[OhHeyItsLou]

Hello! I've been reading many posts about adding a master clock and was curious regarding recommendations
I recently purchased Gustard U18 and R26. I have Gustard U18 connected to my imac via USB and the U18 to R26 via HDMI (I2S)

If I get a master clock, do I connect it to BOTH the U18 and the R26 ? (so 2 BNC cables?)

Any thoughts re: LHY OCK-1 or 2 vs the C18 ?
I also read the BNC cable shorter is better, the gustard BNC cable is 1m. Is that considered long? It's also quite a bit more $$ compared the beatechnick bnc cable (gustard is $240 and beatecnick is $79)

Lastly, is there a recommendation for the C18 to use the sine or square connectors to the u18/r26 ? does it make a difference or just personal preference?

The LHY OCK-1 and C18 are spec'd very similarly and the LHY is a fraction of the price with tons of great feedback from users here in the group. I personally have the LHY OCK-2 and I run 12" LMR 400 cables from Pasternack shorturl.at/mIW07 which has been the best sounding cable I've tried yet.

On Paper the OCK-2 is the better spec'd clock which doesn't mean you'll like the sound better for what it's worth. It's half the price of the C18 but twice the price of the OCK-1. If you want a technically better clock then out of the three the OCK-2 has the best cost to performance value proposition.

There's conflicting opinions on how to connect the clock with I2S however the general idea of connecting multiple devices to the same clock is to synchronize them all together hence why there's all of the outputs on the clock. I connect my U18 and R26 to the OCK-2 both set to Ext Clock.

 

[mikeypas]

The LHY OCK-1 and C18 are spec'd very similarly and the LHY is a fraction of the price with tons of great feedback from users here in the group. I personally have the LHY OCK-2 and I run 12" LMR 400 cables from Pasternack shorturl.at/mIW07 which has been the best sounding cable I've tried yet.

On Paper the OCK-2 is the better spec'd clock which doesn't mean you'll like the sound better for what it's worth. It's half the price of the C18 but twice the price of the OCK-1. If you want a technically better clock then out of the three the OCK-2 has the best cost to performance value proposition.

There's conflicting opinions on how to connect the clock with I2S however the general idea of connecting multiple devices to the same clock is to synchronize them all together hence why there's all of the outputs on the clock. I connect my U18 and R26 to the OCK-2 both set to Ext Clock.

Thanks for the detailed reply!
Any idea about the Beatechnick BNC cables? (the ones sold by LHY distributor)
I guess going with LHY OCK-1 or 2 , unlike the C18 , there is no choice between sine or square outputs. Does this make any difference?

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

Thanks for the detailed reply!
Any idea about the Beatechnick BNC cables? (the ones sold by LHY distributor)
I guess going with LHY OCK-1 or 2 , unlike the C18 , there is no choice between sine or square outputs. Does this make any difference?

I actually have that cable, it's not bad but is outclassed hands down by the LMR 400. You can run Square or Sine Wave. Having tried both, sonically I prefer Sine Wave.

 

[mikeypas]

I actually have that cable, it's not bad but is outclassed hands down by the LMR 400. You can run Square or Sine Wave. Having tried both, sonically I prefer Sine Wave.

Thank you for all the info!
I read that the C18 has a LPS built-in, whereas other users were using a separate LPS for the LHY OCK1/2.
Am I understanding this correctly?

I keep going back to the C18 because I figure that Gustard-Gustard connections would fit the best, but you're quite correct, it is quite a bit more expensive.
But for simplicity sake, I'm wondering if C18 and the C2 cables would still be a good upgrade (compared to the U18 alone), without extra LPS

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

Thank you for all the info!
I read that the C18 has a LPS built-in, whereas other users were using a separate LPS for the LHY OCK1/2.
Am I understanding this correctly?

