Jump to content
IGNORED

Mini - Circuits BLP - 10.7+ Low Pass Filter for Giesemann Clock (Group Buy for audiophilestyle.com)


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, James Stephens said:

Are there any other clocks, besides I imagine the Mutec Ref 10 and Ref 10 SE 120 (?), for which we might expect the square wave output into an ER to surpass its sine wave output (+ of course the Mini-Circuits filter)?


Hi James:

While I understand what you are asking, the phrasing of the latter part of your question does not really fit. You seem to imply that there are first-rate clocks that offer both square and sine waves from the same box. That’s not the case with the Mutec (square only) nor any of the better boxes from Asia (mostly sine) that I am aware of.

 

As John explained in his paper, it takes a lot of care to both produce a really good square wave AND to preserve that quality (via cabling) all the way to the target device. Not that it can’t be done.  And OXCO modules (the circuits in the cans along with the crystal) are available with square wave output. But how that is implemented and handled varies greatly.

Also, some companies (and I have no idea about what AfterDark does to offer square wave in some models) use sine>square circuits between the OCXO module and the output.  There exist a couple of chips that do this extremely well, but then there are the rest which are rather poor at it (and then the truly terrible squarer mess that is in the BG7TBL boxes).


So with inexpensive square wave output clocks you really never know what you will get. Yet with sine wave clocks you need to be very careful to filter to a very clean wave—best done at the endpoint target device end.

 

Back to your question—which likely was more meant to be something like:
“Can a really low-phase noise sine wave output clock—terminated with the Mini-Circuits filter—outperform a first-rate square wave box such as a Mutec REF10 SE20 (assuming $$$ also spent on a cable for that square wave)?

 

I certainly can’t answer that and I think John would decline to as well without making extremely careful (and rather difficult to set up) measurements.  And even the characteristics of the receiver in the endpoint target would likely have significant affect on such a comparison.

 

I write all the above primarily so that we can all begin thinking about these things from the proper angles. It’s confusing stuff! B|

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...