Cybershaft Platinum Review (External Clock & PS)

[doitttt]

take gustard a26 pro with ultra-low noise K2 module
so the result will be different to much better
but I also use mutec ref10

 

[voodooless]

take gustard a26 pro with ultra-low noise K2 module
so the result will be different to much better
but I also use mutec ref10

Clearly it’s no better than other DACs:

Gustard A26 DAC & Streamer Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Gustard A26 network streamer and balanced stereo DAC. It was sent to me by Shenzhenaudio and costs US $1,499. The case is extremely heavy and stout. It looks more modern than previous Gustard products which I much appreciated. FYI the display...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This one “wipes the floor” for much less money:

Loxjie D40 Pro DAC & HP Amp Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Loxjie D40 Pro balanced stereo DAC and headphone amplifier. It was sent to me by the company. It normally costs US $430 but is on sale for $388. The enclosure is metal but the silver look makes you think it is made out of plastic. The 7 segment...

www.audiosciencereview.com

.. to be fair I don’t think you can keep any of these apart in a controlled test, but claiming the “ultra low noise clock” brings an improvement is just nonsense.

 

[doitttt]

maybe
mutec ref 10 have jitter 22fs 1hz and 10hz 5fs
it makes a big difference in the sound, a-b test, gustard a26
on my studio monitor neumann 310a.
we were 5 people, they could clearly hear a difference
change 30sec in a-b test
used sacd
pink floyd dark side of the moon
dire straits brother in arms
rammenstein Mein Herz Brennt without compression

 

[jsrtheta]

maybe
mutec ref 10 have jitter 22fs 1hz and 10hz 5fs
it makes a big difference in the sound, a-b test, gustard a26
on my studio monitor neumann 310a.
we were 5 people, they could clearly hear a difference
change 30sec in a-b test
used sacd
pink floyd dark side of the moon
dire straits brother in arms
rammenstein Mein Herz Brennt without compression

If the listeners knew which set-up they were listening to each time, the tests were meaningless.

 

[voodooless]

it makes a big difference in the sound

What does jitter ACTUALLY sound like? (jitter test tracks)

The following website has some simulated jitter test tracks: What does jitter ACTUALLY sound like? There are seven versions of each sample. Three have periodic jitter, three have random jitter, and one is the original - untouched. In the samples we have 2µs (microseconds), 4µs, 8µs, 16µs...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[MaxBuck]

Goofy business.

 

[HairyEars]

If the listeners knew which set-up they were listening to each time, the tests were meaningless.

You're not going to like it.

A German fellow measured the Ref10 with a EtherRegen and discovered a degradation in performance:

https://www.open-end-music.com/forum/privatforen/thomas-michael-rudolph-tmr/651284-messungen-von-ethernet-infrastruktur-switches-nur-lesen/page3#post695734

He posted it in Audio Style Forum, which silenced the other contributors, but only for a short while. Soon, they shrugged him off and resumed their discussion how great the clock works with their ER.

As for testing the clock in real life, I did an ABX with a bunch of ER's, Mutec MC+ and Ref10 SE. Bottom line, I easily detected a distortion in sound. My system didn't like the extra digital processing at all.

 

[voodooless]

A German fellow measured the Ref10 with a EtherRegen and discovered a degradation in performance:

https://www.open-end-music.com/forum/privatforen/thomas-michael-rudolph-tmr/651284-messungen-von-ethernet-infrastruktur-switches-nur-lesen/page3#post695734

Degradation of what performance? It's still measuring an irrelevant parameter on a network cable...

 

[HairyEars]

The common-mode interference has also increased by more than 10% compared to operation with an internal clock.Degradation of what performance? It's still measuring an irrelevant parameter on a network cable...

I guess you're referring to "common mode interferences" when you write "irrelevant parameters on a network cable" (you may want to be more explicit when you wish to experss your opinions).

At any rate, the author also comes to this conclusion regarding jitter level:
"Jitter value of 360pS . Jitter value with internal clock for comparison (see above): 320pS
Ie an increase in the jitter value by over 10%" Degradation or not?

 

[voodooless]

I guess you're referring to "common mode interferences" when you write "irrelevant parameters on a network cable" (you may want to be more explicit when you wish to experss your opinions).

