Musical Fidelity A3.24 repair - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Source

Digital Source Digital Players and Recorders: CD , SACD , Tape, Memory Card, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 17th April 2007, 03:37 PM   #21
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Eindhoven
Default Re: Re: Re: Update on MF A324 upgrade

Quote:
Originally posted by hollowman


Perhaps Guido Tent can comment here on which specific Tent XO clock (MHz-wise) works best for this unit. THe stock is 50.000MHz.

Thx again for the update and the links. I'll report back after I've done the next round of upgrades.

from my memory, it is 24.576 MHz

Guido
__________________
Guido Tent
www.Tentlabs.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 06:00 AM   #22
diyAudio Member
 
georgehifi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Manly Australia (Jewel of the Pacific)
Send a message via MSN to georgehifi
PM from hollowman
Quote> Guido Tent just repled to my query about which *possible" XO clock he may have been referring to -- i.e., the one he highly recommended <http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...58#post1185658>. His reply is not that *definite*.
>
> I also noted that you, at one point tried, one of the Tent clocks , <Quote



I have not yet played with or instaled an XODAC clock for dac's.

Only the XO3 & XO2 and the XO power supplies for transports.

Below is the front end of the A3.24, and yes it has a 50mhz clock standard, maybe Guido changes this to 24mhz when he used his XODAC, in the one he modded, maybe he will answer you.

Cheers George
Attached Images
File Type: jpg cci00095x.jpg (100.0 KB, 455 views)
__________________
Avatar : Production Lightspeed Attenuator
www.lightspeedattenuator.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 06:29 AM   #23
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Eindhoven
Quote:
Originally posted by georgehifi
PM from hollowman
Quote> Guido Tent just repled to my query about which *possible" XO clock he may have been referring to -- i.e., the one he highly recommended <http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showt...58#post1185658>. His reply is not that *definite*.
>
> I also noted that you, at one point tried, one of the Tent clocks , <Quote



I have not yet played with or instaled an XODAC clock for dac's.

Only the XO3 & XO2 and the XO power supplies for transports.

Below is the front end of the A3.24, and yes it has a 50mhz clock standard, maybe Guido changes this to 24mhz when he used his XODAC, in the one he modded, maybe he will answer you.

Cheers George
Hi George

Thanks for the circuit. this DAC has a sample rate converter, so it can be upgraded with XO2. I mounted 45.1584 MHz, which works wonderfully

best
__________________
Guido Tent
www.Tentlabs.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 06:53 AM   #24
diyAudio Member
 
georgehifi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Manly Australia (Jewel of the Pacific)
Send a message via MSN to georgehifi
Thanks Guido.

There you go hollowman, the messiah has spoken, mount an XO2@45.1584MHz in your MF A3.24, and Bobs your uncle.
And if you want to go all out, power the XO2 from a Tent XO power supply instead of the MF supply, this will take it up another notch.


Cheers George
__________________
Avatar : Production Lightspeed Attenuator
www.lightspeedattenuator.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 09:32 AM   #25
diyAudio Member
 
hollowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally posted by georgehifi ... mount an XO2@45.1584MHz in your MF A3.24, and Bobs your uncle. And if you want to go all out, power the XO2 from a Tent XO power supply instead of the MF supply, this will take it up another notch.
Georgehifi: Thx for pursuing my query!

Honestly, though, I'm a bit confused: the seemingly UNscientific method in which some DIYers/developers swap various-Mhz oscillators and anecdotally report one sounding better than another is bit like practicing the black arts. E.g.:

http://diyparadise.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1168131286/5#5
http://diyparadise.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1168131286/7#7

Question:

What is/are a good SCIENTIFIC (=repeatable) method(s) for selecting the best (frequency) oscillator to pair with a particular stand-alone DAC (i.e., using asynchronous reclocking)? If one is tweaking/modding a pre-manufactured unit, then one may just look at the frequency (MHz) rating on the old oscillator (provided that the manuf. used sound scientific and/or empirical-listening tests as part of their selection criteria). But what if one is building a DAC from scratch?

Tent labs *claim* their oscillators have low jitter, so that's mostly why I'm interested in their product**.

I'm planning on pairing a Tent oscillator with, possibly, a Kwak-Clock (found elsewhere on this forum). For clean power, I may go with one of these routes. The kit modules from Tent, Audiocom, etc. are way too rich for my blood.

**Anyone know where "audiophile" companies -- e.g. Tent, LCAudio, Audiocom -- source their oscillators from. I suspect it may be a company like Crystek. This company makes low-jitter oscillators, but their thru-hole stuff do not seem to be avail. for end users (Mouser does carry most of their SMD stuff).
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 10:58 AM   #26
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Eindhoven
Quote:
Originally posted by hollowman


Georgehifi: Thx for pursuing my query!

