.

 

You have no idea how strange this reads from the one who wrote it. 

[beerandmusic]

17 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Yes, and then you have nothing (good) for Phase Noise. You really are better off with the $25 Crystek (mentioned by jabbr as costing $20).

 

If John Swenson writes you a nice essay, if I were you I'd read it, read it again, start investigating and come back when you understood it ALL which will be in a few months of time. Not in 10 minutes.

 

By now you try to dive in so many subjects that you can only gather superficial knowledge and end up with nothing. As I said elsewhere : you will push the power button for the first time and all appears to be in vain in one blast.

 

 

You have no idea how strange this reads from the one who wrote it. 

I really, REALLY, do not have any desire to understand any of it....I just want someone to say "look for these features" in your next purchase.  I don't want to learn it or expend any more time than i have to.  I just want to buy it, get off these forums and start enjoying music (grin).  It's a rough crowd.  I know I am not stupid, just looking for advice on my final purchase, and will be frugal until purchase.

 

Austin Pop answered it best for me...and for what I am most grateful for:

 

The good news is that some are paying close attention. I suspect over time we will see one-box solutions that make all this spaghetti superfluous.

 

And EXASOUND said: a player dac would be optimum.

I remain optimistic and a believer, but with open ears.

 

[opus101]

Just now, beerandmusic said:

I really, REALLY, do not have any desire to understand any of it....I just want someone to say "look for these features" in your next purchase.

 

I'd say look for a product where the power supply to the crystal oscillator is taken seriously. Don't just assume because they're using an XTAL with top-notch phase noise down to 0.1Hz that that graph is going to be what you get in practice. Manufacturers of XTALs want to show them in the best light so give them ideal conditions. Audio manufacturers trumpet the manu's specs but ask them how they know they're getting those figures in their implementation. If they just say 'individually regulated supplies' that's far from enough detail about a clock oscillator's power supply.

 

Second point is - is the clock getting to the DAC as cleanly as possible? Is there differential transmission from the OSC to the DAC? If not, is the ground connection between them subject to extraneous currents from nearby logic or analog circuits?

[beerandmusic]

2 minutes ago, opus101 said:

 

I'd say look for a product where the power supply to the crystal oscillator is taken seriously. Don't just assume because they're using an XTAL with top-notch phase noise down to 0.1Hz that that graph is going to be what you get in practice. Manufacturers of XTALs want to show them in the best light so give them ideal conditions. Audio manufacturers trumpet the manu's specs but ask them how they know they're getting those figures in their implementation. If they just say 'individually regulated supplies' that's far from enough detail about a clock oscillator's power supply.

 

Second point is - is the clock getting to the DAC as cleanly as possible? Is there differential transmission from the OSC to the DAC? If not, is the ground connection between them subject to extraneous currents from nearby logic or analog circuits?

 

Thanks, all this stuff helps...i won't get too into the weeds, and try to read between the lines....

THe point you make about geting the clock cleanly to the DAC, is another reason i want a one box player dac solution....

 

Thanks, going to go watch BLACKLIST...love spader!

[GUTB]

BTW, just so everyone knows, the reason why everyone uses Crystek for thier femto clocks is because they’re cheap.

 

I think OCXOs are the gold standard for audio clocking. Good luck finding them on affordable gear.

[fas42]

MSB, who make the current ultra-expensive, "rave" DAC, the SELECT II, give the "secret" away, in their promotional blurb ...

 

Quote

The other area we addressed with the new chassis was the sensitivity of the previous SELECT to environment. We attacked this problem at many levels and feel we have made great progress, and that we can expect excellent results in a wide range of listening environments.

 

This is where the value for money action is - quite ordinary players can be lifted to a very high standard, just by paying attention to this one aspect alone.

