[Jake2]

Well said Jake. What I find interesting though is that they only tested, or published, the square wave results. This is not my field of expertise but as Camrector was saying the results for the sine wave, especially with the low pass filter that some of us are using, might show less of an abberation. Might. I hope. I was and still am surprised and very happy with the difference the ock-1 makes, and given that my system isn’t uber hi end, I bet dropping a $5000 clock in here would show marginal improvements, but this is a total guess. I’m fine with the results I’m getting for $300 (didn’t buy from Alvin). If I paid twice that though I might feel differently.

Cheers.

It's important to realise that plot of the square wave was a different OCK-1 unit by a different AS poster, Clockmeister. Alex from Uptone (Superdad on AS) stated repeatedly they had chosen not to publish their measurement charts/plots of the OCK-1.

Interestingly the Clockmeister guy later posted another square wave plot (using a different input impedance setting) which is much cleaner...

And corresponds nicely to the square plot (along with a beautifully clean sine) by HeadFi user JaMo just posted on the MasterClock thread here. So square nowhere near as ugly as that first plot, but sine looks cleaner which aligns to it sounding better to me.

Here is my OCK-1 plots.

Not bad for a master clock in this low price range.

/Jan

Ok, that's a lot of off-topic posting sorry.

 

[Jake2]

This question was posted earlier. I am wondering if anyone can answer it.

@Capri87 & @No Deal What's the question? Which one to go for?

If you had to choose and order one today it'll be a risk based call only you can make - are you willing to pay quite a lot more for the pedigree and guaranteed measured performance of AD or save quite a lot and go for the beautifully built, theoretically much better performing and certainly more fully featured and mostly very well reviewed OCK-2, having a good chance of much better performance than the Prince but risking being a loser in a potential OCXO lottery.

Personally I'd wait a few weeks to let the dust settle, see if any clarifications or reassurances emerge from LHY. I'd probably still go for the OCK-2.

EDIT - sorry I just realised the AD Prince, which I'd never looked at, is only -100db/1hz and is cheaper than the OCK-2.

 

[sajunky]

1. Is the phase noise measurement for both sine and square wave?

From my understanding square waves provide the best results but need a supremely high level of accuracy and precision. I wouldn’t expect a clock priced at the OCK 2 to have this or provide a guarantee every component inside is impedance matched. And unless it does come with this guarantee you shouldn’t either and use a sine wave with a filter.

2. Was the cable used in the measurements impedance matched?

It is said, they used Ethernet probe. It is a differential probe as Ethernet carry differential pairs. Most likely a digital active probe, so good technicians will chose square output. Voltage trigger levels are close, as clock produce 3Vp-p and a probe expect maximum 5.5V, but as there is a voltage drop on the long Ethernet cables, trigger levels must be set to a lower, real world values.

Ethernet probe is terminated using 39 Ohm 1% resistors (each wire to the ground) which is close to the required 75 Ohms, assuming grounds of both devices are separated to assure proper termination. Technicians must be aware of this situation, this is the most tricky part. ISO output option?. If one probe wire is connected to a ground then 50 Ohms output should be used, accepting a bigger impedance mismatch on a short cable, but it allows a direct ground (non-ISO) connection. Not sure which connection is better.

Good point for asking these questions.

 

[No Deal]

@Capri87 & @No Deal What's the question? Which one to go for?

If you had to choose and order one today it'll be a risk based call only you can make - are you willing to pay quite a lot more for the pedigree and guaranteed measured performance of AD or save quite a lot and go for the beautifully built, theoretically much better performing and certainly more fully featured and mostly very well reviewed OCK-2, having a good chance of much better performance than the Prince but risking being a loser in a potential OCXO lottery.

Personally I'd wait a few weeks to let the dust settle, see if any clarifications or reassurances emerge from LHY. I'd probably still go for the OCK-2.

EDIT - sorry I just realised the AD Prince, which I'd never looked at, is only -100db/1hz and is cheaper than the OCK-2.

That is the question and I am actually considering the slightly better AD Queen.

 

[Odezra]

That is the question and I am actually considering the slightly better AD Queen.

