DACs, external clocks, and what's what

An external clock may change the sound, but "better" is arguable.  The physical distance from the DAC chip increases jitter.  Ideally, the best jitter performance would be with a clock chip physically adjacent to the DAC chip itself.  

It's worth pointing out that in the 21st century, affordable clock chips with vanishingly low errors became common.  Also, an atomic style clock may have very good long term stability (great for a wall clock in space) but poor sample to sample error.  

I think no one knows more about this stuff than Meitner, or the MSB folks, 

IMO you are forgetting someone in this sentence, Andreas Koch. (you know, the guy who built the world’s first sample rate converter) There are no Playback Designs "upgraded" external clocks available either, and I don’t have him on record stating it is nonsense, but as he has had experiences working closely with Meitner over the years I believe they both have this same "common sense" approach- one good clock is all that is necessary, and one box is sufficient. 

My knowledge around all of this digital conversion stuff is not good, that is on purpose, but seems like a ridiculous money grab to me. But hey, if someone’s DAC can come in 3 fancy expensive boxes each with a multi-thousand dollar power cord attached to each instead of one box, it must sound better, right? What I do know is I won’t be in the market for another DAC after living with my current one box machine for a few months. 

...but this seems to be a case where one side must be right and the other is wrong. 

I previously held the belief that using the DAC volume control was "wrong" and a pre-amplifier is "right". However, recently having evaluated the onboard analog volume control in this MPS-8, that philosophy that an external pre-amp is a requirement for good sound is also being shattered.

I will attach an article which also includes a description of Playback Designs clock philosophy which does state something regarding the display not having its own clock to contaminate the DAC’s by different clocks "beating against each other" for everyone’s perusal:

https://www.playbackdesigns.com/docs/dreamseries/PlaybackDesigns_DreamStory.pdf

@kerrybh wrote:

I don’t doubt for a minute that your external clock has resulted in improvement-its foolish to question what someone else hears. That’s not really the question that is at the crux of the debate that interests me. I think the designers like Meitner and the MSB guys-certainly well credentialed-would say that IF the internal clock is designed and built to a certain standard the external clock is unnecessary. In fact, I think Meitner has suggested the external clocks are "stupid." Of course, the opposite is true if the internal clock is not optimized.

The crux of the matter to me is this: if you’re able to navigate with regard to your own setup specifics and whether it would benefit from an external clock (preferably from experience), does anything else really matter? The MSB and Meitner guys feel this way about it, the Wadax dudes something else, etc. The advocated protocol has (or should have) a lot to say in what they believe is the best approach and also how they want to market themselves, but being as it may what this, that or the other manufacturer may think about the matter is relative to their chosen context and not universal truths. At least that should give you some perspective on why they feel about the matter as they do, but coming down to it you’ll have to decide for yourself with your own system context. 

On the other hand, equally well credentialed designers such as dcs, Wadax and others take a completely different view. So, the fundamental difference in design philosophy is not whether an external clock makes a difference in a particular application, but whether buying that extra box can be made unnecessary by designing the internal clock to a higher standard, which, of course, is less costly than putting the clock in an extra box.  As I said, I don’t know who is right but simple logic dictates that both sides can’t be right. That is uncomfortable for some, but an important question for dac shoppers.

Whatever works, works. If that means buying an external master clock with extra cables and connectors, then so be it. Nobody seems to question spending hellish amounts on cables in all categories (for what I believe can easily come down to flavor and subjectivity, despite costing thousands of $$), but external master clocks that can be had for a fair outlay seem to be drawing quite the attention as something that should be mostly avoided and/or the sonic effect of which they feel is debatable - mostly from a place of theorizing, that is. I don’t get it; in my setup the Grimm clock has made such an impact sonically that is more palpable than the difference made by my Matrix Audio SI-1 optical LAN-isolator, cables swaps, DAC swaps, etc., so if anything that’s where I feel a real change can be made. 

@erik_squires wrote:

An external clock may change the sound, but "better" is arguable. 

In the right system context and protocol used the effect of an external master clock can be substantial. That is my experience, and reviewers as well. It’s not about "change" as a sideways movement; it’s improvement, plain and simple. 

The physical distance from the DAC chip increases jitter.  Ideally, the best jitter performance would be with a clock chip physically adjacent to the DAC chip itself.  

If the master clock needs to be placed in or fed to the source externally with an S/PDIF protocol, you still have the clock-signal going through the digital cable to the DAC. Even with an external clock, if its inclusion is deemed to lead to better sound, then that’s that. 

@mclinnguy  Mr. Koch is undoubtedly one of the pioneers and PD is am outstanding company.

Thanks for the interesting responses. New dacs seem to be flooding the market-some companies seem to be stepping on their own new releases with even newer releases. Choice is good, but sometimes confusing.

I see many people adding external clocks /ddc's wih chips that are inferior to the one in the dac. I do suppose they hear a "difference."

I can see how syncing up several devices might be helpful. But I agree with MSB and Meitner mostly.

Also, while Grimm makes great products, I wonder why they didn't add a clock input to their MU2 if, as someone said, they thought external clocks were so necessary.