Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Providing an external master clock should not affect the audio because of WHAT master clocking does and that any failure of clocking, internal or external, will manifest itself in plainly audible ways that won't be mistaken for "better." Andy Peters (among others) did a pretty good job of describing why this dog don't hunt (it's in the archived PSW forums).

Linkage:

http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/594144/0/#msg_594144

Another

http://srforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/512942/0/?srch=clock#msg_512942
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

My listening doesn't confirm that the addition of an external clock changes the analog output of a digital console... but I'm over 50 and have 30+ years of live sound "experience" on my ears, so it's possible I'm not hearing the Emperor's New Sound. YMMV.

To quote Rex Ray from that old thread about this:

This confirms our tests done at Clair on PM5Ds. The measured distortion and jitter were HIGHER with an external clock than with the internal.

Some liked the sound better.

I equate it with the XL4. Everyone agrees they sound great,but they don't measure so well.

It's not the distortion, it's the distortion spectrum.

Perhaps my vote is really with my wallet. While I notice a difference, I haven't personally felt it necessary to spend $$$$ for an external clocking solution.
 
Last edited:
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Well, may as well chime in here.

A vast majority of my job is mixing IEM on LS9-32. Up to 8 stereo mixes, up around the 28 channel mark on both gigs. For what it is, the LS9 is a pretty solid and affordable digital mixer that can do 16 outputs and 32 ch on a sends on fader layer. This I like. Sure, the M7 and a lot of others also do this as well, if you like reaching all over the place on a bigger surface. But for 32 faders at any given time and being able to check it in as luggage when flying (in the right case......mine is 2" shy of being oversize, but does weigh in at 71 lbs in case. Still, it does get to ride on over 150 planes a year with minimal hassles).

It is what it is. Is it the best sounding digital? Hell no. Do I like it for larger system intensive FOH mixing? Nope. Is it a solid little decent sounding IEM console (or conventional wedge console)? You bet your ass it is. Especially at its price point. Especially when you are wrangling more than 4 mono mixes and 16 channels. Is the onboard processing and work flow good enough to do the job? Yep. Even better if you spend a minute assigning your UDK for mix selection and the like. Would I prefer a different console? Sure (I would also prefer to be rich, 100lbs lighter, 10 years younger, and 10% less agitated half the time), but you gotta use the tools given to you and make the best of what is in front of you. Would an external clock help? Maybe......then again, are you really going to notice outside on a windy day after a long flight or load in after the little too loud show the night before after you didn't get enough sleep on the rig that is almost big enough to do the job properly? Hey, it's your time and money, how you spend it is up to you.
 
Re: Digital Boards - Sound Quality

Here's a very relevant article, though from the recording industry, about external vs. internal.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jun10/articles/masterclocks.htm

from the article said:
Overall, it should be clear from these tests that employing an external master clock cannot and will not improve the sound quality of a digital audio system. It might change it, and subjectively that change might be preferred, but it won’t change things for the better in any technical sense. A-D conversion performance will not improve: the best that can be hoped for is that the A-D conversion won’t become significantly degraded. In most cases, the technical performance will actually become worse, albeit only marginally so.

This will have no affect on the 'true believers', however.