|
Post by woofhead on Aug 9, 2018 17:40:01 GMT -6
congrats hope you like it! Have had mine for 3 years and is by far the best Ive had.Was never comfortable using outboard to mix with before having it.Had the mr816 before HUGE diff.I think someone named mike miller had a lot to do with the design but I dont think he"s with motu anymore.Hee seemed like some MIT genuis eleectrical engineer.I also had a monitor 8 at one point and had some minor issues using them togethor and he was very helpful. I thing Doug aka emmr at this forum had the same problem as w had pm'd over at the other forum 2-3 years ago Mike
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on Aug 9, 2018 18:10:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by the other mark williams on Aug 9, 2018 18:11:57 GMT -6
I'm really interested to hear your thoughts on this, Johnkenn. I don't think you're going to be disappointed. I think you made a good call.
|
|
|
Post by jdc on Aug 10, 2018 5:18:37 GMT -6
Well, I bought it. Sigh. I get to be my own judge. I'll report back. I got it off of the Guitar Center site...and they freaking charged me tax...so it ended up being $940. Sucks, but I think I could flip it pretty easily at like $950 if I don't keep it. I've found using an external clock (the bla mk2 clock) has improved the clarity in my 16a, something to consider. I did end up using the startbox for monitoring though and never looked back.
|
|
|
Post by lcr on Aug 10, 2018 6:53:08 GMT -6
^^ care to elaborate on the BLA clock mk2? ^^
|
|
|
Post by jdc on Aug 10, 2018 12:27:58 GMT -6
With the external clock it felt like the low end had more definition and the mids were clearer. They were very small differences but I noticed them nonetheless. I think the 16a is a great piece that gets better with external clocking.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 12:46:26 GMT -6
I slave my 16a to the MKIII version, it makes a difference for sure. The 16a upsamples the DAC but still uses a reference, a lot of people will try and argue that because most DAC's upsample they "use their own clock" while they use their own clock, yes, that clock still needs a reference and all the factors like accuracy and jitter still matter.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2018 16:44:30 GMT -6
I slave my 16a to the MKIII version, it makes a difference for sure. The 16a upsamples the DAC but still uses a reference, a lot of people will try and argue that because most DAC's upsample they "use their own clock" while they use their own clock, yes, that clock still needs a reference and all the factors like accuracy and jitter still matter. It's engineering fundamentals that external clocking w/ modern interfaces in most cases makes things worse, there's Lavry papers / AES papers / SOS articles etc. etc. that bang on about this subject for days but the long and short of it is it's a myth.. You also run the risk of additional issues like cheaped out clock interconnects causing issues with ground loops, RF noise etc. I don't like to talk shop, but I've worked on everything from old telecom DPNSS clocking systems to TDM, ISDN, SDH, L2 MUX's, switches, VOIP PBX's to state of the art RTP based conversion systems. I’ve come across the Sabre 32’s before, from what I remember the rate conversion is pretty much unlimited with a clock rate of around 40Mhz from 4Khz in one step with the output DNR above 170dB.. As well as a JRC operating with the rate converter in principle hitting 100% jitter reduction.
The Sabre's are complicated but they are also pretty damn good..
They can also burst an oversampled filter to correct clock edge of the high speed clock. I seriously doubt MOTU don’t know what they’re doing and the only instance an external clock will help is if they royally screwed things up. Not to say people might prefer a bit of jitter in their coffee, but lets not confuse accuracy with preference.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 10, 2018 18:12:19 GMT -6
I slave my 16a to the MKIII version, it makes a difference for sure. The 16a upsamples the DAC but still uses a reference, a lot of people will try and argue that because most DAC's upsample they "use their own clock" while they use their own clock, yes, that clock still needs a reference and all the factors like accuracy and jitter still matter. It's engineering fundamentals that external clocking w/ modern interfaces in most cases makes things worse, there's Lavry papers / AES papers / SOS articles etc. etc. that bang on about this subject for days but the long and short of it is it's a myth.. You also run the risk of additional issues like cheaped out clock interconnects causing issues with ground loops, RF noise etc. I don't like to talk shop, but I've worked on everything from old telecom DPNSS clocking systems to TDM, ISDN, SDH, L2 MUX's, switches, VOIP PBX's to state of the art RTP based conversion systems. I’ve come across the Sabre 32’s before, from what I remember the rate conversion is pretty much unlimited with a clock rate of around 40Mhz from 4Khz in one step with the output DNR above 170dB.. As well as a JRC operating with the rate converter in principle hitting 100% jitter reduction. The Sabre's are complicated but they are also pretty damn good..
They can also burst an oversampled filter to correct clock edge of the high speed clock. I seriously doubt MOTU don’t know what they’re doing and the only instance an external clock will help is if they royally screwed things up. Not to say people might prefer a bit of jitter in their coffee, but lets not confuse accuracy with preference. INCOMING
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2018 18:22:33 GMT -6
Want to finish off the sentence? I've not a clue what you're trying to say here ..!
|
|
|
Post by guitfiddler on Aug 10, 2018 18:34:22 GMT -6
It’s a big bomb with 1’s and 0’s everywhere! Head for the bunker? But if it’s a clock, wouldn’t that be a time bomb? Oh wait, wrong forum! Lol
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 10, 2018 19:15:00 GMT -6
Want to finish off the sentence? I've not a clue what you're trying to say here ..! I'm just saying your statement on clocking might start a war...It's like talking Sunni-Shiite, Democrat-Republican, Curly-Shemp...
