[OhHeyItsLou]

Just added the LHY OCK-2 to my chain. For those that have it, did you find a significant difference in sound after burn-in?

 

[dougms3]

Just added the LHY OCK-2 to my chain. For those that have it, did you find a significant difference in sound after burn-in?

What is the initial impressions of the ock2 ?

 

[ChJL]

Just added the LHY OCK-2 to my chain. For those that have it, did you find a significant difference in sound after burn-in?

hey, just curious... I can imagine using isolation feet (if that's what it's called) for 2 channel but where does vibration come from in a HP set up?

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

hey, just curious... I can imagine using isolation feet (if that's what it's called) for 2 channel but where does vibration come from in a HP set up?

To be honest, I’ve just had a box of them laying around. All of my gear is on top of my desk where there’s movement. Whether they make a difference, who knows.

 

[OCC7N]

Just added the LHY OCK-2 to my chain. For those that have it, did you find a significant difference in sound after burn-in?

Square or Sine?...I am awaiting bnc cables for ock2. Im excited...

Also what headphone cables are those? Why are you also using an extra attatchment(XLR) ?

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

What is the initial impressions of the ock2 ?

I’m not sure if my initial impressions are testament to the excellent K2 internal clock or the need for some burn-in but to my ears when toggling between internal / external I may here just a bit more clarity on the OCK-2.

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

Square or Sine?...I am awaiting bnc cables for ock2. Im excited...

I’ve tried both and initial impressions favor Sine. If you’re running with the R26 don’t expect a huge difference. This may change after a few hundred hours of burn-in but to my ears there’s just a small increase in clarity and background blackness.

 

[OCC7N]

I’ve tried both and initial impressions favor Sine. If you’re running with the R26 don’t expect a huge difference. This may change after a few hundred hours of burn-in but to my ears there’s just a small increase in clarity and background blackness.

Bnc/cables brand?

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

Bnc/cables brand?

I’m using the cable offered as an add on from Beatechnik. I have a few more on order just to see if there’s a perceptible SQ difference. This one should be here this week…

 

[roderickvd]

There is no direct relationship between jitter value dB and RMS value. The first one is a spectral density of jitter energy (frequency dependent between -160 and ~100dB, hudge difference). If not specified a range, then argumentation brought forward doesn't make a sense. Do it matter if adding a noise in the -160dB range? Besides, it is arguing on things that can be fixed, as PLL is very effective in filtering higher frequencies, it will bring back to the -160dB level again.

The RMS value is more meanful, it represent a total noise energy across specified wide frequencies range. If agreed that added 150fs noise is very low, then it implies that in the most critical frequency range (where noise carries the most of energy) a loss in dB value is also insignificant.

Agreed, it is frequency-dependent so the statement there (was also reading along) does not make much sense from a numbers perspective.

Principally however, I do I agree that it is somewhat ironic that we're trying to optimise every little detail of a 10 MHz clock only to send it to a synthesizer to construct the signal we actually need. Yes, such synthesizers can be very good, and it makes sense for a master clock slaving all sorts of devices (not just DACs). But there really is something to be said for having 45.1548 MHz / 49.152 MHz (or halves/multiples thereof) master clocks like the Denafrips Terra, that require no such synthesizer and its additive jitter and skew.

 

[piguetpolo]

But there really is something to be said for having 45.1548 MHz / 49.152 MHz (or halves/multiples thereof) master clocks like the Denafrips Terra, that require no such synthesizer and its additive jitter and skew.

Why is the Terra 45.1548 MHz / 49.152?

Don't we need 44.1 MHz / 48 MHz?

 

[alvin1118]

Why is the Terra 45.1548 MHz / 49.152?

Don't we need 44.1 MHz / 48 MHz?

The native/based sampling rate fs of audio tracks are

• 44.1KHz
• 48KHz

The crystal oscillator(s) found in the digital audio devices (DDC/DAC/ADC), more often than not, are

• 11.2896MHz, 12.288MHz
• 22.5792MHz, 24.576MHz
• 45.1548MHz, 49.152MHz
• 10MHz or other MCLK Frequency with PLL Synthesizer

Digital device equipped with two crystals rated 512x or 1024x of the based sampling rate is arguably arithmetically simpler as there is no complex PLL synthesiser requires. i.e. For the case of DENAFRIPS MCLK, the output frequencies are 45.1548MHz, 49.152MHz, which is 1024x of the based sampling rate 44.1KHz, 48KHz.

Hope this helps!

 

[piguetpolo]

The native/based sampling rate fs of audio tracks are

• 44.1KHz
• 48KHz

The crystal oscillator(s) found in the digital audio devices (DDC/DAC/ADC), more often than not, are

• 11.2896MHz, 12.288MHz
• 22.5792MHz, 24.576MHz
• 45.1548MHz, 49.152MHz
• 10MHz or other MCLK Frequency with PLL Synthesizer

Digital device equipped with two crystals rated 512x or 1024x of the based sampling rate is arguably arithmetically simpler as there is no complex PLL synthesiser requires. i.e. For the case of DENAFRIPS MCLK, the output frequencies are 45.1548MHz, 49.152MHz, which is 1024x of the based sampling rate 44.1KHz, 48KHz.

Hope this helps!

Thank you Alvin. I understand... So even though the crystal oscillators beat at a slightly different mhz to the native sampling rate, at the 1024th "beat" they sync up, thus requiring no additional complex math to reconcile/interpolate.

 

[FredA]

Here is an update on the Harmonic Tecbnology 50-ohm cable.

It has passed the Gustard c2 after 5 days. It is more refined, it offers better resolution, depth and imaging. It is significantly better. To such an extent that the C2 is now assigned to the ddc for good. Music is just more relaxed and lively with the HT. The c2 sounds like a cheaper cable in comparison.

After 3 days, both cable were equal. 2 more days and the HT took te lead. Doing an a/b is not so simple as the HT does not like to be moved. At first, the HT was horrible. It is not surprising from an upocc cable.

I got the HT from AudïoAccesories in HK. I had ordered 0.5m but they send 1.0m instead. I did not mind. Best 50-ohm i have tried so far and under 200usd.

 

[dougms3]

So the options so far for higher end 50 ohm BNC cables are...

Harmonic Tech Digital Copper III
Gustard C2

There just seems to be very limited options for 50ohm. Are there any other options for a premium 50 ohm BNC cable?