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

AD8000 clock okay?

Discussion in 'Pro Audio Equipment' started by regisfunk, Nov 18, 2001.

  1. regisfunk

    regisfunk Guest

    I'm just curious what you all think about the AD8000's internal crystal as far as a master word clock. I used to have an Aardsync2, and then I bought the 8k. I really had trouble hearing a noticable difference between the 8k's internal clock and the aardsync, so I sold the aard. The folks at Apogee told me that their clock would be plenty stable as a master clock in most digital studios, and that a dedicated external clock would only be needed if I were doing some sort of tape transfer stuff (perhaps I'm not being too clear, forget that comment).

    Anyhoo, I'm hearing all this nanosync, lucid, etc., business, and I'm just wondering if any of you (non-SE) 8000 owners have experimented with external master clocks and experienced any improvement in overall sound.

    thx!

    CS
     
  2. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    Hey regisfunk!
    The SE upgrade doesn't improve clock! So I belive all Apogee AD8000's to have the same quality clock.
    :)
     
  3. regisfunk

    regisfunk Guest

    Okay Jules, thanks. So, now my question is basically posed to ALL 8000 owners, SE or not. Any noticably difference when driving with external clock (i.e. nano or lucid, rme, etc)?

    thanks dudes

    CS
     
  4. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    The SE upgrade is overall Audio enhancement..you get better clarity sound and spatial imaging.
    The internal Crystal is rock solid and can be the master for days on end!!
    Again..SE version of the AD8K does not change the clock whatsoever
    Opus
     
  5. regisfunk

    regisfunk Guest

    Argh! :) Sorry. Geez. I'm having trouble communicating my question I guess. I should have never used the letters 'SE' in my original post.

    What I really wanted to know was if there would be any reason to go out and buy one o those nano-lucid-rme, etc., clocks, when I have an ad8000 sitting here. Would there really be a noticeable different in sound quality if I were to slave everything to that instead of the 8000? I know quite a few people with 888's go out and get a dedicated clock. Is that necessary with an 8000?

    Sorry to beat a dead horse :0
     
  6. Opus2000

    Opus2000 Well-Known Member

    No...it is not neccessary if you dont need to multiple sync many other devices...depending on what you need anyhow..you might need a master sync box as it is
    Opus
     
  7. regisfunk

    regisfunk Guest

    Originally posted by Opus2000:
    No...it is not neccessary if you dont need to multiple sync many other devices...depending on what you need anyhow..you might need a master sync box as it is
    Opus


    Thanks Opus. From the apogee, I have an 888/24 hanging off the superclock jack, a tc m3000, and a Kurzweil KDS (digital interface for my K2500) cascading off the sync out jack. These are all slaving to the apogee's internal clock. I haven't had any trouble as of yet. I'm getting the feeling that 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' eh? Just wondering if some sync box out there would magically transform things to a higher level, as is reportedly the case when slaving an 888 to something more stable.

    CS
     
  8. Sly

    Sly Guest

    One of the reasons why the ad8000's are better sounding than the 888/24 is the clock. In the same way, an 888/24 is improved by slaving it to an ad8000 clock. I have no idea about how it compares with an aardsync2, but if you cant tell the difference, you shouldnt worry about it. I gather from others that they are very much in the same ballpark. I have considered getting an aardsync to use with my 888/24 but have decided to wait and see what the clocks are like in the new digidesign hardware. I wonder how long I will have to wait!
    Jack
     
  9. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    Originally posted by regisfunk:
    Any noticably difference when driving with external clock

    I've noticed a big time difference when using an external clock. I use the Lucid stuff (beause we're dealers for it and I can just grab one and go), but most of them at the Lucid, Aardsync, Nanosync (not RME that I could tell) level will make a significant difference in the size of the 'soundstage', and the overall clarity and depth of the recording.

    YMMV...
     
  10. Over a year and a half ago, I bought an Apogee Rosetta and Master clocked it over my 888/24. I could instantly tell a big difference in stereo imaging and presence in all of my sessions previously recorded with the 888/24 using the better Apogee digital clock. The digital clock is the same in all Apogee units, AD8000 SE, Rosetta, etc., according to Apogee.

    Kip
    Bardstown Audio
    http://www.bardstownaudio.com
     
  11. Jon Atack

    Jon Atack Member

    I'm going to swim against the current, because in my experience, the Apogee PSX100SE clock sounds smoother in the high-mids and tighter in the low end than the Apogee AD8000 (non-SE) clock.

    This is NOT an audio comparison, just a clock one, with the same separate AD8000 for A/D and D/A being clocked alternately by the PSX100SE and the AD8000.

    ***

    I wonder if the clock and audio quality isn't improving with new Apogee boxes versus older ones. My newer AD8000s sound slightly better than my older one.

    ***

    My master clock prefs among the various possible sources in my studio are:

    PSX100SE ***
    Nanosyncs **
    AD8000 **
    Waves L2
    Masterlink
    888/24
    Sony PCMR500 DAT

    I use the Nanosyncs for clock distribution to everything else, and often switch the Nanosyncs between Internal and WC (PSX100SE) settings to compare which clock works best on a particular track. The PSX100SE almost always wins.

    Jon
     
  12. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    Unlike Jon I prefer the Apogee clock to the Nanosyncs one, but I want to try thet Lucid box I will report back when I have (not expected for a while unless Jim here somewhere organises it for me)

    Fletcher? Once & for all... Have you heard the Lucid clock improve sound on an AD8000? Let's try to put the origional poster out of his mysery! Thanks!

    :)
     
  13. regisfunk

    regisfunk Guest

    Originally posted by Julian Standen:
    Fletcher? Once & for all... Have you heard the Lucid clock improve sound on an AD8000? Let's try to put the origional poster out of his mysery! Thanks!

