"Buy a Tent module."
The original question though has yet to be answered. Why?
I like Elso's circuit myself so someone sell me on a different one.
Mike
The original question though has yet to be answered. Why?
I like Elso's circuit myself so someone sell me on a different one.
Mike
Mike Gergen said:
Are you expecting to find someone that has tested ALL the clocks out there?
On the same player?
Even more, are you demanding someone to justify his oppinion? 😀
Also, do you trust someone that sells a product and says it's the best?
I have experience with LC-Audio clocks since 1999 up to the last one (XO3), and since ~2003 with Tent clocks.
I can tell you that on the same player the Tent clock (XO2) sounded superior (to the LC-Audio XO3), TIGHTER bass, everything clearer, all the instruments easier to follow, even in high dynamics passages.
I have used the normal Tent XO clock too, made my own boards and PSU, and it sounds very good too.
I haven't used other clocks from other makers.
I'm happy with the Tent clocks, I agree with rfbrw's oppinion.
What is Tent's clock?
I found :
XO 2 109 euros
XO 3 149 euros
they are build modules,
but that's not DIY IMHO.
Is it just the can and a PSU?
BTW,
I found this:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=14950
Mike Gergen said:
Any reason beyond those I've already given would be subjective and therefore of limited value. If you want more, you'll have to buy the lot and listen for yourself.
Then go with that one. It is just as likely to be subjectively pleasing as any other clock. Unless you live on Planet Self, the proof really is in the eating.
DragonMaster said:
The canned oscillator module. Just add PSU.
http://www.tentlabs.com/ProductEntities/XO/XO.html
OK!
Prices:
TentXO: 35USD euros + shipping + PSU + shipping.
Elso's XTALs: 18USD(Free ship) + parts(20$) + shipping(But you can order other parts @ the same time).
It seems like they are about the same price.
Prices:
TentXO: 35USD euros + shipping + PSU + shipping.
Elso's XTALs: 18USD(Free ship) + parts(20$) + shipping(But you can order other parts @ the same time).
It seems like they are about the same price.
DragonMaster said:
Yes but you still have to put it altogether competently for best results. There are those who can't even 'deadbug' competently nevermind layout a pcb.
DragonMaster said:
No user serviceable parts inside. 😀
It's more than just the crystal oscillator.
You just need a good PSU.
Carlos
No, I'm not expecting some one to test all of them. Just interested in trying to keep the thread going. In looking at previous threads I haven't found a lot of info about anybody comparing clocks. Doesn't mean I just haven't found the info though.
There are threads galore of comparisons between opamps, all manner of passive parts, transistors, blah, blah... Both objective and subjective.
Besides, it's always fun watching Elso, Jocko and others get their blood pressure up. I'm joking, I'm joking!
Mike
No, I'm not expecting some one to test all of them. Just interested in trying to keep the thread going. In looking at previous threads I haven't found a lot of info about anybody comparing clocks. Doesn't mean I just haven't found the info though.
There are threads galore of comparisons between opamps, all manner of passive parts, transistors, blah, blah... Both objective and subjective.
Besides, it's always fun watching Elso, Jocko and others get their blood pressure up. I'm joking, I'm joking!
Mike
crystal
Most of the time you can use the crystal from the CDP saves you 18USD.🙂
DragonMaster said:
Most of the time you can use the crystal from the CDP saves you 18USD.🙂
I wish I could get my blood pressure up. Nope, not likely in this lifetime.
In my case, you mean "getting my stomach contents up". Yep, I can do that one..........
OK.........why has no one measured/tested them all.
1.) Most are too damn expensive, and most likely are GPTs.
2.) Guys like me who can actually measure them don't care. We make our own.
3.) So why should someone like me go to all the expense of buying crap that we have no need for, just so some punter who doesn't like what we have to say can argue with us? Nope, some guy who just got flogged for 300 quid isn't going to want to hear they just bought a GPT.
