I just noticed this being used by Zeos with an Aune DAC/Amp combo. He said it somehow did something to the sound, but I don't get how it could, especially with a single separate unit. Even if this external clock did something that positively improved the sound, when would I ever need to sync a clock to an external device, or across multiple devices? If I was running two monoblock dacs and amps? What problem (real or made up) is this thing trying to solve?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
AUNE XC1 Audio Clock - why would anyone need this?
- Thread starter redstang
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2020
- Messages
- 1,354
- Likes
- 2,034
I honestly don't understand the ludicrous claims being made by many of these YouTube reviewers. What sound improvement? there was no blind testing on the subjective claim.
- Thread Starter
- #3
Yeah - I maybe shouldn't have mentioned him because I didn't mean to start up any discussion focused on him. I am just more interested in the existence of the unit itself, and why Aune thinks anyone needs this, and where it ranks on the snake oil scale.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2020
- Messages
- 1,354
- Likes
- 2,034
Fair point on the need for an external clock. Only thing I can think of is that, XC1 is sold as part of a stack because they is a lack of internal clock on the DAC. Which in current times seem illogical from a design stand point but know knows their intent.
DVDdoug
Major Contributor
- Joined
- May 27, 2021
- Messages
- 3,013
- Likes
- 3,960
It's NOT going to improve the "sound quality"...
Pros use a master clock for a couple of reasons - You can synchronize multiple devices down to the exact-sample no matter how long the recording. Normally each interface has its own clock so it you record with two interfaces and they will drift apart. For example, over the length of a concert you'll get phase differences if not outright beats/notes that are out-of-sync.
Consumer soundcards can differ by enough to cause tempo problems over shorter periods, or you can even get pitch differences. This can cause big problems when musicians are collaborating, each recording on their own computer. (It's usually NOT a problem if they are using "proper" audio interfaces.)
Also if you are working with audio/video, timing can be very critical. You often want to know the "exact" playing time with movies/video and if the audio and video drift out-of-sync a fraction of a second by the end of a movie, you've got "lip sync" issues.
A typical crystal is rated for frequency accuracy of about 100ppm. (Wristwatches are "trimmed" to be better and I don't know what the typical specs are.) This master clock is rated for 0.001ppm.
Pros use a master clock for a couple of reasons - You can synchronize multiple devices down to the exact-sample no matter how long the recording. Normally each interface has its own clock so it you record with two interfaces and they will drift apart. For example, over the length of a concert you'll get phase differences if not outright beats/notes that are out-of-sync.
Consumer soundcards can differ by enough to cause tempo problems over shorter periods, or you can even get pitch differences. This can cause big problems when musicians are collaborating, each recording on their own computer. (It's usually NOT a problem if they are using "proper" audio interfaces.)
Also if you are working with audio/video, timing can be very critical. You often want to know the "exact" playing time with movies/video and if the audio and video drift out-of-sync a fraction of a second by the end of a movie, you've got "lip sync" issues.
A typical crystal is rated for frequency accuracy of about 100ppm. (Wristwatches are "trimmed" to be better and I don't know what the typical specs are.) This master clock is rated for 0.001ppm.
- Thread Starter
- #7
? That looks like some sort of power conditioner, not something you connect directly to your DAC.
JSmith
Master Contributor
Definitely not required...
www.audiosciencereview.com
www.audiosciencereview.com
JSmith
Auralic LEO GX DAC Clock Review
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Auralic Leo GX "atomic clock" outboard option for the Vega G2 that I just reviewed. It is on kind loan from a member. The LEO GX costs US $8,299. The LEO GX comes in the same enclosure as the Vega DAC: Strangely for a device that just...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Cybershaft Platinum Review (External Clock & PS)
This is a review and detailed measurements of the Cybershaft Platinum (Palladium) OP16 clock with its optional Ultra Pure Power Supply. It is on kind loan from a member. The clock costs US $1,457 and power supply, US $347. While "DIY" in nature, I still like the look of these cases...
www.audiosciencereview.com
JSmith
- Thread Starter
- #10
That makes sense - when you're recording. But when would you use one during playback? Maybe between a CD transport and a DAC? But why would you just connect it to a single DAC?
edit: Ok after reading through those other external clock reviews JSmith linked to I guess it's just a "this one is better" situation, which seem dumb to me. Somehow another full size component is necessary to just provide the clock (over a cable) to a DAC that already has a clock right next to it. I really wonder if the engineers designing these devices believe they are making tangible improvements, or are they totally in on the ploy? I mean - they're engineers, who usually tend to be audiophile skeptics in discussions I read.
Last edited:
Poor joke. It's a clock, albeit not a "DAC clock", and a scam. Old-timers will remember...
Phrangko
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2019
- Messages
- 57
- Likes
- 22
The Lina DAC of DCs has an external clock as well. The price is insane.
Similar threads
