![]() |
Avid Pro Audio CommunityHow to Join & Post • Community Terms of Use • Help Us Help YouKnowledge Base Search • Community Search • Learn & Support |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I´d like to know if any of you could report an audible increase in dynamic range in the digi 002 when clocking it from an external source clock via SPDIF, I am thinking of buying an Apogee BigBen to do this, is it really worth it??? has anyone tried this?
Thank you very much for your time. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The dynamic range isn't determined by the clock source, it's determine by the bit depth. That's not to say clock quality doesn't affect sound, it does - but not dynamic range.
__________________
Quad 2.5 G5, 4.5G RAM |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A high end low jitter clock source is always a good idea man. Ive heard the difference between an 002 on its internal clock and one clocked from an apogee rosetta and the difference is definitely there.
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A better clock gives superior dynamic range, that´s for sure. That´s why different machines with the same bit depht have different DR, being always proportional to the jitter in the clock. What I don´t know is if a consumer interface like SPDIF is capable of increasing the conversion quality of the 002, using it with a superb clock, like the BigBen.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Youll get better sound from a better clock on your 002. I've heard it. I dunno if its to do with the dynamic range. Tele usually seems to have a good grasp of these things from what I've seen of his posts so I'm inclined to say hes right. I would imagine that having the low jitter clock makes each sample closer to dead accurate in its position in the audio stream. I would guess that the reason this opens up a mix more is because it gets rid of alot of phase issues and such. To me the highs dont sound any higher and the lows dont sound any lower....everything just sounds clearer. I noticed the effect of a better clock source was most apparent as far as the width and clarity of the stereo image from our overheads are concerned.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
The clock determines when your converter takes a sample of your audio.
A low quality clock makes mistakes at least 44,100 times every second- both when recording AND when playing back. That adds up pretty quick. A high quality clock doesn't do that. That's why they cost so much. What goes in and what comes out don't have those tiny timing mistakes all over the place making your audio a little less clear. You better believe that has an effect on your sound quality!! The clock in the 002 isn't horrible, but even clocking my system off a TC Electronic Finalizer Plus seems to make the system a bit clearer. Most external clocks are in the same price category as the entire 002 or 002r, though. Take care, Chris |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Default to External Clock Source? | blizzard | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) | 4 | 04-19-2011 09:46 PM |
External word clock source for 192? | jrmintz | Pro Tools TDM Systems (Mac) | 5 | 04-08-2010 09:35 PM |
Setting up Digi 002 to External Clock source????? | SmoTools | Post - Surround - Video | 5 | 08-17-2006 12:30 PM |
External clock source invalid | Fergus Kelly | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 0 | 06-22-2006 02:39 PM |
External Clock Source 002 | foisyt | 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) | 0 | 05-12-2005 10:54 AM |