Honestly, though, I'm a bit confused: the seemingly UNscientific method in which some DIYers/developers swap various-Mhz oscillators and anecdotally report one sounding better than another is bit like practicing the black arts. E.g.:

http://diyparadise.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1168131286/5#5
http://diyparadise.com/yabb/YaBB.pl?num=1168131286/7#7

Question:

What is/are a good SCIENTIFIC (=repeatable) method(s) for selecting the best (frequency) oscillator to pair with a particular stand-alone DAC (i.e., using asynchronous reclocking)? If one is tweaking/modding a pre-manufactured unit, then one may just look at the frequency (MHz) rating on the old oscillator (provided that the manuf. used sound scientific and/or empirical-listening tests as part of their selection criteria). But what if one is building a DAC from scratch?

Tent labs *claim* their oscillators have low jitter, so that's mostly why I'm interested in their product**.

I'm planning on pairing a Tent oscillator with, possibly, a Kwak-Clock (found elsewhere on this forum). For clean power, I may go with one of these routes. The kit modules from Tent, Audiocom, etc. are way too rich for my blood.

**Anyone know where "audiophile" companies -- e.g. Tent, LCAudio, Audiocom -- source their oscillators from. I suspect it may be a company like Crystek. This company makes low-jitter oscillators, but their thru-hole stuff do not seem to be avail. for end users (Mouser does carry most of their SMD stuff).

Hi,

My oscillators are made on my specifications. Since I am one of the very few clock suppliers that specifies and publishes measured perfomance, no black art from my side.

best
__________________
Guido Tent
www.Tentlabs.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 11:50 AM   #27
diyAudio Member
 
hollowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally posted by Guido Tent
My oscillators are made on my specifications. Since I am one of the very few clock suppliers that specifies and publishes measured perfomance, no black art from my side.
But this is not what I meant by "black art". Tight manuf. specs and "measured perfomance", as on a test bench, is exacting science. However, the scope here is narrow: it does not conote better sound.

Rather (and repeating from message above), "black art" is meant to address the following query:

Quote:
What is/are good SCIENTIFIC (=repeatable) method(s) for selecting the best (frequency) oscillator to pair with a particular stand-alone DAC (i.e., using asynchronous reclocking)? If one is tweaking/modding a pre-manufactured unit, then one may just look at the frequency (MHz) rating on the old oscillator (provided that the manuf. used sound scientific and/or empirical-listening tests as part of their selection criteria). But what if one is building a DAC from scratch?
Scientific validation could be made rigorously efficacious:

If a company that makes audiophile clocks (or other tweaks for that matter) has promoted the use of empirically-siginificant metrical/specs tests (jitter, THD, linearity, etc.) on a broad range of modified units (players, outboard DACs), conducted by an independent organization (e.g. ISO), then that's science.

And/or:

If a company that makes audiophile clocks (or other tweaks for that matter) has promoted the use of empirically-siginificant listening tests (incl. subjective ones) on broad range of modified units (players, outboard DACs), conducted by an independent organization (e.g. ISO), then that's science.

Scientific validation could also be gleaned...

If there was/is popular consensus (= empirically statistically valid) among a large group of people (e.g., diyAudio forum members) that a certain product has/had certain qualities (sounds "good"/"bad").
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 12:01 PM   #28
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Eindhoven
Quote:
Originally posted by hollowman


But this is not what I meant by "black art". Tight manuf. specs and "measured perfomance", as on a test bench, is exacting science. However, the scope here is narrow: it does not conote better sound.


Unlike with distortion, or bandwidth or amplitude flatness, with jiter it is easy: Lower jitter means better quality.

That is, if you are after transpararent reproduction. If you're after something else, you'd need different types of jitter. i can make these, but won't sell them.

cheers
__________________
Guido Tent
www.Tentlabs.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 12:11 PM   #29
diyAudio Member
 
hollowman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Blog Entries: 3
Quote:
Originally posted by Guido Tent
Unlike with distortion, or bandwidth or amplitude flatness, with jiter it is easy: Lower jitter means better quality.
So, as queried above, what is/are good SCIENTIFIC (=repeatable) method(s) for selecting the best (frequency) oscillator to pair with a particular stand-alone DAC (i.e., using asynchronous reclocking)?
  Reply With Quote
Old 18th April 2007, 12:15 PM   #30
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: .
Quote:
Originally posted by hollowman


So, as queried above, what is/are good SCIENTIFIC (=repeatable) method(s) for selecting the best (frequency) oscillator to pair with a particular stand-alone DAC (i.e., using asynchronous reclocking)?
Asynchronous reclocking is a daft idea. There isn't a sensible way of putting a round peg in a square hole.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Musical Fidelity B1 amp - repair and small mod tuck1s Solid State 1 8th January 2013 08:57 AM
Musical Fidelity A5 east electronics Solid State 4 17th October 2008 02:00 PM
musical fidelity B1 mcberta2 Solid State 0 31st December 2007 10:31 AM
Musical Fidelity CD Pre 24 devron12 Solid State 5 7th January 2006 06:01 PM
musical fidelity repair mistamovie Solid State 14 3rd March 2005 11:19 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:39 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2