You're the one talking about "performance" without specifying it... I'm just asking you to specify that that is... now I have to be more explicit? This is the world upside down

At any rate, the author also comes to this conclusion regarding jitter level:
"Jitter value of 360pS . Jitter value with internal clock for comparison (see above): 320pS
Ie an increase in the jitter value by over 10%" Degradation or not?

And this is relevant how to audio playback? What actually degrades when I play a song?

 

[HairyEars]

You're the one talking about "performance" without specifying it... I'm just asking you to specify that that is... now I have to be more explicit? This is the world upside down

And this is relevant how to audio playback? What actually degrades when I play a song?

Ain't you a sour grape?

If you believe, like many others here, that any DAC blocks any incoming jitter, then it has no relevant to the playback.
I'm no subscribed to your dogma, so let each person live by their own credence.
And before you jump on your high horse, establish your "jitter-is-not-relevant" paradigm through proper ABX, not by what your theoretical understanding.
I have.

 

[voodooless]

Ain't you a sour grape?

I don't see how me being any kind of grape has any relevance.

If you believe, like many others here, that any DAC blocks any incoming jitter, then it has no relevant to the playback.

We're talking about jitter on a network cable. Tell me again how this is relevant to audio playback? The clock of the network data is totally decoupled from the DAC clock. They have nothing whatsoever in common. If you think they have you are welcome to explain.

I'm no subscribed to your dogma, so let each person live by their own credence.

It's no dogma, it's common knowledge.

And before you jump on your high horse, establish your "jitter-is-not-relevant" paradigm through proper ABX, not by what your theoretical understanding.
I have.

Nobody has proven this in any controlled and peer-reviewed tests, so until that happens, I'm good, thank you

 

[HairyEars]

It's no dogma, it's common knowledge.

Nobody has proven this in any controlled and peer-reviewed tests

"Common knowledge? Nobody?" That's appeal to authority. No thanks, I'll do my own experiments.

Something bleeds through the network wire that you so belitte. I did ABX with ER before my streamer, and it certainly distorts the sound in my system.

 

[pkane]

"Common knowledge? Nobody?" That's appeal to authority. No thanks, I'll do my own experiments.

Something bleeds through the network wire that you so belitte. I did ABX with ER before my streamer, and it certainly distorts the sound in my system.

Let's hear it. Record the output with and without ER playing a portion of the same track and post both. Otherwise, who knows what you're hearing? Maybe a power supply is broken, or you have a bad ground loop, or maybe ER is just that bad as a network switch. Or maybe you're imagining the whole thing -- we really can't tell. But you can help convince us.

 

[voodooless]

"Common knowledge? Nobody?" That's appeal to authority. No thanks, I'll do my own experiments.

What authority is that? And if there were any, why would you need to blindly trust it? Knowledge gives you all the tools needed to access the situation an come to a logical conclusion. You can even verify this.

Besides, who's talking here? You're the one appealing to just trust your authority on this based on your anecdotal evidence.

Something bleeds through the network wire that you so belitte.

We’re not talking about noise here. We’re talking specifically about clocks for clocking network traffic. Define “something” and how this has any relation to the network clock and how that would impact the audio clock. Random hand waving does not make for a good hypothesis.

 

[doitttt]

the fine instrument sits, is your ears
you can measure a lot.
but the listening impression you get, how good your hifi system is.
with and without 10mhz master clock.
micro-detail, micro-dynamics, overall definition, and soundstaging
listen to saxophone or trumpet that's the point
that it sounds right with timbre

 

[amirm]

the fine instrument sits, is your ears

The ear is a pretty bad instrument. Even if it were good, your brain constantly decided to change what the ear delivers. You better know how to separate the two or you are constantly facing false conclusions.

 

[jsrtheta]

The ear is a pretty bad instrument. Even if it were good, your brain constantly decided to change what the ear delivers. You better know how to separate the two or you are constantly facing false conclusions.

Anyone who denies that they have thought their system sounded outstanding one night, and then like "something's off" on another night, where nothing at all has in fact changed in the set-up, is a liar.