I'll be honest, I have the LHY Ock 1, and my benefits are marginal. I have a low pass filter on the way which hopefully might help things a wee bit. But marketing results / claims that the clock cannot do (and then pulling down those claims later) is a bit of a concern. We expect equipment to be priced to value, but not claims things it can't do. I'd like to give LHY the benefit of the doubt, so if you can wait a few weeks for the dust to settle on this, and some more tests emerge - you could potentially confirm that the Ock 2 / SW-10 clocks are excellent value for money. If time is of the essense, I think there is too much ambiguity on the brand at this particular time to give a clear recommendation for it. As Jake says, it's potentially a lottery.

What LHY should do - is actually publish their own stats on what the Ock 1/ Ock 2 / SW10 can do.

 

[camrector]

I'll be honest, I have the LHY Ock 1, and my benefits are marginal. I have a low pass filter on the way which hopefully might help things a wee bit. But marketing results / claims that the clock cannot do (and then pulling down those claims later) is a bit of a concern. We expect equipment to be priced to value, but not claims things it can't do. I'd like to give LHY the benefit of the doubt, so if you can wait a few weeks for the dust to settle on this, and some more tests emerge - you could potentially confirm that the Ock 2 / SW-10 clocks are excellent value for money. If time is of the essense, I think there is too much ambiguity on the brand at this particular time to give a clear recommendation for it. As Jake says, it's potentially a lottery.

What LHY should do - is actually publish their own stats on what the Ock 1/ Ock 2 / SW10 can do.

But wouldn’t that require them to actually test every ocxo individually?
Aren’t they all second hand repurposed off cell towers?

 

[BShaw]

But wouldn’t that require them to actually test every ocxo individually?
Aren’t they all second hand repurposed off cell towers?

That would explain why mine says Verizon on it

 

[Jake2]

I'll be honest, I have the LHY Ock 1, and my benefits are marginal. I have a low pass filter on the way which hopefully might help things a wee bit. But marketing results / claims that the clock cannot do (and then pulling down those claims later) is a bit of a concern. We expect equipment to be priced to value, but not claims things it can't do. I'd like to give LHY the benefit of the doubt, so if you can wait a few weeks for the dust to settle on this, and some more tests emerge - you could potentially confirm that the Ock 2 / SW-10 clocks are excellent value for money. If time is of the essense, I think there is too much ambiguity on the brand at this particular time to give a clear recommendation for it. As Jake says, it's potentially a lottery.

What LHY should do - is actually publish their own stats on what the Ock 1/ Ock 2 / SW10 can do.

There was a phase noise chart ostensibly for an OCk-1 supplied by Beatechnik back in August at the request of a member and it showed a nice plot with -115db/1hz. Which taken at face value, albeit realistically assumed to likely be a cherry picked best case outlier, given the claimed <-110db spec this suggested upwards variation in a good way where there might be winners who get OCXOs performjng nicely above the minimum spec. Back then there was no suggestion of losers below the claimed min spec.

I really hope that plot was measured by LHY/Jay's Audio (hoping they have the equipment on premises to do so) on an actual OCK-1 OCXO and not provided by their OCXO supplier who now appears a little dubious. I got my OCK-1 back then, before the OCK-2 had been released. There was some speculation st the time that with the release of the OCK-2 LHY would be naturally reserving all their best OXCOs for that model so the days of crazy good OXCOs for the OCK-1 (jackpot winners) were numbered. This seems a bit naive now as I realise this (well I) made all sorts of assumptions about how LHY sourced and personally selected their OCXOs (as if they had a big stash of OCXOs on premise), when it seems like they've outsourced this selection process to their supplier with insufficient oversight/QC checks.

 

[No Deal]

But wouldn’t that require them to actually test every ocxo individually?
Aren’t they all second hand repurposed off cell towers?

My thinking is that at the very least random samples would be tested to verify that the performance claim was being met.

 

[Jake2]

But wouldn’t that require them to actually test every ocxo individually?
Aren’t they all second hand repurposed off cell towers?

You can have random sample based QA that demands explanation from the supplier and ramps up to higher volume or 100% QA for a time when below SLA exceptions are found.

I'd have hoped they'd have at least this in place but perhaps it doesn't fit with their fulfillment model.

 

[mgsu]

Hello,

Personally speaking, I think a lot of things have to be right in the LAN area, starting with the router, cable, etc....
So that the results are good.
Regardless of with or without a clock.

With the DDC, the clock is the most valuable thing, but there too, as with the LAN, you will reach the technical limit at some point.

Since I have both in my system, the Fmc boxes and a DDC.
My other personal impression is that a DDC seems to be somewhat better.
I simply notice that when I listen to music, the Su2 has more sparkle, better depth and imaging.

