SOtM sCLK-OCX10

[MNG]

1 hour ago, BigAlMc said:

 

Haha - yup that's a bit ironic re the 3 black boxes. 

 

I recognise your Head-fi user name. I've read quite a few of your posts - you helped me convince myself to buy the SE! So thanks and nice to 'meet' you. 

 

Funnily enough I've gone opposite direction. I was semi hiding the SOtM boxes towards the back of my rack and the bamboo board marks a change in direction where I'm putting them at the front and on display. 

 

Cheers, 

Alan 

 

Ah, well I’m glad you are enjoying it. Another irony is that I had decided that keeping it simple was the way to go and not the rash of black boxes that a lot of folk were pursuing, which is what led me to the SE. I may have been right, but the boxes still got me in the end!  

 

I don’t much care for the aesthetics of the boxes tbh, but they look pretty cool the way that you have them in your setup. 

 

Regards,

 

Malc

 

[BigAlMc]

1 hour ago, MNG said:

 

Ah, well I’m glad you are enjoying it. Another irony is that I had decided that keeping it simple was the way to go and not the rash of black boxes that a lot of folk were pursuing, which is what led me to the SE. I may have been right, but the boxes still got me in the end!  

 

I don’t much care for the aesthetics of the boxes tbh, but they look pretty cool the way that you have them in your setup. 

 

Regards,

 

Malc

 

 

Thanks Malc, 

 

Yeah it sounds like we've been on similar journeys. 

 

I took out the 'spaghetti' mix of boxes, cables and PSUs in favour of the SE thinking that a very clean source was better than a host of decrapifiers and enhancers. 

 

I'm not registered over at Head-fi but I followed that Comparison of 5 High End Digital Servers thread pretty closely. So when posts from yourself, Romaz and folks said that the TX-USBultra added something I was kinda reluctant. 

 

Then chats with Austinpop and Liminscate here confirmed that view, so I had to find out for myself. 

 

The sCLK-OCX10 & SPS-500 means that I'm back to a multi box spaghetti digital path. With bamboo thrown in as well! 

 

What USB cables are you using if you don't mind me asking? 

 

Cheers, 

Alan 

[elan120]

1 hour ago, BigAlMc said:

Be interested to hear how you gents get on with the clock cables. 

 

I looked at the Pasternack but whilst the cable is very reasonable at 60usd for 12 inches they wanted 122usd to deliver it to the UK. Not a ratio that stacked up! 

In my case, I started with SOtM dCBL-BNC cable during sCLK-OCX10 burn-in period, felt good with it, after the burn-in past 250 hours, I switched to a much shorter (6 inch) PE-P195 triple shield cable, in my system, this cable seems to emphasize both treble and bass region more, after one day, I switched again, this time, to another 6 inch short RG400 cable, where this cable is quite close to dCBL-BNC cable, very smooth and does everything well.  I now end up going back to dCBL-BNC cable again, and will stay with this cable for now. 

 

After changed back to dCBL-BNC cable again, I changed the LPS-1 that was powering txUSBUltra to a 5A LT3045 power supply feeding by a generic 9V linear power supply, meanwhile, changed out all txUSBUltra internal cables including the u.FL to BNC cable that is connected to the BNC output from sCLK-OCX10, and liked the result quite good.  At least, in my system, I find all these cables inside of txUSBUItra as well as the power supply used also contribute to the changes in the playback.

 

Currently, I also use sPS-500 powering my sCLK-OCX10, but not knowing whether power supply can make any difference here, I plan to experiment using JS-2 and 5A LT3045 to compare in the next couple weeks.  Wonder if anyone has input in this area?

[MNG]

16 hours ago, BigAlMc said:

 

Thanks Malc, 

 

Yeah it sounds like we've been on similar journeys. 

 

I took out the 'spaghetti' mix of boxes, cables and PSUs in favour of the SE thinking that a very clean source was better than a host of decrapifiers and enhancers. 

 

I'm not registered over at Head-fi but I followed that Comparison of 5 High End Digital Servers thread pretty closely. So when posts from yourself, Romaz and folks said that the TX-USBultra added something I was kinda reluctant. 

 

Then chats with Austinpop and Liminscate here confirmed that view, so I had to find out for myself. 

 

The sCLK-OCX10 & SPS-500 means that I'm back to a multi box spaghetti digital path. With bamboo thrown in as well! 