 

[voodooless]

the fine instrument sits, is your ears
you can measure a lot.
but the listening impression you get, how good your hifi system is.
with and without 10mhz master clock.
micro-detail, micro-dynamics, overall definition, and soundstaging
listen to saxophone or trumpet that's the point
that it sounds right with timbre

As @amirm said, your ears are not a reliable measurement instrument, and there are numerous scientific papers to back that up. So, again no explanations whatsoever, other than “trust me, I can hear it”…

 

[Nicolai]

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.
View attachment 181901

While "DIY" in nature, I still like the look of these cases. Replacement spikes are provided for the feet as well as necessary cabling:
View attachment 181903

Normally audio DACs extract the DAC clock from incoming S/PDIF or Toslink inputs. But for asynchronous USB, use their own internal clock. In professional setups with many devices over large distance, a "master clock" is used to synchronize various ADC and DAC devices. At home we don't have such a use but somehow the application has morphed into "better clock" than what is inside your DAC. Some DAC companies provide their own external clocks. Here, we have an independent Japanese company providing it with various grades ("OP16" is one -- it ranges from OP11 to OP19).

I had a hard time finding reviews of this product but did run into this forum post:

View attachment 181906

I am amazed that his system was not relaxed before arrival of this unit. Wonder how he tolerated it that way....

This device was sent to me by the owner of SMSL VMV D3 so I chose to test it with that DAC.

Cybershaft Clock Measurements
Manufacturers of these clocks like to rave about the accuracy of the clocks in them. But we don't listen to clocks, we listen to analog output of the DAC and that is how I am going to test the effect of these units. Let's first test the VMV D3 with USB input and hence its own internal clock:

View attachment 181904

Now let's switch to using external Cybershaft OP16 clock:
View attachment 181905

I can't find any difference whatsoever other than minor run to run variations. Noise, distortion, etc. all seem the same. So we need a more precise test focusing on clock accuracy which is jitter. Let's again run the D3 with its internal clock:

View attachment 181907

Now let's change to Cybershaft:
View attachment 181908

As I suspected, performance gets worse, not better! We now have new jitter components we did not have before. Zooming into them we can see better:


View attachment 181909

How can this happen? Well, I don't care how good your clock is. When it has to travel over a cable and get extracted inside the DAC, it is liable to be worse than the one inside the DAC sitting close to where it is needed. Remember that I said the notion of a master clock was to get synchronization, not better fidelity and we see this here.

Discussion and Conclusions
It is amazing how our lay intuition leads of astray. We assume these clocks are like watches where more accuracy is better. Turns out we are not at all sensitive to absolute pitch as if we were, no one would be listening to analog sources! I can play my music 1% slower or faster (all the time) and you wouldn't know there is anything is wrong. What we care about is consistency of "speed" or clock. This type of variation causes jitter. So the fact that an external clock is "oven controlled," stable over time, etc. is of no value. What matters is that it doesn't vary over time. As I explained above though, best way to get consistency is with an internal clock right close to the DAC, not one across feet and meters of cabling. At best, such an external clock can match what is inside. At worst, it will make it perform worse as we see in the case of D3.

I run my jitter test in every DAC I review. Should that show clean spectrum, which it does in countless high performance DACs, then you don't need or want another clock. All you are doing is wasting money and possibly getting worse objective performance. Fortunately the levels of jitter created here is well below audibility so it doesn't do any harm other than to your pocketbook.

As to people thinking it sounds better, well, that is improper subjective testing for you. They connect the clock, focus into their music and all of a sudden hear detail they had not "heard" before. The combine it with wrong impression of what this device does to fidelity and they convince themselves of the improvement they provide. They need to do a simple AB test by switching the internal DAC and external DAC 10+ times blind and see if they get at least 8 right. Without it, they create folklore which causes people to waste money.

I should note that in the English translation of the Cybershaft webpage I did not find much of any reference to making things sound better so in that regard, I appreciated it but of course, the intent is obvious.

Needless to say, I don't recommend anyone use external clocks with their DACs unless they need synchronization with other devices.

I can't recommend the Cybershaft OP16 clock.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Amir, in my case the external clock improves the sound significantly. It‘s much more natural, more air, darker background and sparkling soft treble. The sound is very much closer to the live act using the external clock. It‘s a difference like night and day. No blind testing needed.