Does clock influence sound?

[DNCAgain]

'His' graph starts near 0 Hz - look again. Also you refer to specific clock measurements (like in data sheets of crystals), while the one used here is a 'real-world result' measurement, showing the effect on the analog output (aka DA conversion) - the only thing that really matters. And this measurement shows zero nada nothing affecting the analog output signal that is jitter related...or would be audible.

Thanks!

 

[wwenze]

So at what point does jitter become a problem? Is there an acceptable threshold below which it’s no longer a concern?

Phase noise in audio clocks is often rated at 1Hz or 10Hz, yet Amir tests at 12kHz and his graph doesn’t go below 1kHz. I’m new to looking at jitter measurements here and it would appear that the data was starting to trend upwards towards the 1kHz end of the chart. Not sure how this all relates?

There was one review where the spdif jitter went as high as like -90dB (or maybe more?) and when the audio was reduced the signal lost lock.

That is a f ton of jitter btw and you won't encounter it unless something is broken. Still, it doesn't become "less audiophile" before it stopped working.

 

[NTK]

So at what point does jitter become a problem? Is there an acceptable threshold below which it’s no longer a concern?

Phase noise in audio clocks is often rated at 1Hz or 10Hz, yet Amir tests at 12kHz and his graph doesn’t go below 1kHz. I’m new to looking at jitter measurements here and it would appear that the data was starting to trend upwards towards the 1kHz end of the chart. Not sure how this all relates?

Please read this thread and watch the video by Amir.

Understanding Jitter in Digital Audio: Measurements and Listening Tests

Yet another video, this time on topic of jitter. It is a tough topic to cover and I had to do it over and simplify it from my first "take." Hopefully you can follow it. :) Article: understanding digital audio measurements...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Purité Audio]

‘Toslink’ is just optically encoded S/PDIF.
Keith

 

[NTK]

Interesting watch. Too bad he decided to comment on jitter while using a Toslink input. As far as I’m aware, most DACs do not reclock Toslink. PLL can improve things, but not reclock, so unless the tech literature for a given product states that to be the case, there’s a good chance what’s being measured is the jitter of the source + noise in the system.

Some expensive DACs do reclock Toslink inputs, and as far as I’m aware, take the time to advertise this. Many depend on operating mode though: if in NOS mode etc. the source is still the clock reference.

It would be good practice to understand and explain all of this as it pertains to the specific product being measured, prior to posting measurements.

What do you mean by "reclock"? What mechanism does the "reclocker" use to lock into the clock signal of the incoming data?

Did Amir's video show jitter was a problem? If not, what problem is "reclocking" fixing? The products are tested as how they are most commonly used. What explanation is missing?

 

[LTig]

Interesting watch. Too bad he decided to comment on jitter while using a Toslink input. As far as I’m aware, most DACs do not reclock Toslink. PLL can improve things, but not reclock, so unless the tech literature for a given product states that to be the case, there’s a good chance what’s being measured is the jitter of the source + noise in the system.

With SPDIF (regardless whether Coax or Toslink) or AES/EBU input the clock is buried into the signal, so every DAC must use this clock. Whether it uses a PLL or a sample rate converter is up to the designer of the DAC. What matters is the jitter at the analog output, and that is very seldom a problem.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Interesting watch. Too bad he decided to comment on jitter while using a Toslink input. As far as I’m aware, most DACs do not reclock Toslink. PLL can improve things, but not reclock, so unless the tech literature for a given product states that to be the case, there’s a good chance what’s being measured is the jitter of the source + noise in the system.

Some expensive DACs do reclock Toslink inputs, and as far as I’m aware, take the time to advertise this. Many depend on operating mode though: if in NOS mode etc. the source is still the clock reference.

It would be good practice to understand and explain all of this as it pertains to the specific product being measured, prior to posting measurements.

What?

 

[tamtam]

It does influence the sound in DA/AD. However, in today's reality, it is cheap to get a "high-end" dac.
Today's $300 dac maybe better than a $3000 from 10 years ago, especially after Chi-fi entered the market.
Sound-wise a good clock makes the things precisely defined in the stereo field and bass.
Switching from a okeyish dac to one that has a better clock you will hear things that should be in the center,
they are right in the center, not smearing all over the place.
A few month ago I sold my "high-end" audio interface, because it doesn't matter anymore.