Just look at all the endless debates on how the '5534 is the best op-amp ever. Do you really expect someone to proclaim The Grand Wazoo of clocks? And everyone to believe it?
Nope, the best clock is one that fits your budget, is a fairly competent design, powered by a low-noise PSU and isn't shoved into the XTI pin of the digital filter.
This assumes that one can tell the difference between a crystal and a canned oscillator, and that you can't drop the latter into a circuit for the former. Hate to say it.......Elso has tons of e-mail from idjits who can't.
They need more than to be told which clock is the best.
Jocko
In my case, you mean "getting my stomach contents up". Yep, I can do that one..........
OK.........why has no one measured/tested them all.
1.) Most are too damn expensive, and most likely are GPTs.
2.) Guys like me who can actually measure them don't care. We make our own.
3.) So why should someone like me go to all the expense of buying crap that we have no need for, just so some punter who doesn't like what we have to say can argue with us? Nope, some guy who just got flogged for 300 quid isn't going to want to hear they just bought a GPT.
Just look at all the endless debates on how the '5534 is the best op-amp ever. Do you really expect someone to proclaim The Grand Wazoo of clocks? And everyone to believe it?
Nope, the best clock is one that fits your budget, is a fairly competent design, powered by a low-noise PSU and isn't shoved into the XTI pin of the digital filter.
This assumes that one can tell the difference between a crystal and a canned oscillator, and that you can't drop the latter into a circuit for the former. Hate to say it.......Elso has tons of e-mail from idjits who can't.
They need more than to be told which clock is the best.
Jocko
One of them is a 45.1584MHz (3rd harmonic) and you told me it wouldn't work. I will not use a 45MHz anymore because I will bypass the DAC which divides the clock by ??.
The best clock?
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69609
45.1584MHz KWAK-CLOCK
Hi DragonFighter,
You need a fundamental mode 45.1584MHz crystal and a slightly modified circuit. Please contact me by email.😎
DragonMaster said:
Hi DragonFighter,
You need a fundamental mode 45.1584MHz crystal and a slightly modified circuit. Please contact me by email.😎
The original thread was :-
Hacker I'm trying to figure out which clock to use when reclocking my Naim CD3.5.
However, we seem to have drifted away (myself included ) and more towards external dac’s.
I think the following posts sum up most of the question:-
Jocko Homo ‘Nope, the best clock is one that fits your budget, is a fairly competent design, powered by a low-noise PSU …..’.
rfbrw ‘Yes but you still have to put it altogether competently for best results. There are those who can't even 'deadbug' competently nevermind layout a pcb.’
Whatever clock you chose can always be compromised by mediocre construction and installation.
………………
‘and isn't shoved into the XTI pin of the digital filter.’
‘Or does it come down to implementation? Ie, avoid shoving it through a '04.’
If Hacker did buy a Tent clock (not module), what would be the best way to interface it, given the above comments from elsewhere in this thread? Use a comparator, as in the Kwak clock? ( I am worried about negative-going parts of the waveform here- does this not have consequences to the following stage?).
What is wrong with buffering with a SINGLE ’04 gate (others unused)?
And if you don't stick it in the XTI, where are you going to stick it?
Hacker I'm trying to figure out which clock to use when reclocking my Naim CD3.5.
However, we seem to have drifted away (myself included ) and more towards external dac’s.
I think the following posts sum up most of the question:-
Jocko Homo ‘Nope, the best clock is one that fits your budget, is a fairly competent design, powered by a low-noise PSU …..’.
rfbrw ‘Yes but you still have to put it altogether competently for best results. There are those who can't even 'deadbug' competently nevermind layout a pcb.’
Whatever clock you chose can always be compromised by mediocre construction and installation.
………………
‘and isn't shoved into the XTI pin of the digital filter.’
‘Or does it come down to implementation? Ie, avoid shoving it through a '04.’
If Hacker did buy a Tent clock (not module), what would be the best way to interface it, given the above comments from elsewhere in this thread? Use a comparator, as in the Kwak clock? ( I am worried about negative-going parts of the waveform here- does this not have consequences to the following stage?).