I keep going back to the C18 because I figure that Gustard-Gustard connections would fit the best, but you're quite correct, it is quite a bit more expensive.
But for simplicity sake, I'm wondering if C18 and the C2 cables would still be a good upgrade (compared to the U18 alone), without extra LPS

The OCK-2 has a filtered AC Mains stepped down by an High Quality Encapsulated Talema AC Transformer, Rectified DC further Regulated by Low Drop Out (LDO) Regulators to supply Ultra-Low-Noise (<uV) to the OCXO. Two separate LDO supply to the Buffer Circuitry. Also built within the design is compartment isolation milled out of a single block of aluminum. The OCK-2 punches way above it's price point.

 

[mgsu]

Hi all,
I am lurking here since a few days and saw the OCK-1 mode which inspired me to take a look at the OCK-2 and see if there is room for improvements.

After opening the OCK-2 i must give credit to LHY for the outstanding circuit design.
3 separate boards that are mechanical isolated from each other. Better design overall than REF-10 imo, because ref10 clock shares the same board with the transformer which can transmit vibrations into the board and can influence the clock.

Since clocks are very sensitive to vibrations which can influence the overall accuracy, i am glad that LHY took care of this.

But there is still room for more isolation technics.

I am saying this because i opened in the past the SOTM switch to do a firmware update and noticed that the board is not screwed to the chassis but is mounted floated. Also some caps are hot glued to take care of vibrations.

I have red that capacitors can have tiny voltage fluctuations when they are exposed to vibrations. I dont think that this is an issue in other hifi gear as such as an amp, but maybe can have negative effects in a precision clock circuit.

Taken all the considerations mentioned above,

1. i loosen the screws from the clock board and from the BNC connectors at the back of the unit a tiny bit so that the board can now float inside the chassis. To allow for isolation of vibrations from the transformer.

2. i dampened some of the capacitors and the clock oscilator with a sheet of Aluminium-Butyl. To add Mass to the OXCO and to dampen against vibrations. (Before applying Alu-Butyl i checked if it is removable)

3. i applied a sheet of Aluminium-Butyl on the bottom of the chassis body to dampen and make the chassis more innert.

Has this madness mentioned above brought any sound improvements to the table? Short answer: yes it did a lot! I dont want to hype and bombard you with all the detail, soundstage, blacker background, instrumental separation lingo, because such things are subjective and can not be proven other than in a blind test.

 

[iSpartan]

Hi all,
I am lurking here since a few days and saw the OCK-1 mode which inspired me to take a look at the OCK-2 and see if there is room for improvements.

After opening the OCK-2 i must give credit to LHY for the outstanding circuit design.
3 separate boards that are mechanical isolated from each other. Better design overall than REF-10 imo, because ref10 clock shares the same board with the transformer which can transmit vibrations into the board and can influence the clock.

Since clocks are very sensitive to vibrations which can influence the overall accuracy, i am glad that LHY took care of this.

But there is still room for more isolation technics.

I am saying this because i opened in the past the SOTM switch to do a firmware update and noticed that the board is not screwed to the chassis but is mounted floated. Also some caps are hot glued to take care of vibrations.

I have red that capacitors can have tiny voltage fluctuations when they are exposed to vibrations. I dont think that this is an issue in other hifi gear as such as an amp, but maybe can have negative effects in a precision clock circuit.

Taken all the considerations mentioned above,

1. i loosen the screws from the clock board and from the BNC connectors at the back of the unit a tiny bit so that the board can now float inside the chassis. To allow for isolation of vibrations from the transformer.

2. i dampened some of the capacitors and the clock oscilator with a sheet of Aluminium-Butyl. To add Mass to the OXCO and to dampen against vibrations. (Before applying Alu-Butyl i checked if it is removable)

3. i applied a sheet of Aluminium-Butyl on the bottom of the chassis body to dampen and make the chassis more innert.

Has this madness mentioned above brought any sound improvements to the table? Short answer: yes it did a lot! I dont want to hype and bombard you with all the detail, soundstage, blacker background, instrumental separation lingo, because such things are subjective and can not be proven other than in a blind test.

Is that you Mike?
Edit. Sorry, I see that you're not Mike!

 

[Jake2]

The external ring on a bnc is earth, not neutral.

Seems very ackward to me to apply grounding to the rca's central pin. It is a live contact.