[esldude]

2 hours ago, davide256 said:

Don't get caught up in all the tech hoopla.. what matters is what can be heard. 30 years ago tech pundits were claiming we didn't need anything better than a Denon or a Technics direct drive for vinyl turntables, that belt drive, suspension products like Linn or Sota couldn't improve analog playback. The science of audio rarely keeps up with the art of audio.

I'm calling BS on this because that is what it is.  BS, revisionist history.  Your description is not what happened.  

 

If you disagree with the opinion on current streamers fine, don't put out crappy misinformation about the past doing so. 

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

Austin Pop answered it best for me...and for what I am most grateful for:

 

The good news is that some are paying close attention. I suspect over time we will see one-box solutions that make all this spaghetti superfluous.

 

And EXASOUND said: a player dac would be optimum.

I remain optimistic and a believer, but with open ears.

 

We can make this for you, like so many others (already do btw). Let's remember that we make all of the chain, and that includes a fine PC and obviously also a DAC. Now why am I not smart enough to put both in the same box.

I'll give you a hint : Something like a $30 Raspberry PI would do the job (at maximum 24/384 I think). We'll give it a nice separate power supply as well and drop the lot in the case of the $5800 NOS1a/G3. It will sound crappy and it exceeds your budget 3 fold, meanwhile.

 

The above is your answer. Technically it will work, but SQ wise it won't and it is not about the DAC.

 

To avoid misunderstanding : the present solution is great as it is (and with the best SQ ever), but when you'd do what I would like you to do, the cost is the $5800 for the DAC plus $3000 or so for a PC with linear power supply inside. Your desired clocks are all over the place, and yes with separate regulation etc. and of course with triple galvanic isolation because one only really won't do the job. And I am not kidding.

And oh, we could tuck the DAC boards and everything in that 3.5" of height PC just the same. And again : why don't we do that ...

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, beerandmusic said:

I really, REALLY, do not have any desire to understand any of it....I just want someone to say "look for these features" in your next purchase.

 

Beer, I hope that by now you can see that I am not all over against you (can't find a real reason for it ). How could I, with something like 600 bottles in stock of home brewed beer. 

But is doesn't work like that. The (audio) world is too cruel for that.

 

Correct me if I recall it wrongly, but I think it was you who found that OCXO in a device which you already like so much, thus now you like it even better. This, while you should like it worse because of the same reason. But you don't want to understand. Only grab key words and think it will do.

 

About a cruel world : Maybe you missed the pointing out of John Swenson that rubidium clocks etc. won't do a thing for audio because it costs 10K or whatever crazy amount. But back at the time when MSB came about with their "femto clock" module, which indeed costs 10K, it was personal me digging out the phase noise figure/plot which they hided. And didn't John just mention that you must stay away from it when the phase noise plot is not given. I think he did. Anyway, I found out what they used, it was just crap for audio, but they of course still sell it today (well, I assume, but the other day, years after, they did). So this is a plain scam.

 

How many people in the US use the Dexa clock modules of New Class D ? I think many, and they are all hoaxed and for the same reason. Heck, such a manufacturer doesn't even understand himself that a low ppm is completely worthless for audio (this softens the hoaxing but does not help you).

 

So those guys you are going to rely on.

Your only useful help and advice could be that you should not.

 

 

[jabbr]

6 hours ago, GUTB said:

BTW, just so everyone knows, the reason why everyone uses Crystek for thier femto clocks is because they’re cheap.

 

I think OCXOs are the gold standard for audio clocking. Good luck finding them on affordable gear.

To be perfectly clear, the reason I suggested Crystek is because they supply the phase noise plot that is the only important spec for audio. 

 

There are better clocks. However you should not spend $$$ on clocks which are worse and without seeing a phase error plot you don’t know.

 

John S explained that OXCO uses a  crystal cut which is generally better (but not necessarily) but it’s possible to have an OXCO which has more phase noise than an unheated crystal.

[jabbr]

6 hours ago, opus101 said:

I'd say look for a product where the power supply to the crystal oscillator is taken seriously. Don't just assume because they're using an XTAL with top-notch phase noise down to 0.1Hz that that graph is going to be what you get in practice.