What is wrong with buffering with a SINGLE ’04 gate (others unused)?
And if you don't stick it in the XTI, where are you going to stick it?
poynton said:
Please use Guido's instructions with his clock. Don't mix up circuits by using a comparator with his clock, no need for that.😎
Negative going part of the waveform??? As far as I know only the positive going flank is used. Please address Guido for questions on his clock and me for questions about the KWAK-CLOCK.
poynton,
A very good reassumption!
Now, if you are not sticking it into XTI - then You are going to stick it into XTI! Too. But most importantly You are going to stick it into the CLK input of a D flipflop, which then itself disrupts the line between the dig filt / or decoder chip output and the DAC input. Which line, that's another question, depends on the DAC itself. Sometimes it's WCLK / WS somtimes it's BCLK.
In other words, now that you have a good clock, you have to duplicate it's output, and distribute it between XTI and the CLK of the D-flop.
Without creating ground loops.. Because the XTI in fact expects a sinusoid signal, what I would do is to start from a clock design which squares up a sinus oscillator, would buffer it, take one buffered output & square it up, then pass the other output through a small high freq pulse transformer, and forward this small sinusoid to the XTI. This way one can avoid of creating a new ground loop. In the process care should be taken to respect the setup / hold times for the reclocking flip flop, which usually means delaying adequately the signals. A usual trick is to invert / or not the branch which goes to the XTI. The small transformer provides this easily. One can also play with the length of cable travelling to the XTI.
Now, all these operations should be done in a way that does not disrupt the continuity of the fast signal current loops. [Supposed that there existed such a continuity in the first place.. which is almost never..]
Now, this sentence above is a pure contradiction in itself. So, it is here that I would add to the claim of RBFW [you still have to put it together competently..] - there is no such a thing that put it together competently..
About the difficulties of doing it properly I would suggest to read up the saga of Pete Goudreau about his dac mods. I have some huge text files..
Conclusion - go for a DAC design where all this has been taken into account right from the start. Hagerman? Guido Tent? Rakk dac? Pedja Rogic?
Ciao, George
Ps.: There exist somewhere also a design by Jocko..
A very good reassumption!
Now, if you are not sticking it into XTI - then You are going to stick it into XTI! Too. But most importantly You are going to stick it into the CLK input of a D flipflop, which then itself disrupts the line between the dig filt / or decoder chip output and the DAC input. Which line, that's another question, depends on the DAC itself. Sometimes it's WCLK / WS somtimes it's BCLK.
In other words, now that you have a good clock, you have to duplicate it's output, and distribute it between XTI and the CLK of the D-flop.
Without creating ground loops.. Because the XTI in fact expects a sinusoid signal, what I would do is to start from a clock design which squares up a sinus oscillator, would buffer it, take one buffered output & square it up, then pass the other output through a small high freq pulse transformer, and forward this small sinusoid to the XTI. This way one can avoid of creating a new ground loop. In the process care should be taken to respect the setup / hold times for the reclocking flip flop, which usually means delaying adequately the signals. A usual trick is to invert / or not the branch which goes to the XTI. The small transformer provides this easily. One can also play with the length of cable travelling to the XTI.
Now, all these operations should be done in a way that does not disrupt the continuity of the fast signal current loops. [Supposed that there existed such a continuity in the first place.. which is almost never..]
Now, this sentence above is a pure contradiction in itself. So, it is here that I would add to the claim of RBFW [you still have to put it together competently..] - there is no such a thing that put it together competently..
About the difficulties of doing it properly I would suggest to read up the saga of Pete Goudreau about his dac mods. I have some huge text files..
Conclusion - go for a DAC design where all this has been taken into account right from the start. Hagerman? Guido Tent? Rakk dac? Pedja Rogic?
Ciao, George
Ps.: There exist somewhere also a design by Jocko..
- Status
- Not open for further replies.