Mutec MC-3+

hi,

just a quick report after receiving and testing the MC3+ : simply amazing...

There are only good remarks about it so I won't copy them.

I just wanted to mention that when you add it between your drive and the DAC you realise how the "timing" of the data you send to the DAC is THE critical point of digital audio. Such product allows the DAC to be fed correctly and it changes your rather good hifi in something that sounds like High End stuff :-)

Power supply is key point as well of course...

Rgds

I have a custom 2 enclosure fan-less PC based off CAPS v4 running WS2012 R2 w/ AO core mode that's dedicated to only playing music. This goes to the BADA Alpha USB Converter via a Cabledyne Reference Silver USB Cable and out to my DAC AMR DP-777 via a Cabledyne Reference Silver XLR Digital Cable.

My question here is: Would I benefit "ANY" by adding the MUTEC MC-3+ Smart Clock between the Alpha USB Converter and the DAC?

So it would look like this:

PC --> USB cable --> Alpha USB Converter --> XLR cable --> Mutec MC+3 --> XLR Cable --> To the DACs XLR input.

Very difficult to predict...

In case the source has no jitter at all, putting a re-clocker into the chain can not reduce any jitter at all...

Not all dacs are created equal - some react more on jitter at the input than others...

Knowing both, the source jitter spectrum and the re-clocker's jitter transfer function would be great... I don't know neither...

So far, the only way to get an answer to your question seem to be: give it a try...

Ulli

PS:

Using XLR is fine in this case - I'm sure.

Aysnchronous USB includes their own oscillators locally- the Alpha USB has very good ones, and it controls the feed to the associated DAC. while I have both an Alpha USB (for when I occasionally need to hook up to a Macbook or PC via USB) and a Mutec, I have't used them together. would be best to borrow one to try out, as there might not be much if any benefit. OTOH, depending on the quality of your cables, and if you have a long run from your USB to the Mutec, and short to the DAC, maybe there would be some benefit. But I wouldn't be expecting much in this combination.

Aysnchronous USB includes their own oscillators locally- the Alpha USB has very good ones, and it controls the feed to the associated DAC. while I have both an Alpha USB (for when I occasionally need to hook up to a Macbook or PC via USB) and a Mutec, I have't used them together. would be best to borrow one to try out, as there might not be much if any benefit. OTOH, depending on the quality of your cables, and if you have a long run from your USB to the Mutec, and short to the DAC, maybe there would be some benefit. But I wouldn't be expecting much in this combination.

Jon, I read of your Mutec on another site, but I couldn't find a report of the resulting sound quality.

What happened?

dup removed - sorry

Just found this video:

[video=youtube;4q-T4XnUCeE]

They talk about the new 3+ USB.

Beneath 3+ USB there is a new Mutec 10 MHz clock - will have much better spec than any Rb clock I know ,-)

Ulli

Just found this video:

[video=youtube;4q-T4XnUCeE]

 

They talk about the new 3+ USB.

Beneath 3+ USB there is a new Mutec 10 MHz clock - will have much better spec than any Rb clock I know ,-)

 

Ulli

Wow! This sounds very interesting. Studio clock/reclocker plus USB converter at a very attractive price point. Any idea how much the 10M is going to be? How do you know about specs?

Best regards

Any idea how much the 10M is going to be?

How do you know about specs?

I'm quite sure Mutec's design will be way better than my DIY style.

Cheers,

Ulli

Hi,

Christian Peters of Mutec asked me to post his statement in the german forum aktives-hoeren - might be of interest to some here, too.

Key message:

New MC-3+ Smart Clock USB will come with these audio interfaces

- S/P-DIF (optisch, coaxial, BNC)

- AES3 (XLR), AES3id (BNC)

To allow for this extension on audio interfaces at the given space, the number of word clock outputs is reduced from 6 to 4 - taking into account that word clock signal is less imported in the audiophile context.

And: MC-3+ Smart Clock USB will be available in black, too.

Ulli

Hi, Ulli.

I am still saving up for the MC-3+.

I already have two LPFRS 10MHz Oscillators & Omron PS's.

Please keep posting your impressions.

The following is a recent note from Jon regarding the set-up parameters...

Wrote up some further thoughts on the re-clocking setups and comparing the DCD-8 to the Mutech MC-3 plus. I'm going to copy a bit of that here, as it's very relevant to the budget re-clocking topic.