    :)


    Is that a death threat?

    regis. ;)
     
  14. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    hehehehe!

    I had my PT cards for my AD8000 swapped today, free of charge. A new upgrade.. I was also assured there WILL be SOME upgrade path in future as apogee go 8ch 96k.

    :)
     
  15. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    Originally posted by Julian Standen:
    Fletcher? Once & for all... Have you heard the Lucid clock improve sound on an AD8000? Let's try to put the origional poster out of his mysery!

    I believe just 6 short posts above this one (3 above Jules's original post) you will find where I said "YES" in pretty uncertain terms...then again...YMMV :p
     
  16. regisfunk

    regisfunk Guest

    Originally posted by Fletcher:


    I believe just 6 short posts above this one (3 above Jules's original post) you will find where I said "YES" in pretty uncertain terms...then again...YMMV :p


    I think Jules was just wanting you to clarify that your statement was specifically in regard to the AD8000, and not a general statement about any bread and butter A/D converter. And now that you have done so....I'm more flustered than ever. :-(
    Perhaps my ears suck.

    CS
     
  17. Greg Malcangi

    Greg Malcangi Member

    Hi CS,

    To a certain extent you are missing the point of a dedicated masterclock. The main reason for adding a dedicated masterclock to your system is to remove the jitter in that system. The difference in jitter between the clock in say a Nanosyncs and an AD8000 is probably no more than a few pico seconds. It's unlikely that you would hear any difference whatsoever, as this is not the job for which a dedicated masterclock is intended. Correctly setup to send word clock in parallel to every piece of digital gear in your chain, a dedicated masterclock can remove hundreds of pico seconds of jitter from a system with daisy-chained word clock. Depending on the number of pieces of digital gear in your system you could find a drammatic improvement in the quality of your final mixes by using a Nanosyncs compared to daisy-chaining the signal from your AD8000.

    A much more useful question in your situation would have been: "Is it worth properly distributing word clock around my system, or daisy-chaining it. If it is worth it, should I get a distribution amp for my AD8000 or buy a dedicated masterclock?"

    Greg
     
  18. fletchmo

    fletchmo Guest

    Hi-This is my first note on the board.
    Did any of you read (or write) the recent article in Audio Media about clocks? I don't remember all the converters and clocks used, but the tone of the article was that the converters used in the tests sounded better clocked by the AardsyncII. The change for the better in the AD8000 was less evident than the 888, but was enough to make a difference to the author. All the converters were also used as master clocks in the tests. There were oscilloscope tracings of the various clock outputs with a suggestion that some clocks generated enough high amplitude random noise between clock ticks to cause jitter. There was also suggestion that AardSync's 'better sound' was a result of less interstitial noise. I've yet to try out what the article suggested, but Greg's last suggestion is enough to make me buy a separate clock for all the crap I have daisy-chained.
    thanks, Norm
     
  19. regisfunk

    regisfunk Guest

    Originally posted by Greg Malcangi:
    Hi CS,

    To a certain extent you are missing the point of a dedicated masterclock. The main reason for adding a dedicated masterclock to your system is to remove the jitter in that system. The difference in jitter between the clock in say a Nanosyncs and an AD8000 is probably no more than a few pico seconds. It's unlikely that you would hear any difference whatsoever, as this is not the job for which a dedicated masterclock is intended. Correctly setup to send word clock in parallel to every piece of digital gear in your chain, a dedicated masterclock can remove hundreds of pico seconds of jitter from a system with daisy-chained word clock. Depending on the number of pieces of digital gear in your system you could find a drammatic improvement in the quality of your final mixes by using a Nanosyncs compared to daisy-chaining the signal from your AD8000.

    A much more useful question in your situation would have been: "Is it worth properly distributing word clock around my system, or daisy-chaining it. If it is worth it, should I get a distribution amp for my AD8000 or buy a dedicated masterclock?"

    Greg


    Greg,

    Actually, I am pretty much aware that the primary function of a dedicated clock is to provide high quality parallel sync to multiple devices. As mentioned a few posts up, my studio, for the most part, does not suffer from a great deal of daisy chained activity. I have two clock outs on the 8000. One is a superclock, going to just one 888. The other is a standard wordclock going to my digital mixer and then just one more device (m3000). So my question was indeed related solely to whether or not the "sound quality" would be improved by simply substituting the internal clock on an 8000 with an external clock like the aard. And at least one poster (fletcher) has suggested that it indeed does make a sonic difference. I just have trouble hearing it. But admittedly I haven't done exhaustive A/B comparisons. Mainly because they make me go clinically insane. :) But I'm ready to move on to a more interesting subject if everybody else is. My question has been more or less answered with the all too familiar "depends on who you ask."


    CS
    :D
     
  20. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    Norm wrote:
    Hi-This is my first note on the board.
    Did any of you read (or write) the recent article in Audio Media about clocks? I don't remember all
    the converters and clocks used, but the tone of the article was that the converters used in the tests
    sounded better clocked by the AardsyncII. The change for the better in the AD8000 was less
    evident than the 888, but was enough to make a difference to the author. All the converters were
    also used as master clocks in the tests. There were oscilloscope tracings of the various clock
    outputs with a suggestion that some clocks generated enough high amplitude random noise
    between clock ticks to cause jitter. There was also suggestion that AardSync's 'better sound' was a
    result of less interstitial noise. I've yet to try out what the article suggested, but Greg's last
    suggestion is enough to make me buy a separate clock for all the crap I have daisy-chained.
    thanks, Norm

    Good point Norm - so a real test would be to get a Genex6 (the new kid on the block) and an Ardsyn II in to see if they made the Apogee rig sound better.

    :)

    I agree with regisfunk, clock shootouts are low on my list of favorite pastimes!

    :)
     

Share This Page