Absolutely. Moreover the entire DAC circuitry affects the phase noise which you ultimately get.

[beerandmusic]

6 hours ago, GUTB said:

BTW, just so everyone knows, the reason why everyone uses Crystek for thier femto clocks is because they’re cheap.

 

I think OCXOs are the gold standard for audio clocking. Good luck finding them on affordable gear.

 

doesn't the sotm uyltra use OCXO?

 

[beerandmusic]

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

We can make this for you, like so many others (already do btw). Let's remember that we make all of the chain, and that includes a fine PC and obviously also a DAC. Now why am I not smart enough to put both in the same box.

I'll give you a hint : Something like a $30 Raspberry PI would do the job (at maximum 24/384 I think). We'll give it a nice separate power supply as well and drop the lot in the case of the $5800 NOS1a/G3. It will sound crappy and it exceeds your budget 3 fold, meanwhile.

 

The above is your answer. Technically it will work, but SQ wise it won't and it is not about the DAC.

 

To avoid misunderstanding : the present solution is great as it is (and with the best SQ ever), but when you'd do what I would like you to do, the cost is the $5800 for the DAC plus $3000 or so for a PC with linear power supply inside. Your desired clocks are all over the place, and yes with separate regulation etc. and of course with triple galvanic isolation because one only really won't do the job. And I am not kidding.

And oh, we could tuck the DAC boards and everything in that 3.5" of height PC just the same. And again : why don't we do that ...

 

you don't need a "pc"... you can use  a quiet audio designed processor in a network player. that supports it's own storage or from nas.  I want to move away from trying to resolve for pc usb shortcomings and need for usb toys or specialized cables.

I would guess than an sotm ultra to a mytek brooklyn playing native dsd could compete, and if the likes of a lumin d1 could make their same box with ocxo in a nextgen single unit box, it could compete as well.

I am sure exasound could put their playpointe in the same box as their e32 and could likewise compete.  I believe we are just scratching the surface with new advances in  noise supression and clocking.

 

 

 

[beerandmusic]

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

We can make this for you, like so many others (already do btw). Let's remember that we make all of the chain, and that includes a fine PC and obviously also a DAC. Now why am I not smart enough to put both in the same box.

I'll give you a hint : Something like a $30 Raspberry PI would do the job (at maximum 24/384 I think). We'll give it a nice separate power supply as well and drop the lot in the case of the $5800 NOS1a/G3. It will sound crappy and it exceeds your budget 3 fold, meanwhile.

 

The above is your answer. Technically it will work, but SQ wise it won't and it is not about the DAC.

 

To avoid misunderstanding : the present solution is great as it is (and with the best SQ ever), but when you'd do what I would like you to do, the cost is the $5800 for the DAC plus $3000 or so for a PC with linear power supply inside. Your desired clocks are all over the place, and yes with separate regulation etc. and of course with triple galvanic isolation because one only really won't do the job. And I am not kidding.

And oh, we could tuck the DAC boards and everything in that 3.5" of height PC just the same. And again : why don't we do that ...

 

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Beer, I hope that by now you can see that I am not all over against you (can't find a real reason for it ). How could I, with something like 600 bottles in stock of home brewed beer. 

But is doesn't work like that. The (audio) world is too cruel for that.

 

 

To be honest, i spent over an hour in bed last night just trying to figure out what I am doing wrong to upset people....maybe i create a lot of threads, but only because all of those subjects were of interest to me.  Maybe people think it makes the board less professional? Maybe some people just don't like thoughts that are different than theirs?  I really don't know what i may have said to upset anyone, except for after the fact when someone condescends me, that I act out in defense, but I can't think of anything I have said to upset anyone without them attacking me first.  I know i am a social misfit...and I contribute that mostly to just speaking what is on my mind.  Whatever the reasons are, I just say "cheers" and apologies if I offended anyone. 