With the Fmc boxes I don't have that and it seems a bit darker for my taste. and explain it with this.
On the other hand, the Fmc speakers are much tidier, which is something I would perhaps like to see on the DDC.
I could try some other tubes that might be brighter to fix that.

But in the end I like the DDC and R26 with the selected tubes the best and I don't want to change anything.
These are the aspects that make the music seem intoxicating to me.
It is the final subtle difference in perception for me.

If we go back DDC vs Fmc it has both advantages.
However, it has to be said that in the lan area the costs are significantly higher where you can say that a Singxer Su 2,6,Matrix Spidf 2&3 deliver almost the same results as a well thought out lan setup.

In the Lan area, you might have to take into account that you would have to try a lot of things.
Streamer,Cable,Power supply ect....
With the DDC you buy it once, choose the right usb & power cable and then it's actually quiet again.

The linked Fmc boxes from Amazon you might have to add that they are not the best and there might be better ones at a more expensive price.
And there would be something to get out again.
And such a clock can possibly be decisive.
What bothers me a bit in terms of market technology are the switches that are technically OK but have too many connections.
Which drives the price up unnecessarily.
Let's be honest, how many connections does it need?
Two would actually be quite sufficient and not eight.
I'm not sure if the more expensive built-in clock would deliver significantly better results even in the DDC.
This can also backfire as it can be musically analytical, sterile, unattractive, cold for the listener.
And it doesn't really deliver what was expected.

100% agree
I had 2 FMC into SOTM switch and thought that it improved my system. After 4 weeks i removed the FMC and the real improvement occurred.

When you have clean power and clean ethernet you dont need FMC.

I dont want to disregard the FMC because i think that these boxes are great for isolation and eliminating ground loops. FMC can bring some great SQ improvement to a lot of people. It is a cheap experiment to try out in your system and see if it helps or not.

My best results with R26 are over the Singxer SU-6 DDC
I bought the Stack Audio Link 2 streamer and added it to my chain as a Roon endpoint and it elevated the SQ quite a bit. If you could get one second hand i would highly recommend to get one.

 

[No Deal]

As I sit here as a skeptic and listen to the 421-A tubes pump Pete Belasco into my ZMFs, I wonder how much nit picking is justified. My kid is listening to ear Pods being fed by her iPhone. For me, that would be cause to request a mercy killing.

 

[Odezra]

But wouldn’t that require them to actually test every ocxo individually?
Aren’t they all second hand repurposed off cell towers?

Random sampling would suffice. My issue is less the clock performance but the publishing of excellent clock data with no random sampling test of their oem components. It appears they took it on faith and published the claims. This is my assumption based on the fact that the data is now down off the website, inferring that they never checked in the first place and now are concerned they have false advertising.

If they rode on the wave of a claim but never actually checked for themselves (whether or not individual clocks are better or worse than the marketed claims) is a bit dodgy. All manufacturers should be independently checking the oem components used before marketing any claims. I’d have no issue if I bought the clock and these claims were never made in the first place and the performance turned out to be what it is (though I’d probably have looked elsewhere which is the rub of this story really).

I have a low pass filter coming to put on the sine wave output which may actually help improve things and alleviate these issues for me but will see.

 

[Jake2]

Lol

As I sit here as a skeptic and listen to the 421-A tubes pump Pete Belasco into my ZMFs, I wonder how much nit picking is justified. My kid is listening to ear Pods being fed by her iPhone. For me, that would be cause to request a mercy killing.

Lol, that's a great bit of perspective.

I see you already have an OCK-1. In which case you'd run an additional risk getting an AD Queen at -103db/1hz, the risk that your OCk-1 is one of the good/better ones. Not sure I'd do that.

I've idly pondered the same thing and I reckon vaulting past the claimed specs of both OCKs to the likes of the -117db AD Emperor Double Crown and beyond is the only way to be certain you're getting a good audible upgrade over both models. I'm half serious too. But for 1/5th the price the OCK-2 remains in my upgrade frame based on all the happy punter feeback several of whom have much pricier clocks than even the AD ×2 as their point of reference

 

[Capri87]

Until the dust is settled, I guess the only obvious advantage OCK-2 has over AD is that the former provides multiple outputs which piqued my interest from the outset.

I just bought R26 and may have plans to get a U18 and thus it will be good for both of them to be audibly enhanced by an external clock.