DIY Word Clock.

[nacho459]

Someone posted this over at TapeOp, and I was wondering the same thing. Shouldn't a really solid 44.1K/48k Word colck be relatively easy to build?

http://messageboard.tapeop.com/viewtopic.php?t=25579

 

[mcs]

Yes. I think all you would need is a 11.2896 or 12.288MHz oscillator and a 256 divider (like a 4040).

You could use one of the "hifi" clocks to get better performance than the cheap standard oscillators (perhaps).

Best regards,

Mikkel C. Simonsen

 

[gyraf]

I might be wrong, but..

..contrary to common belief, I don't think that external wordclocks will do ANY difference for your sound, unless you have large systems that needs sync'ing. And even then, you'd probably be better off using one of the internal clocks for reference.

Jakob E.

 

[chrissugar]

Jakob is right, an external clock will never improve an internal well designed crystal clock.
It is like you would say that audio transmited through radio waves sound better than through wire. It doesn't mater how much technology will improve audio transmited through radio waves will be maximum as good or less good than through wire.
The same thing is with external clocking. Even if the external clock is better than the internal, the clock goes through a transmiter ,receiver, PLL and the clock will be not better than a good internal crystal clock.

There is an explanation at Dan Lavry's forum. The whole myth of the improvement produced by external clocks [like the Apogee BigBen] is busted.

chrissugar

 

[Guest]

hmm, this is interesting... Not arguing here, but I know some very good engineers who I highly respect that subscribe to the external word clock thing... These are guys who swear by special speaker cables, etc. as well... I havent had the opportunity to really test the differences between word clocks (and cables for that matter) in a thoroughly convincing way yet. I was under the impression that having one master clock that ran individual word clock to all your devices ( as opposed to daisy chaining them) was the best way of doing things. I'll google for Dan Lavry's forum. Interesting topic!

 

[gyraf]

[quote author="JCMaudio"] I'll google for Dan Lavry's forum. Interesting topic![/quote]

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/f/38/0

Jakob E.

 

[Guest]

Thanks Jakob!

 

[dasbin]

[quote author="JCMaudio"] I was under the impression that having one master clock that ran individual word clock to all your devices ( as opposed to daisy chaining them) was the best way of doing things. [/quote]


It IS the best way of doing things, if and only if you have multiple digital devices that need syncronizing. If you have only one device, use the internal clock. If you have only two devices, daisy-chain them and set the master as the one that is more critical in your chain (ie your ADC) so it can use its internal clock for itself.
If you have more than two devices, then an external wordclock is justifiable. This is because extensive daisy-chaining degrades the quality of the wordclock significantly. In other words, it's easier to hear the public speaker up on the podium than getting the info from the guy beside you, who's telling you what he THINKS the guy beside him said...

 

[emankayker]

Hi all
I'm thinking about building a 44.1- 48 clock, yes I do have more than 2 devices.
How complicated is it to build a clock with 3 outputs?
Thanks

 

[Newmarket]

Jakob is right, an external clock will never improve an internal well designed crystal clock.
It is like you would say that audio transmited through radio waves sound better than through wire. It doesn't mater how much technology will improve audio transmited through radio waves will be maximum as good or less good than through wire.
The same thing is with external clocking. Even if the external clock is better than the internal, the clock goes through a transmiter ,receiver, PLL and the clock will be not better than a good internal crystal clock.

There is an explanation at Dan Lavry's forum. The whole myth of the improvement produced by external clocks [like the Apogee BigBen] is busted.

chrissugar

See Jakob's "unless..." caveat.
I took it as implicit that it was a discussion concerning multi component systems that required syncing.

 

[Newmarket]

[quote author="JCMaudio"] I was under the impression that having one master clock that ran individual word clock to all your devices ( as opposed to daisy chaining them) was the best way of doing things.

It IS the best way of doing things, if and only if you have multiple digital devices that need syncronizing. If you have only one device, use the internal clock. If you have only two devices, daisy-chain them and set the master as the one that is more critical in your chain (ie your ADC) so it can use its internal clock for itself.
If you have more than two devices, then an external wordclock is justifiable. This is because extensive daisy-chaining degrades the quality of the wordclock significantly. In other words, it's easier to hear the public speaker up on the podium than getting the info from the guy beside you, who's telling you what he THINKS the guy beside him said...
[/QUOTE]


Alternatively take a high quality clock from a WC output on one unit and feed that to the others radially via a clock distribution widget.

 

[PermO]

I think it should have tubes....

 

[emankayker]

Well I thought some of you did a diy in this group
Can't decide if I want to spend money on a black Lion micro or try to build one from scratch. Was hoping to find some love for a diy project around here
; )
Cheers

 

[PermO]

I'm using the microclock myself... works fine.

 

[emankayker]

Yes I guess it's the easy route

 

[emankayker]

But it doesn't have tubes

 

[Newmarket]

Well I thought some of you did a diy in this group
Can't decide if I want to spend money on a black Lion micro or try to build one from scratch. Was hoping to find some love for a diy project around here
; )
Cheers

I don't see anyone really against DIY here. Just some opinions that it might not be justified in terms of improvement. Due to PLL clock recovery to produce the actual clocks needed, derived from the WC. As stated, I'd suggest a DIY clock distro' using an existing WC signal as input. You could then replace the WC with your own WC to evaluate if any advantage.
If system interface facilitates higher frequency "masterclock" eg 256fs to be used then consider that. Depending on length of connection.

 

[PermO]

But it doesn't have tubes

Yes, true...

The cool thing of DIY is that it doesn't need to make sense, just do it because you can.
I never looked at building a clock myself, but if I would, it would have a tube...

Tubes are pretty good at HF stuff.

It will defenitely be unique.

 

[blue_luke]

I solved my WC system for very little $$$ using a video blackburst generator with 6 outputs on BNC connectors and at each device I use a WC generator.
All of the equipment was found used on E_BAY for a very good price.
I still have most of it but don't use it anynore, which makes it for sale I guess?

 

[MicMaven]

Yes, true...

The cool thing of DIY is that it doesn't need to make sense, just do it because you can.
, but if I would, it would have a tube...
Tubes are pretty good at HF stuff.

Brief OT Comments This strikes a friendly chord - Tubes ARE good at HF. In fact, there is a 1500 watt linear HF RF amp with tubes bigger than quart Mason jars on my desk ...

Gratuitous Sidebar - I marvel at the number of amateur radio operators who spend thousands of dollars on the latest, greatest state of the art transceiver ... before spending just $80 on eBay for a cheap external 10MHz GPS disciplined reference oscillator to tune the rig (some as often as weekly) as if manufacturers have no clue what they are doing.

OK, nothing serious here, we now return to the regularly scheduled program ...

James