Originally posted by bgroup:
Just wondering if anyone has used the Lucid A/D 9624 with it's own internal clock AND also clocked to a Lucid GENx6. I'm curious if it sounded significantly different. I realize this is pretty subtle and subjective, but I'm interested if anyone has noticed a difference, subtle or not? I have an A/D 9624 on order for testing and have been contemplating ordering a GENx6 too. Anyone? Fletcher?

Brent

Do you have other digital devices that you are wordclocking? Simply, the more digitial devices networked with wordclock together, the greater need you have for a good stable clock, preferably with multiple outs.

If your only digital devices is the 9624, your mixer, and your soundcard, it would be somewhat of a waste to get an external wordclock.

Originally posted by Faeflora:

If your only digital devices is the 9624, your mixer, and your soundcard, it would be somewhat of a waste to get an external wordclock.

Faeflora,

Thanks for your response. Would it be a waste though? From what I understand, the performance of a converter is somewhat determined by whatever is clocking it. This is why a lot of folks using ProTools/888 rigs buy external clocks like the aardsync/nanosync/lucid - to make the 888 perform or "sound" better than when it is clocked using it's internal clock. If I'm wrong about this someone please correct me...

I think in essence what I'm asking is: Is the clock in the GENx6 better than the internal clock of the A/D 9624? Anyone?

Thanks in advance.

Brent

Synchronization and jitter are different things, and you have to think about both

With one just box, you needn’t worry too much about sync (provided your box is well built), but you might need to worry about jitter. Synchronization is a mechanism that allows many converters to share the same time base. Poor synchronization can cause phase problems between tracks from unsynced boxes. You have one box, so there’s nothing to sync up with. Indeed, you should be able to slave a few other converters to a single master and avoid synchronization problems.

Jitter, on the other hand can cause phase, frequency, and amplitude distortions. The clock of tells the systems when to record a sample. So if the clock fails to mark even time, the sample could be taken anywhere and at random intervals. Super stable (low jitter), high resolution (few tens of picoseconds) clock circuits are still pretty expensive to produce and test. That’s why there’s a market for these things. So I would definitely expect them to help control jitter.

That’s the theory anyway. Will any of the boxes you mentioned help you with your 9624? Well I’d expect so, but I’d wait for folks with real experience to answer that. They’re still pretty pricey.

-Dennis

I think in essence what I'm asking is: Is the clock in the GENx6 better than the internal clock of the A/D 9624? Anyone?

I'm also wondering if anyone has A/B'ed the GENx6 to the Aardsync and Nanosync? I just saw a chart of a bench test comparison of clock jitter between Aardsync and the GENx6, and it looked like the GENx6 performed better than the Aardsync box... for considerably less money. Anyone got more info??

I am having a small moment of clarity. I have a Lucid A?D 9624 that is my main converter. However when I need more than the two ins I use my old Echo Gina and Darla cards (don't laugh, I know..) I have noticed that there is often a strange "gargley" sound for lack of a better description when I track using all three card. The sound is most noticable in hi-hats and overheads.
Now, the Gina can take wordclock through a s/pdif input but the Darla 24 is on its own and I am wondering now if there is some synch/jitter issues going on that make it sound this way.

Any thoughts (besides ditch the echo s**t)?

Charles

From the "test results" I've seen, bench stuff, the clock in the GenX is better than the clock in the AD9624 from the perspective of 'jitter'. The AD9624 when used on it's own still had better 'jitter' spec's than most of the other stuff out there.

So, "need", no, you won't "need"...but you may hear a subtle difference if you do add one.

Southwind, you may indeed be having a 'sync' issue with the Darla, though in my limited experience with this stuff [and I do mean limited], when I've encountered 'sync' issues, they most often seem to manifest themselves as 'clicks and pops'...

Hope this helps.

Amazing. Thanks Fletcher. This helps a lot. And to everyone else who responded, thanks to you too!

Brent

Not trying to stretch a dying thread out, but just a quick question for Fletcher and/or anyone:

What does jitter sound like? As I understand it, it is a distortion that occurs during conversion when samples are not evenly timed (or not read evenly).

I know very well the sound of clocks arguing with each other (click....pop...). The sound I am experiencing "feels" almost like an imaging anomoly. It's as if the sound flutters or warbles back and forth in the field. the closest I can come to an analogy is a very subtle phased sound with a very fast and slightly distorted trem WAY in the background. (That doesn't really get it, but will have to do....)
There is also a taste of comb filtering in it as the sound seams to move with its frequency content.....if that makes any sense.
It is most notiable with sounds like hi hats that are in a few mics at the same time.

Thanks again,
Charles

The answer is YES. It makes a big difference, a very audible one. But then the GEN is a GEM! Best piece of gear I've got in a long time