 

What USB cables are you using if you don't mind me asking? 

 

Cheers, 

Alan 

 

SE>tX-U - Nordost Blue Heaven

tX-U>BluDave - Curious

 

I agree with various reviews that I have seen that the more analytical cable is best going into the tX-U, but there is a degree of mix and match to taste involved.

[BigAlMc]

31 minutes ago, MNG said:

 

SE>tX-U - Nordost Blue Heaven

tX-U>BluDave - Curious

 

I agree with various reviews that I have seen that the more analytical cable is best going into the tX-U, but there is a degree of mix and match to taste involved.

 

Yeah I've got the Curious going SE>TX-U

And Sablon Reserva going TX-U to Directstream

 

But I also have a Lush on hand. So once the sCLK-OX10 & SPS-500 are burned in fully I need to play around to see what I think it offering the best combo.

 

Ditto with the ferrites I ordered.

[auricgoldfinger]

Here is the latest update on my OCX10 saga.

 

 

[MNG]

18 hours ago, auricgoldfinger said:

Here is the latest update on my OCX10 saga.

 

 

 

Useful to know. I found exactly the same with the tX-U when I first got it and very nearly returned it because first impressions were not good, but it did improve over time and I kept it. I was quite prepared for exactly the same with the OCX10 but, funnily enough, it sounded pretty good straight away in my system. 

 

Has your opinion of the SoTM BNC cable changed as well - I’m assuming that it has? I’m still undecided with it. Did you use the SoTM BNC cable from outset? If so, I wonder whether the change that you have observed might be as much to do with the cable as the OCX10? I don’t understand enough about clocking as I’d like but, in any case, I don’t like to introduce more than one new item at a time into my system as I find it very hard to assess where any changes that I detect are coming from.

 

I have found it quite interesting to note the degrees of difference that people feel the OCX10 made in their system. I found it made a similar degree of improvement to that which the tX-U made and, at 3 times the cost, it was a much harder decision to make than it was for the tX-U. I consoled myself with the fact that I could use it with the forthcoming SoTM switch and thereby increase the nominal value derived from the Master Clock but a) I’m not totally convinced that I will obtain very much benefit from the switch and b) I was disappointed to see the size of the switch from Austinpop’s photo of it. Much will depend upon the price and I have my suspicions about that now because a) the size and b) the fact that a BNC Master Clock input is a chargeable extra, so possibly £300 for that alone judging by the tX-U pricing.

[auricgoldfinger]

4 hours ago, MNG said:

Has your opinion of the SoTM BNC cable changed as well - I’m assuming that it has? I’m still undecided with it. Did you use the SoTM BNC cable from outset? If so, I wonder whether the change that you have observed might be as much to do with the cable as the OCX10? I

 

It's interesting how our experiences were similar but differed by device.  I loved the tX-USBultra from the moment I plugged it in.

 

I bought the dCBL-UF with the OCX10 to take advantage of the special pricing offered at the time, so I have never tried another BNC cable.  I would guess that 90% or more of the change I have observed is from the burn-in of the OCX10 itself.  However, I do find the ferrite cores on the cable make a subtle improvement.  They seem to make the sound a bit more relaxed without sacrificing any detail.

 

I am happy with the dCBL-UF, especially with the ferrite cores, but I can't say if it's worth the price since I lack a basis for comparison.

[MNG]

2 minutes ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

It's interesting how our experiences were similar but differed by device.  I loved the tX-USBultra from the moment I plugged it in.

 

I bought the dCBL-UF with the OCX10 to take advantage of the special pricing offered at the time, so I have never tried another BNC cable.  I would guess that 90% or more of the change I have observed is from the burn-in of the OCX10 itself.  However, I do find the ferrite cores on the cable make a subtle improvement.  They seem to make the sound a bit more relaxed without sacrificing any detail.

 

I am happy with the dCBL-UF, especially with the ferrite cores, but I can't say if it's worth the price since I lack a basis for comparison.

 

Yes, quite amusing actually - who knows with this stuff how it will pan out in any given system and environment. People definitely need to listen and test for themselves as opposed to just following what others have done because it worked for them.

