Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site

manisandher wrote:

What I'm having more difficulty with is playing 176.4/192KHz sample rate files with the Model Two in Master mode. The Model Two can only output a clock at 1x or 2x 44.1KHz or 48KHz. My AFI1 cannot double the clock frequency to match the sample rate.

Yes, it was exactly what the Model One did – it outputted one 1X clock. That sucks. You can double the rate with dual-wire: the 88K with Model One and 176K with Model Two but to double a reference clock is a totally another problem and I would not go it. However, I do not play anything at 176K….

manisandher wrote:

So, at these sample rates, I cannot use the Model Two in Master mode, which is the only mode I can live with.

Mani, this is a controversial subject and in my view it is not so straight forward. When you record you defiantly would like to slave the recording devise to A/D. You might do it not only in Master mode, but you might slave the sampling marks right from you AES cable, like many other DACs do.  The idea of a separate interface for clock is divisive, Mr. Lavry argued this subject many times, claiming that the clock slaving interfaces have more jitter and more damage than better internal clocks. You can read here and in many other his white papers.

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/14324/0/

I do not have my own position on the subject but what I feed my computer player to DACs of the Lavry Gold or Pacific levels I very much sure that their own clock are way more superior and do not need to be slaved. It is not to mention that that they relock data anyhow. To slave the sources from the upstream devise? I do not know if I like it. Did you try to listen and did detect sonic benefits from slaving your PC interface from you DAC?

Rerurn to Romy the Cat's Site