1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

aardsync II (VS) Apogee Rosetta WORDCLOCK?

Discussion in 'Pro Audio Equipment' started by slickshoe, Oct 13, 2001.

  1. slickshoe

    slickshoe Guest

    Which clock source is more stable? Not worried about features, just a superior clock.

    Thanks
     
  2. The Aardsync II is a dedicated master clock, designed to eliminate jitter in a digital system, whereas the Rosetta is basically an ADC. So as a master clock the Rosetta is reasonably useless and as an ADC the Aardsync is completely useless! This is as much to do with the features of each unit as it is to do with the superiority of the clock.

    Bare in mind though that the Rosetta does not have a word clock input so it cannot be directly slaved to a dedicated master clock.

    So to answer your question, the Aardsync has the superior clock. I can't see though how this information is of any use to you.

    Greg
     
  3. RandomGuest

    RandomGuest Guest

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2001
    And from the tests I've seen, the Lucid 'GENx6' is more stable still than the Aardsync II...and only around $500 USD. Both are leaps and bounds more stable than the 'Rosetta'...
     
  4. dweiss

    dweiss Guest

    Fletcher,

    I'm most curious about those tests you've seen. When the GenX came out I was very interested and contacted Lucid. I was told by them that the GenX clock was not quite as stable as the Aardsync so I abandoned the idea. Has the design changed since then maybe?

    Dan
     
  5. atlasproaudio

    atlasproaudio Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2001
    Location:
    Tampa Bay, FL
    Home Page:
    That's some refreshing honesty on the part of Lucid. But consider the price difference of the two units, 70% improvement is better than none at all, right?
     
  6. RandomGuest

    RandomGuest Guest

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2001
    Grudgingly I perhaps concede that the ArdsyncII might be better than my Rosendal Nanosyncs BUT I DONT KNOW IT FOR SURE!...

    :)

    One thing, the Nanosyncs' interesting designer Fritz, described to me at length how he went to great effort to make the 256 super clock on them, make Digidesign 888/24's sound good (and it does)

    :)
     
  7. dweiss

    dweiss Guest

    >>>>>>>That's some refreshing honesty on the part of Lucid. But consider the price difference of the two units, 70% improvement is better than none at all, right?<<<<<<<<<


    Absolutely! And I'm sure it's a fine unit particularly at it's price. But if you're shopping for the best clock generator, and I don't believe that it's particularly subjective, it's not a device you want to buy twice. --Dan
     
  8. The benefit of a dedicated masterclock depends greatly on what digital equipment Slickshoe has and also his plans for the future.

    If the only digital piece of equipment Slickshoe has is the Rosetta then a dedicated masterclock is useless as the Rosetta does not have a word clock input. If he has a few other bits of digital equipment in the chain then I'm sure the Lucid would make an improvement. If Slickshoe is thinking about upgrading to PT TDM then the Lucid will probably be useless and the Nanosyncs or Aardsync would be required.

    Greg
     

Share This Page