I apply grounding to neutral on my di20he and r7he mkii. I use the outer ring of rca connectors.

Quick update - thanks heaps for your steer Fred. I moved & resoldered the grounding wire of the little Aliexpress RCA-terminated ground tube from the RCA's central pin to its external ring/earth then tried it again on a spare coax spdif input on my DAC. The audible result is the polar opposite - no flattening of dynamics now, rather most aspects of the sound improve eg. Better bass weight and definition, soundstage deepens and the midrange loses yet more residual glare and hardness. This with a mere $20 grounding box/tube.

With the OCK-1 I concluded I don't like the effect of connecting one of these tiny 45 gram ground tubes to it, it's not an improvement vs the sound of the native OCK-1 after it has been left on for 24 hours with stabilised oscillators. Sound is leaner and edgier with these ground tubes attached using a crocodile clip to the spare square wave BNC (the only attachment point). Will try again when several full size (2kg) Quartz Acoustics grounding boxes I've ordered arrive, including a cable with a BNC connector which should improve the conductivity of the grounding connection.

 

[Jake2]

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.

Fred how are you enjoying the Harmonic Technology cable a few weeks on? Still an unqualified recommendation as an upgrade over the C2?

Do you use it with the sine or square wave output of your - IIRC - C18 clock?

 

[FredA]

Fred how are you enjoying the Harmonic Technology cable a few weeks on? Still an unqualified recommendation as an upgrade over the C2?

Do you use it with the sine or square wave output of your - IIRC - C18 clock?

I have the afterdark trifecta with square outs. The HT is a clear upgrade from the c2, which sound like a cheap cable in comparison, i would dare to say. It needs 4 days to start to sound as it should, but then it is really good. I will likely get an Habst soon. The HT made me realize how important the clock cable is. The Habst is over 1k and my Canadian Tire money is not worth much, so it is a tough one to swallow.
But i made a upgrade to my setup that did not cost much this weekend. I installed a fanless linksys switch (30$), which i feed with a nice ebay psu and a short shielded ghentaudo dc cable. This is to avoid using a wifi usb dongle for internet access to my Usbridge sig streamer. I gained clarity, this is quite amazing. The psu and dc cable were really important in getting this result.

 

[Jake2]

I have the afterdark trifecta with square outs. The HT is a clear upgrade from the c2, which sound like a cheap cable in comparison, i would dare to say. It needs 4 days to start to sound as it should, but then it is really good. I will likely get an Habst soon. The HT made me realize how important the clock cable is. The Habst is over 1k and my Canadian Tire money is not worth much, so it is a tough one to swallow.
But i made a upgrade to my setup that did not cost much this weekend. I installed a fanless linksys switch (30$), which i feed with a nice ebay psu and a short shielded ghentaudo dc cable. This is to avoid using a wifi usb dongle for internet access to my Usbridge sig streamer. I gained clarity, this is quite amazing. The psu and dc cable were really important in getting this result.

Thanks Fred. Did you used to have a C18 or is that my memory playing tricks? Yes >1k is a big pill to swallow. Looking to skip the comparatively affordable SOTM then eh?

Also can I ask - does the HT also sound very good, if not presumably not quite as good in your system, with a sine output? Appreciate there's other variables like the DAC and clock, and that theoretically well implemented square wave output/input should sound better. Reason I ask is: a) I'd be using it with sine with my OCK-1* and b) per John from Uptone, optimised shielding rather than low reflectivity/purity of signal path is more key for sine, so a cable that is great for one may not necessarily be great for the other - though I'd hope a cable using quality parts and materials well implemented, like the HT looks to be, would be good for both.

*Sine sounds much better than square on my OCK-1 on every cable I've so far tried. Which incidentally, as a few of you will know from the AS ER Masterclock thread is consistent with a scope image of a sample OCK-1 square wave output - a rather rounded and jagged leading edge which looked anything but ideal. Who knows how representative that sample is, but anyway, sine with mine sounds way better. Trying my best to resist clock-upgraditis.