 

[LTig]

It does influence the sound in DA/AD. However, in today's reality, it is cheap to get a "high-end" dac.
Today's $300 dac maybe better than a $3000 from 10 years ago, especially after Chi-fi entered the market.

DACs in the 1990s were already transparent, not all of them though.

Sound-wise a good clock makes the things precisely defined in the stereo field and bass.
Switching from a okeyish dac to one that has a better clock you will hear things that should be in the center,
they are right in the center, not smearing all over the place.

There is only one clock for both stereo channels, so they cannot go out of sync to each other. The effect you describe must be caused by something else.

 

[tamtam]

Maybe, until now I was convinced that was the clock.
Both devices were compared not cheap studio devices. One is entry level, another is a mastering grade.
A noticeable difference for a trained ear only.
Whenever that's the clock or something else, for the end consumer it doesn't really matter,
as long as the device has a decent electronics and modern chips,
it would likely sound very similar to a "high-end" one.

 

[pablolie]

NO

The clocking required by audio is ridiculously low. Actually laughably so. To think audio has clocking issues in the existing landscape is below laughable. it's even below sadly ignorant.

 

[Chrispy]

Audiophilia has spread so much bullshit....

 

[JSmith]

@tamtam

Let's Avoid the Term Chi-Fi

I often see the use of the term "Chi Fi" to describe audio products from China. I see the intention and don't think anyone is trying to be racist and what have you. Still, I like us to show the highest respect to products from around the world. As avid readers of this forum know...

www.audiosciencereview.com

JSmith

 

[voodooless]

A noticeable difference for a trained ear only.

And the trained ear used level matching and wasn’t aided by their nice friend Mr. Eye?

 

[Chrispy]

@tamtam

Let's Avoid the Term Chi-Fi

I often see the use of the term "Chi Fi" to describe audio products from China. I see the intention and don't think anyone is trying to be racist and what have you. Still, I like us to show the highest respect to products from around the world. As avid readers of this forum know...

www.audiosciencereview.com

JSmith

Almost reminds me of something like brit hifi bullshit.

 

[Jim Taylor]

Time smearing

How do you define "time smearing"?

how precisely the stereo image is perceived.

Which measurement defines precision in stereo imaging?

often improves stereo imaging

How often?

by a significant amount

Have measured amounts been published?

improving the timing of the data

By what degree?

, the DDC can also drop the noise floor

Again ... by what degree?

USB from a streamer is usually

Usually? How often?

much cleaner

How much cleaner?

Order a Douk U2 Pro from Amazon for $80 and try it. If it does nothing positive, return it.

Why should we do that?

This is ASR ... Audio Science Review. Please provide data in lieu of the indefinite adjectives commonly known as"weasel words".

 

[pablolie]

Because it's a risk-free way to confront your greatest fears.

such a persuasive follow up non sequitur

 

[Beave]

Time smearing does have an effect on how precisely the stereo image is perceived. Adding a DDC in front of a DAC often improves stereo imaging by a significant amount; the DDC usually takes a USB input and outputs over SPDIF to the DAC, improving the timing of the data over the USB implementation in the DAC. If the USB source is a PC, the DDC can also drop the noise floor as it isolates the DAC from noise coming from the PC. USB from a streamer is usually much cleaner and if so, won't benefit as much from a DDC.

Before anyone cues up their copy/paste boiler plate rejection of that notion, try this for yourself risk-free. Order a Douk U2 Pro from Amazon for $80 and try it. If it does nothing positive, return it.

And when somebody does try it, and can't hear a difference, will it be because their hearing isn't good enough or because their system just isn't resolving enough?

 

[solderdude]

Car analogies versus such a simple aspect as timing in electronics is the most lame analogy one can get.
There litereally are hundreds of factors that differ between 2 cars that determine differences in measurable/perceived performance. When it concerns clock in audio there is just 1.... and that one is extremely small.
So small it is not even easy to measure but the mighty ears and brain are fully capable of doing an analysis of those minute differences.

Better to use an analogy like 2 quartz watches telling time and see how much they differ at the end of the day.

 

[voodooless]

Because it's a risk-free way to confront your greatest fears.

Here is another one: do a blind test and prove that you can actually hear a difference!