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Aug 10, 2018 19:21:50 GMT -6
I, for one, welcome any expert commentary on clocking or digital audio in general.
My brief understanding of the Lavry viewpoint is that every converter is its own best clock, and introducing an external clock signal over various types of cabling can only be worse that what was there before. TECHNICALLY speaking, measurements I mean.
What you could hear who knows.
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 19:30:01 GMT -6
I slave my 16a to the MKIII version, it makes a difference for sure. The 16a upsamples the DAC but still uses a reference, a lot of people will try and argue that because most DAC's upsample they "use their own clock" while they use their own clock, yes, that clock still needs a reference and all the factors like accuracy and jitter still matter. It's engineering fundamentals that external clocking w/ modern interfaces in most cases makes things worse, there's Lavry papers / AES papers / SOS articles etc. etc. that bang on about this subject for days but the long and short of it is it's a myth.. You also run the risk of additional issues like cheaped out clock interconnects causing issues with ground loops, RF noise etc. I don't like to talk shop, but I've worked on everything from old telecom DPNSS clocking systems to TDM, ISDN, SDH, L2 MUX's, switches, VOIP PBX's to state of the art RTP based conversion systems. I’ve come across the Sabre 32’s before, from what I remember the rate conversion is pretty much unlimited with a clock rate of around 40Mhz from 4Khz in one step with the output DNR above 170dB.. As well as a JRC operating with the rate converter in principle hitting 100% jitter reduction.
The Sabre's are complicated but they are also pretty damn good..
They can also burst an oversampled filter to correct clock edge of the high speed clock. I seriously doubt MOTU don’t know what they’re doing and the only instance an external clock will help is if they royally screwed things up. Not to say people might prefer a bit of jitter in their coffee, but lets not confuse accuracy with preference. Well I've been doing this for a pretty good while, I've heard internal clocks that sounded great and then I've heard gear that sounded like crap instantly sound better from just hooking it up to a clock...… I've seen engineers hook up clocks to their rigs and jump up and down with excitement..... I don't know about any papers but you can put me in the camp that knows my ears and knows when something sounds better and is better. The Motu 16a when clocked off a Black Lion Micro Clock MKIII sounds better on both the ADC and the DAC. In fact, I reached out to Motu back when I was considering upgrading clocks and it was them that told me about the 16a overclocking but having a master clock with good or great specs only made that overclocking better and thus the box sound better.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Aug 10, 2018 19:35:35 GMT -6
ya, I got it and am down in the audio bunker now!
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Aug 10, 2018 19:35:55 GMT -6
I, for one, welcome any expert commentary on clocking or digital audio in general. My brief understanding of the Lavry viewpoint is that every converter is its own best clock, and introducing an external clock signal over various types of cabling can only be worse that what was there before. TECHNICALLY speaking, measurements I mean. What you could hear who knows. This is what always gets me...… Dan Lavry says that and then..... he sells this...… Lavry Engineering MASTER CLOCK
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Aug 10, 2018 19:41:23 GMT -6
I, for one, welcome any expert commentary on clocking or digital audio in general. My brief understanding of the Lavry viewpoint is that every converter is its own best clock, and introducing an external clock signal over various types of cabling can only be worse that what was there before. TECHNICALLY speaking, measurements I mean. What you could hear who knows. This is what always gets me...… Dan Lavry says that and then..... he sells this...… Lavry Engineering MASTER CLOCKI'm not here to be Lavry's advocate or anything, but there is a point when a system wide clock is necessary to keep things running. And I assume this would be the product to solve that. Which doesn't necessarily change the argument from before. And I'm pretty glad the marketing claims are kept to a minimalistic 2 sentences. That's different from the Antelope claim or whatever "This clock improves every conterter." Apologize if I'm paraphrasing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2018 20:08:42 GMT -6
It's engineering fundamentals that external clocking w/ modern interfaces in most cases makes things worse, there's Lavry papers / AES papers / SOS articles etc. etc. that bang on about this subject for days but the long and short of it is it's a myth.. You also run the risk of additional issues like cheaped out clock interconnects causing issues with ground loops, RF noise etc. I don't like to talk shop, but I've worked on everything from old telecom DPNSS clocking systems to TDM, ISDN, SDH, L2 MUX's, switches, VOIP PBX's to state of the art RTP based conversion systems. I’ve come across the Sabre 32’s before, from what I remember the rate conversion is pretty much unlimited with a clock rate of around 40Mhz from 4Khz in one step with the output DNR above 170dB.. As well as a JRC operating with the rate converter in principle hitting 100% jitter reduction.
The Sabre's are complicated but they are also pretty damn good..
