Where to install Superclock3, Transport or DAC?

Hi, I want to experiment with some mods in my Digital source, a transport/BelCanto DAC2. I'd like to try the Audiocom Superclock3, but I'm not sure where it would be more efficient to install it, whether in my transport or in the DAC? or it does not matter? or the ideal would be to install one in both? What do you suggest?
Thank you.
AFAIK you can't install Superclock in the DAC.

The best way is to install a new clock in a CDT and run a separate clock line between the CDT and a DAC. You can do that with a TenTLabs clock.
I'd love to give you a guess-pinion (and I might just be correct!) but if you want to avoid confusing/conflicting responses and get an answer you can "take to the bank," write to Steve Huntley at Great Northern Sound Co. and ask him:


That said, companies like Wadia, EMM, and Mark Levinson put the clock in with the DAC and link it (with a digital cable) to the transport. I don't know if the Superclock 3 can be implemented that way.
I would definitely put it in the Dac if possible. It seems to make more of a difference there. My transport has one in it and it doesn't make a real difference as far as I can tell. I auditioned a Dac that used a Super Clock in it and the difference was very noticeable. Other factors could have played a part in what I heard also?

On another note, I've discovered using a Monarchy DIP in between the transport and the Dac made more of a substantial difference than the Super clock. So tread carefully. At least you can sell the Monarchy DIP or GW Labs DSP without a big loss.

Since I've bought a product from these guys and very impressed by it..I suggest you check out Burson Audio and save some money. This will at least give you another option for the clock. Hell.. you'll have enough money left over to throw in the regulator and power supply!

Good luck
FWIW Elberoth2 ..there are at least two modding companies installing the Super Clock 3 in the BelCanto. Empirical Audio and
Reference AudioMods. Personally I would save the money and just get the jitter/signal reclocker and conditioning unit along with a 1.5 meter digital cable and be done with it.
Aftermarket clocking makes the larger difference in the transport and it only makes sense because this where the information is being extracted from the disc and error correction and noise and jitter must be addressed or you will not have optimal performance in this scenario.

Aftermarket clocks in general being installed into DAC's, (ie: Belcanto DAC2) make a definite improvement as well. Certain DAC's use clocks for upsampling features, hdcd, de-jitter and some other uses depending on design.

An active clocking circuit is very dependant on the quality of power being fed to it and how it is addressed in connection to the circuit, and how it is designed, and some other things.

My view is to keep everthing as short and simple as possible, lose any extra connections and noise, and most importantly, Enjoy The Music!!!

Thank you all for your suggestions.

Reading some of the DAC2 reviews again (after 2 years), I realized that the DAC2 was supposed to be a very good jitter rejection unit, so now I wonder if an aftermarket clock would really make a difference anyway (either in my transport or DAC2). I saw that Reference Audio Mods makes mods (that includes a superclock3) for the DAC2, and there is a very positive review about this mod in their website, but I was wondering how much of the final result was due to the superclock specifically and not due to the other parts swap. Any other comment? Thanks!
Richard at Audiomod is the best for me..

Apllying a low jitter clock to the Dac, You will notice improvment to the soundstage ,placement, focus, well defined articulate bass, midrange openness.

BUT: Performance is limited to the quality of power, and Data intergrity.

Improving the associated parts within a component works hand in hand, with the clock.

AND: To fully appreciate your refined dac, make sure you make your source, up to par, so it does not become the limiting factor. ;c)

I had a Superclock 3 installed by RAM in my CEC TL-1X transport as part of an overall upgrade. (See RAM website for full description.) I cannot tell whether it was the Superclock or the other mods or the combo, but there was a dramatic improvement in performance: tightended CEC's sometimes loose bass; better and more sparkling treble; wider and deeper soundstage and blacker background.

I'm a little disturbed by the advise you are getting, installing a superclock in any one component is tantamount to guessing its clock will be in sync with the other unit. The best and only way to truly take advantage of a precision clock is to have the unit with the worse clock slave to the unit with the superclock installed.
Can the SC3 be installed in the CDT and DAC(not that I would do it, but curious)?

Don’t be disturbed, be happy!

Most DAC's of today get clocked (reclocked) by the incoming signal. DAC as such, The DAC Clock is just a slave.

If you want to go the linked route,
Guido at Tent Labs specializes in that.
You want the DAC as a master and the transport as a slave.
Tent Labs is the best I seen so far as he uses a voltage controlled clock link.

With my work sometimes is not good to link the clocks.
(Induces noise) Superclock has one output... (I believe).
LClock has two output, but the AUX clock output is not great... it does not compare to the main output.

The reason I suggest two separate HQ clocks in each unit,
So you would not have the common HF noise contamination in the clock signal. Plus depending on the design, Some DAC's can reclock to the incoming data, using its clock as a slave.

I specialize in TacT Audio, Full Digital Audio.
The 2.2x has 6 clock oscillators, and amps have 2 clock oscillators. I found using HQ speced OEM style Oscillators,
(Accuracy -+10 ppm, jitter 10ps) with in the 2.2x works very well.

Three main specs you want in a clock is, Accuracy, stability, low jitter.

I found with most of today’s gear, having very low jitter is most important, along with stability and accuracy.
Linking clocks between components can easily induce jitter. Using a Jiterized clock, you can be sure your data signal is going to be jitterized too.

This is why I prefer separate HQ clock in both units.

Now if we use an Iclock master clocker, or similar device,
There is less of a chance for errors.

I would like to add, I do not suggest you purchase a Superclock, lclock, etc. and install yourself with out proper test gear. Improper clock installs can have a huge effect in degrading sound quality.... I have seen this many times...

Hello Anthony,
Thanks for your reference to my answer to the above thread.
I agree with you that the mis-management of the clocking features in digital components often lead to compromised sonics.

You said:

"Linking clocks between components can easily induce jitter."

You may want to reconsider this statement, the sole purpose of slaving clocks is to eliminate timing errors (jitter) between the linked components.

My contribution to this thread is to point out that just installing a high quality clock in one of the units does not guarantee less jitter (better sonics) unless one of the components has a built-in or adjustable slaving feature. The ability to slave or not may be the most neglected and important feature in a digital component as it gives a component the flexibility of acting as a slave or master clock based on the accuracy of its internal clock. One other advantage is that the product does not become obsolete when you change its partnering piece. Of course, it is very useful if digital equipment manufacturers publish the specs of their installed clocks so the end user can determine which should be the master or slave in any given application.

I am happy now that this is now a consideration when upgrading internal clocks...

Best regards.