[jabbr]

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

To avoid misunderstanding : the present solution is great as it is (and with the best SQ ever), but when you'd do what I would like you to do, the cost is the $5800 for the DAC plus $3000 or so for a PC with linear power supply inside. Your desired clocks are all over the place, and yes with separate regulation etc. and of course with triple galvanic isolation because one only really won't do the job. And I am not kidding.

And oh, we could tuck the DAC boards and everything in that 3.5" of height PC just the same. And again : why don't we do that ...

 

Well Peter you have invested a tremendous amount of energy optimizing the interaction between the PC and DAC and you have done a great job. 

 

I do consider any any effects of the PC on DAC sound squarely in the anomalous category, and are a side effect of “something else”. The mitigation of elimination of this “something else” would eliminate the need for a $3000 PC, although the DAC would indeed be more expensive ... but look at the continued progress you’ve made on the DAC side ... time to re-evaluate the phase noise plot effects  

[beerandmusic]

4 hours ago, PeterSt said:

 

Correct me if I recall it wrongly, but I think it was you who found that OCXO in a device which you already like so much, thus now you like it even better. This, while you should like it worse because of the same reason. But you don't want to understand. Only grab key words and think it will do.

 

 

Actually that isn't the manner i have been led where i am led today.  It really started with seeing that huge sotm thread on this site, and in starting to read through it, i found a lot of people were very enthusiastic.  Starting even on page 1 of the thread though, i realized it was a thread for audio engineers that just made my head spin....I am sure if I wanted, to go down that route of mods etc, i could, but I feel too old and i just want to find something i can be as enthusiastic about without DIY or spedning $4K for a trifecta and that is before the dac.  I researched the SOTM ULtra and came across the HANS channel review and he mentioned the SCLK-ex, and I also heard a few people including AUstinpop and ELvira and their equally enthusiastic interest in the clock mods.  I figure if people are enthusiastic as they are, there must be some real juice here.  A search will show the sclkex is a OCXO, and John Swenson substantiates the OCXO here as well.  A google search of OCXO and DSD will produce very few hits (comparatively speaking for google) but the likes of AUrender W20 and Antelope and a couple other welll recieved gear appear.  I have to believe there is something good scratching the surface....Also, i have always been stating that I believe (go back 4 years in these threads), that to me native DSD over network sounds best regardless of dac...and now this area is really getting some traction with the sonore and sotm.

 

Anyway, that is a brief history of what has led me here.  Granted i have been absent for a couple years from the site.  I really do have an addictive personality, and I may be putting too much energy into my interest, and should probably "cool it".

[PeterSt]

9 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Maybe people think it makes the board less professional?

 

No way and I am sure that nobody thinks that.

 

11 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

Maybe some people just don't like thoughts that are different than theirs?

 

100% sure not the case.

 

11 minutes ago, beerandmusic said:

I really don't know what i may have said to upset anyone,

 

And I personally don't know why on earth you think that you upset people. OK, you quote me for it, so it must be me myself doing it.

No-way.

 

Where it may go wrong in your thinking (about the upsetting subject) is that the things I tell you (for advice) are genuine with zero in between any lines. I am Dutch. That this coincidentally incorporates a but of so-called knowledge about the subject is, well, coincidence, but it allows be to give you this advice(s).

It really is nothing of "go away". That is only for trolls.

 

It would be true that with your many new threads it looks like you occupy 1000s of people with your thoughts and questions and that at some stage people react in a "oh no, not again". Still you manage to imply fairly good discussions (me thinks) and I sense that your questions are not so bad at all because they mostly contain a base for good discussions. It is only that the responses will not help you much because it is "too much" to digest. Of course someone like me can't decide over that, so here too it would be "advice" only.

But hey, it goes too far already by talking about this explicitly. Best thing for now is : don't feel sad because I don't think there is a reason for it.

 

HTH

Peter