 

I did get the cable as part of the launch offering, although it wasn’t in the initial delivery, but anyway I wanted to check the OCX10 on its own first in order to separate out the contribution made by the clock and the cable. Listening to it now, I believe that the cable is settling in a bit more now as it seems that the sharp edge is reducing and it seems warmer and more relaxed. I’ll take it out at the weekend and go back to the cheap cable and see how that compares.

 

Having done the hoopla with my BluDave, I doubt I’ll be trying any more ferrites for a while - though I do have a load lying around.

[auricgoldfinger]

3 minutes ago, MNG said:

Having done the hoopla with my BluDave, I doubt I’ll be trying any more ferrites for a while - though I do have a load lying around.

 

What was the hoopla all about?

[MNG]

7 minutes ago, auricgoldfinger said:

 

What was the hoopla all about?

 

There were pages on the subject over on Headfi - you have twin BNC cables joining Blu II to Dave and the Chord DAC designer recommended trying ferrites so we went through a rigamarole of which ferrites and how many, how much $ and so on. I’m not a fan of ferrites because they make the cable bulky, heavy and unwieldy - but they do definitely work in certain applications.

[auricgoldfinger]

I am experiencing an improvement in SQ after connecting a Synergistic Research HD Ground Cable to one of the unused BNC outputs on my OCX10.  The ground cable is connected to a Synergistic Research Ground Block.

 

If you own a grounding box, try connecting the OCX10 to it.

[MayfromSOtM]

On 2018. 4. 11. at 1:24 AM, auricgoldfinger said:

I finally received my sCLK-OCX10 yesterday along with a pair of dCBL-BNC cables.  I bought the cables based on my positive experience with the dCBL-CAT7 and dCBL-UF silver USB cables.

 

Frankly, I am very disappointed with the dCBL-BNC.  There is a tremendous amount of HF glare that makes listening very fatiguing.  I spent a lot of time trying to EQ my system to no avail.  I finally remembered my six unused ferrite cores, so I put three of them on each cable.  The HF glare is now greatly diminished, so I have ordered more ferrite cores to experiment further.

 

USD700 cables should not require ferrite cores to be usable.  Given the price of the cables plus the additional $100 in ferrite cores, I do not recommend the dCBL-BNC.  A very disappointing product from SOtM.

 

Hi auricgoldfinger, 
IMHO, I think this result was made more related with  the combination of the rest of your system which means it is not only a matter of dCBL-BNC. After adopting sCLK-OCX10 in your system, I believe the sound gets very much detailed and dedicated, so in this situation, more fine tunning is required according to this new system.   

 

So I would like to add some comments like replacing the power cable used for sCLK-OCX10 to get more fair comparison and better result in your system, for example, if you use the sPS-500 for the power supply, try to use the different or better AC power cable or DC power cable. And better to check the polarity of the power supply, and  the position of the power strips. 

In addition, if you are able to replace and test with other cables like USB cable, power cable and etc, you will get closer to find fine tunning solution in your system. But I do not recommend using ferrite cores in the system, but if you are willing to do it, try it with the power cables.

 

Thank you~

Best regards, May

[Mustu]

On 27/03/2018 at 3:31 PM, ronfint said:

 

If it looks better than what I currently have, I guess that I'd consider this. I honestly don't believe that there would be a difference in sound.

 

Hi what plate are you using above the stack ?

[ronfint]

On 5/5/2018 at 3:34 AM, mustafakaiser said:

Hi what plate are you using above the stack ?

 

Plexiglass.

[auricgoldfinger]

On 5/5/2018 at 2:34 AM, mustafakaiser said:

Hi what plate are you using above the stack ?

 

Here is some information that you may find helpful.

 

 

 

[RussL]

Two close friends, both golden ear +, with systems to die for, heard the master clock demo (in and out) at Axpona.  They both came to the same conclusion independently; no change other than a 1-2 dB  higher sound level with the clock in.

 

Their observations are correct from a techical prospective as an USB DAC throws away any incoming clock and substitutes its own clock.  So there should not be any difference when a master clock is used ahead of the DAC.

 

A master clock makes sense in a studio environment where many devices may have to be synchronized, but makes no sense in the audiophile world. Only exception I can think of otherwise is in an DCS stack where the master clock becomes the clock in the DAC.

 

Russ

[auricgoldfinger]

47 minutes ago, RussL said:

Two close friends, both golden ear +, with systems to die for, heard the master clock demo (in and out) at Axpona.  They both came to the same conclusion independently; no change other than a 1-2 dB  higher sound level with the clock in.