 

[FredA]

Thanks Fred. Did you used to have a C18 or is that my memory playing tricks? Yes >1k is a big pill to swallow. Looking to skip the comparatively affordable SOTM then eh?

Also can I ask - does the HT also sound very good, if not presumably not quite as good in your system, with a sine output? Appreciate there's other variables like the DAC and clock, and that theoretically well implemented square wave output/input should sound better. Reason I ask is: a) I'd be using it with sine with my OCK-1* and b) per John from Uptone, optimised shielding rather than low reflectivity/purity of signal path is more key for sine, so a cable that is great for one may not necessarily be great for the other - though I'd hope a cable using quality parts and materials well implemented, like the HT looks to be, would be good for both.

*Sine sounds much better than square on my OCK-1 on every cable I've so far tried. Which incidentally, as a few of you will know from the AS ER Masterclock thread is consistent with a scope image of a sample OCK-1 square wave output - a rather rounded and jagged leading edge which looked anything but ideal. Who knows how representative that sample is, but anyway, sine with mine sounds way better. Trying my best to resist clock-upgraditis.

I have no sine out to try it with. But the guy from Uptone is right, noise plays a great role. The HT has 3 layers of shielding. The lmr400 looks less noisy than other cheap cables on a scope. I would bet the HT is even less noisy. What is more is it has been designed to be a clock cable and not just a 50-ohm... It uses 7n occ copper so it is worth this asking price IMO. Too bab they don't make a silver version like with the 75-ohm.

https://www.harmonictech.com/digital-copper-iii-50-ohm/

 

[OhHeyItsLou]

Reason I ask is: a) I'd be using it with sine with my OCK-1* and b) per John from Uptone, optimised shielding rather than low reflectivity/purity of signal path is more key for sine, so a cable that is great for one may not necessarily be great for the other - though I'd hope a cable using quality parts and materials well implemented, like the HT looks to be, would be good for both.

*Sine sounds much better than square on my OCK-1 on every cable I've so far tried. Which incidentally, as a few of you will know from the AS ER Masterclock thread is consistent with a scope image of a sample OCK-1 square wave output - a rather rounded and jagged leading edge which looked anything but ideal. Who knows how representative that sample is, but anyway, sine with mine sounds way better. Trying my best to resist clock-upgraditis.

Best sounding BNC cable I've come across yet is this LMR-400 shorturl.at/tNQTX bass dynamics, texture and slam have all increased. Overall my systems sound signature is sonically more full bodied without losing detail. The last time I noticed such an immediate improvement in a cable was when I upgraded to the Audioquest Cinnamon USB. The LMR-400 has continued to improve with burn-in. In many cases it's 1/3 or less the price of some of the higher end cables. The shielding is pretty incredible as well.

 

[Jake2]

Best sounding BNC cable I've come across yet is this LMR-400 shorturl.at/tNQTX bass dynamics, texture and slam have all increased. Overall my systems sound signature is sonically more full bodied without losing detail. The last time I noticed such an immediate improvement in a cable was when I upgraded to the Audioquest Cinnamon USB. The LMR-400 has continued to improve with burn-in. In many cases it's 1/3 or less the price of some of the higher end cables. The shielding is pretty incredible as well.

Cheers, yes I got an LMR-400 - if not your Pasternack - from the same vendor as MartinWT. I've been away for the weekend so need to try it again vs the C2, which last time I compared them I still preferred.

But i made a upgrade to my setup that did not cost much this weekend. I installed a fanless linksys switch (30$), which i feed with a nice ebay psu and a short shielded ghentaudo dc cable. This is to avoid using a wifi usb dongle for internet access to my Usbridge sig streamer. I gained clarity, this is quite amazing. The psu and dc cable were really important in getting this result.

Re the effect of switch and power upgrades & tweaks you're talking to a recent convert & zealot here - I am at real risk of descending into the rabbit hole. There is exceptional bang-for-buck improvements to be had I reckon. I've heard that re the criticality of the DC cable but not something I've explored yet.