They can also burst an oversampled filter to correct clock edge of the high speed clock. I seriously doubt MOTU don’t know what they’re doing and the only instance an external clock will help is if they royally screwed things up. Not to say people might prefer a bit of jitter in their coffee, but lets not confuse accuracy with preference. Well I've been doing this for a pretty good while, I've heard internal clocks that sounded great and then I've heard gear that sounded like crap instantly sound better from just hooking it up to a clock...… I've seen engineers hook up clocks to their rigs and jump up and down with excitement..... I don't know about any papers but you can put me in the camp that knows my ears and knows when something sounds better and is better. The Motu 16a when clocked off a Black Lion Micro Clock MKIII sounds better on both the ADC and the DAC. In fact, I reached out to Motu back when I was considering upgrading clocks and it was them that told me about the 16a overclocking but having a master clock with good or great specs only made that overclocking better and thus the box sound better.
Seriously not trying to one up you my friend, because I get paid the same irrelavent. I just like to share the wealth where I can, I've been doing this my entire working career.. Yeah I took a short and misguided recess into "pro" mixing and mastering (I use that term loosely), but if I gotta be honest even then I did contracts to supplement it.
When it comes to the sound of something, it all becomes somewhat irrelevant.. I've heard industry vets jump up and down due to some seriously technically inferior equipment. I did check out the MRX 816, in terms of specifications and layout it ain't all that great but the amount of people that swooned over it was incredible.
I'm talking about the technical side of things, not what somebodys ears prefer because that's just a myriad of random contradictions.. Also technically superior ain't always "the best" check out Neumann for e.g., their obsession with "better" lead to the TLM's LOL!..
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Aug 11, 2018 7:00:24 GMT -6
I had popped the top off the Symphony MKII, and they are using the same 9018 ESS chip on the DA for both the MKI and MKII cards (I have one of each). Motu uses the ESS 9016.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 11, 2018 8:45:51 GMT -6
I had popped the top off the Symphony MKII, and they are using the same 9018 ESS chip on the DA for both the MKI and MKII cards (I have one of each). Motu uses the ESS 9016. So the Symphony is two better?
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Aug 11, 2018 8:58:28 GMT -6
The Apogee 2x6 I/O SE card for Symphony is the one with ESS9038 PRO. I don't remember if that was already mentioned in this thread. The card by itself is $1,895 not even including the main symphony chassis.
DA spec on that one has an insane -131 dB headroom quoted performance.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 11, 2018 9:06:38 GMT -6
Actually, it’s not the 9038. Seems like Lucas said it was a version below that one. Not that anyone’s ears could tell.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Aug 11, 2018 9:10:17 GMT -6
Hello there. For Symphony MKI and MKII we have always used the ES9018S DAC. The ES9016 we use in Ensemble, Elements, Quartet, etc. The SE version we recently released has the 9028PRO as DAC. For regulation we have our own ultra low noise discrete design, that we very likely will maintain. Nothing wrong with the ESS regulator, but our own design is more flexible for different applications and more multipurpose. Cheers, Lucas @ Apogee Read more: realgearonline.com/thread/8454/new-high-end-dac?page=4#ixzz5Nsn2lwGh
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Aug 11, 2018 9:15:20 GMT -6
Thanks, I must have read that and scrambled it inside my head. I should have checked that before I posted.
I did find a DAC out there called the Ayre Acoustics QX-5 that uses the 9038PRO and it has a hilarious asking price of $8,000.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Aug 11, 2018 9:37:22 GMT -6
Well I've been doing this for a pretty good while, I've heard internal clocks that sounded great and then I've heard gear that sounded like crap instantly sound better from just hooking it up to a clock...… I've seen engineers hook up clocks to their rigs and jump up and down with excitement..... I don't know about any papers but you can put me in the camp that knows my ears and knows when something sounds better and is better. The Motu 16a when clocked off a Black Lion Micro Clock MKIII sounds better on both the ADC and the DAC. In fact, I reached out to Motu back when I was considering upgrading clocks and it was them that told me about the 16a overclocking but having a master clock with good or great specs only made that overclocking better and thus the box sound better.
Seriously not trying to one up you my friend, because I get paid the same irrelavent. I just like to share the wealth where I can, I've been doing this my entire working career.. Yeah I took a short and misguided recess into "pro" mixing and mastering (I use that term loosely), but if I gotta be honest even then I did contracts to supplement it.
When it comes to the sound of something, it all becomes somewhat irrelevant.. I've heard industry vets jump up and down due to some seriously technically inferior equipment. I did check out the MRX 816, in terms of specifications and layout it ain't all that great but the amount of people that swooned over it was incredible.
I'm talking about the technical side of things, not what somebodys ears prefer because that's just a myriad of random contradictions.. Also technically superior ain't always "the best" check out Neumann for e.g., their obsession with "better" lead to the TLM's LOL!..
first off, I only understand the most basic of basics. But I've often wondered if people actually prefer the sonics of jittery clocking with their external clocks - and that's what's fueled the external clock rage. Wouldn't be the first time people preferred "sonically inferior" over "technically better".
|
|