 

Their observations are correct from a techical prospective as an USB DAC throws away any incoming clock and substitutes its own clock.  So there should not be any difference when a master clock is used ahead of the DAC.

 

A master clock makes sense in a studio environment where many devices may have to be synchronized, but makes no sense in the audiophile world. Only exception I can think of otherwise is in an DCS stack where the master clock becomes the clock in the DAC.

 

Russ

 

You might want to spend some time reading these 2 threads.  There are a lot of people who would argue otherwise based on their real-life experience.

 

 

 

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, RussL said:

Two close friends, both golden ear +, with systems to die for, heard the master clock demo (in and out) at Axpona.  They both came to the same conclusion independently; no change other than a 1-2 dB  higher sound level with the clock in.

 

Their observations are correct from a techical prospective as an USB DAC throws away any incoming clock and substitutes its own clock.  So there should not be any difference when a master clock is used ahead of the DAC.

 

A master clock makes sense in a studio environment where many devices may have to be synchronized, but makes no sense in the audiophile world. Only exception I can think of otherwise is in an DCS stack where the master clock becomes the clock in the DAC.

 

Russ

 

If that's what they heard, so be it. I'll never argue with anyone about what they hear, because we are all unique in that regard.

 

The one caveat I will add is that a show demo environment (crappy hotel room with noisy neighbors!)is not at all ideal for these comparisons. So don't form conclusions from what you hear in a show - good or bad. The ultimate test comes in your own system, in your sweet spot, and where you can repeat the comparison as many times as you need to decide. 

 

Despite some of the glowing show reports, I felt the AXPONA acoustics were terrible in general. Yes, there were some rooms that were exceptional. For example, I found the Nagra room - with their massively expensive HD preamp and amp - to be really harsh and unengaging. Yet a very similar system at RMAF was the best room of the show, for me.

[austinpop]

1 hour ago, RussL said:

...no change other than a 1-2 dB  higher sound level with the clock in.

 

@limniscate and I have tested several clock changes in his system over the last few months - both due to sCLK-EX and reference clock - and heard substantial improvements in each case. In many of these cases, we audited the sound level with an SPL level, and confirmed there was no difference in level.

 

Whatever your friends did or did not hear, I would be very surprised if the clock caused a 1-2dB level change.

[Superdad]

4 hours ago, RussL said:

...no change other than a 1-2 dB  higher sound level with the clock in.

 

Yeah, that pretty much is technically impossible.  Subjectively they may have felt that one way seemed to have more level or punch, but an SPL would say otherwise.

[Confused]

Re the above, I can only really comment on my own experiences.  I am aware that this is the sCLK-OCX10 thread, but I have the Mutec REF10.  Using the controls on the front panel of the REF10 it is very quick and simple to switch on and off a particular clock feed, this can be done in real time when listening.  In my case, feeding a Mutec MC3+USB and SOtM Ultra products, I notice no increase in gain when doing this with any of the devices receiving a clock signal, certainly not a 1-2 dB increase, nothing even close to this.

[RussL]

19 hours ago, Superdad said:

 

Yeah, that pretty much is technically impossible.  Subjectively they may have felt that one way seemed to have more level or punch, but an SPL would say otherwise.

 

Yes it was subjective but I believe you know as an engineer and respected designer that the only clock that counts for asynchronous USB audio is the clock in the DAC, not any external clocks.

 

Russ

[RussL]

21 hours ago, austinpop said:

 

@limniscate and I have tested several clock changes in his system over the last few months - both due to sCLK-EX and reference clock - and heard substantial improvements in each case. In many of these cases, we audited the sound level with an SPL level, and confirmed there was no difference in level.

 

Whatever your friends did or did not hear, I would be very surprised if the clock caused a 1-2dB level change.

 

I wasn't there, so I could only go on what they told me and again they're both audiophiles for 40 years plus.  I had asked them ahead of time to "not miss the demo" and let me know what they heard.  I also asked them to get a picture with May; they did.

 

Russ

[d_elm]

4 minutes ago, RussL said:

 

Yes it was subjective but I believe you know as an engineer and respected designer that the only clock that counts for asynchronous USB audio is the clock in the DAC, not any external clocks.

 

Russ

You should make it clear that this is your opinion and not based on any true facts.