Late last week I added the modestly priced Alpha Audio-recommended Netgear GS108E switch (with Ifi Power X + AliX grounding tube, which is very audible btw) upstream of my LHY SW-8. Whoa. Quite a bit more clarity, focus and depth in the soundstage, yet more edges fell away, yadda yadda. I also directly AB'd the Netgear alone vs the LHY alone. The Netgear, though a huge improvement over the R26-direct-to-router, was a distant second to the LHY which was more three dimensional with a greater sense of space and longer, more nuanced reverberations. The Netgear complements the LHY nicely when sitting upstream. Interestingly my system sounded best with the Mac Mini Roon/HQP server plugged directly into the LHY. Versus conventional wisdom which would dictate I think that it be treated as a source of noise and placed further away and connected to the Netgear (mid-case) or Router (worst). My theory is this is because the Mac Mini and/or HQP as server were happiest and so performed their best interfacing directly with my best switch, the OCXO & Talema-powered LHY.

More generally my working theory is the more modest one's streamer (like say the one built into my R26), the greater the potential upside of upstream network path improvements. Versus the other extreme of say the Grimm MU-1 which is apparently virtually indifferent to upstream network enhancements. Interestingly even with the two switches in series I can hear the removal of a grounding tube from the router (a little bit of digititus reappears) and, more critically when I unplug the ethernet cable between the Netgear and the router - HQP continuing to play from the Mini's RAM buffer - it sounds better still. There's some previously undetected residual digitus - that's there even with the grounding tube in place on the router - that drops away. This last test is a strong argument for trying the total galvanic isolation of FMCs methinks.

Sorry I seem to have gone further OT again. Apologies. These topics, they start to blur...

 

[FredA]

Cheers, yes I got an LMR-400 - if not your Pasternack - from the same vendor as MartinWT. I've been away for the weekend so need to try it again vs the C2, which last time I compared them I still preferred.



Re the effect of switch and power upgrades & tweaks you're talking to a recent convert & zealot here - I am at real risk of descending into the rabbit hole. There is exceptional bang-for-buck improvements to be had I reckon. I've heard that re the criticality of the DC cable but not something I've explored yet.

Late last week I added the modestly priced Alpha Audio-recommended Netgear GS108E switch (with Ifi Power X + AliX grounding tube, which is very audible btw) upstream of my LHY SW-8. Whoa. Quite a bit more clarity, focus and depth in the soundstage, yet more edges fell away, yadda yadda. I also directly AB'd the Netgear alone vs the LHY alone. The Netgear, though a huge improvement over the R26-direct-to-router, was a distant second to the LHY which was more three dimensional with a greater sense of space and longer, more nuanced reverberations. The Netgear complements the LHY nicely when sitting upstream. Interestingly my system sounded best with the Mac Mini Roon/HQP server plugged directly into the LHY. Versus conventional wisdom which would dictate I think that it be treated as a source of noise and placed further away and connected to the Netgear (mid-case) or Router (worst). My theory is this is because the Mac Mini and/or HQP as server were happiest and so performed their best interfacing directly with my best switch, the OCXO & Talema-powered LHY.

More generally my working theory is the more modest one's streamer (like say the one built into my R26), the greater the potential upside of upstream network path improvements. Versus the other extreme of say the Grimm MU-1 which is apparently virtually indifferent to upstream network enhancements. Interestingly even with the two switches in series I can hear the removal of a grounding tube from the router (a little bit of digititus reappears) and, more critically when I unplug the ethernet cable between the Netgear and the router - HQP continuing to play from the Mini's RAM buffer - it sounds better still. There's some previously undetected residual digitus - that's there even with the grounding tube in place on the router - that drops away. This last test is a strong argument for trying the total galvanic isolation of FMCs methinks.

Sorry I seem to have gone further OT again. Apologies. These topics, they start to blur...

No problem. I use the linksys lgs-105, which is found in the lhy sw5. An ebay ultralow noise psu with chokes and an encapsulated Talema and a short silver plated and shileded Ghentaudio dc cable. I tried 3 different dc cable and two psus before getting this winning combo. I just can't believe it.