 

Last weekend I replaced a power cable to the LPFRS that had broken at the DB9 connector when packing this up and moving over to GF's. Then I spent some time working on the setup and menu configuration of the DCD8, and I started to recall what a PITA this was back in late 2010 when we were getting the DCD8 operation sorted out for my colleague in Munich's system- he had to go back to the recording studio he had bought it from used (they were upgrading to a Zodiac 10M) and get a walk through on the process.

 

Well, this Wednesday evening we got this sorted out- the sticking point I'd forget is that you can't get rate reference from the input (where the sample rate is tracked and set by the input) AND 10MHz re-clocking from the reference oscillator on WC1 at the same time- instead, you have to set the WC-1 up for the desired input and domain and use the learn function to "teach" it that it's getting a 10MHz GPS reference oscillator input, then manually set the sample rate on that domain- for any change on the input rate, one must manually reset the rate. So, to go from 44.1 KHz to 88.2 kHz or 96 kHz, you have to know the rate of the incoming program material and by the front panel menus reset for the new rate. Something of a PITA, compared with what we're used to with "normal" DAC setups.

 

But man, when it is locked in to the 10MHz WC-1 clock and you compare that to just standard pass through, with auto rate set, there's no doubt about which way to go... finally I've got this setup right in the home system, as of last night!

 

Now, in this regard the DCD8 is NOT as flexible as the Mutec MC-3 Plus seems to offer more flexible functionality, as by the manual one of the several re-clocking functions, besides using the internal clock generator, is an "asynchronous" with re-clock aligned with the external reference (10MHz oscillator, in this case). So, this SHOULD provide re-clocking but with automatic sample rate tracking on the input.

 

How will the re-clocking compare with the DCD8? Don't know yet, but obviously I'll want to get the second LPFRS and supply built up and tested soon, and try out this configuration- in principle I COULD have do direct A/B as long as I'm willing to use different outputs and inputs on the M50 and TotalDAC-D1- (AES and S/PDIF), though to be fair, I should test both with either.

 

Of course, relying on subjective impressions is bothersome to me- not for myself, but for making any kind of recommendation to the community. (I am seeing more and more the desirability of finding a good used sample of Audio Precision Model 2- easier said than done, especially with a pending marriage by daughter next year I'm going to need to dig into my piggy bank for!) Of course, there is the cost advantage of the Mutec MC+3 Plus, though. And from the information provided, I believe it will work in balanced single wire mode all the way up to 192 kHz, unlike the DCD8, which needs double wire mode, which is not supported on most consumer DACs. So, this could be a big plus for the Mutec all in all- but must test it out. Hopefully soon.

 

Here's the relevant part of the Mutec manual:

 

 

 

 

 

Could be some real significant functional advantages, but I still need to satisfy myself that the sonics are comparable at least. Of course, as good a reports as these are getting other places even without the 10M reference clock, it's likely a fairly safe bet in my book. But then I bought one with very little up front to go on, except a write up in a Markertek email and what I could find online.

 

Hi Bill,

Mutec MC-3 Plus seems to offer more flexible functionality, as by the manual one of the several re-clocking functions, besides using the internal clock generator, is an "asynchronous" with re-clock aligned with the external reference (10MHz oscillator, in this case). So, this SHOULD provide re-clocking but with automatic sample rate tracking on the input.

Let me pls add this:

LPFRS is the clock my 10 MHz journey started with - good for a first trial.

OCXOs are normally a better choice for this application - mid/long term stability is less important here...

hth

Ulli

Let me pls add this:

LPFRS is the clock my 10 MHz journey started with - good for a first trial.

OCXOs are normally a better choice for this application - mid/long term stability is less important here...

The LPFRS has 50 ohm output connector and cabling, but the MC-3+ has 75 ohm input. I would assume the internal word clock termination needs to be disabled as per page 20 on the manual, and then externally terminated with a BNC-T piece and a 50 ohm terminator instead right?

That would probably apply to most scientific and industrial type equipment as well, e.g. Orbital Research POS OCXO.

Short answer: do use 75 ohm cabling to connect a 10 MHz source do the 75 ohm specified input.

Longer answer adresses two topics:

• line impedance describes who waves are traveling on a line. As long as the impedance does not change there is just a wave traveling in just one direction: from source to load.
  
  from: Reflection coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  

=> your cable impedance should have the same impedance as its termination:

75 ohm in case of a MC-3+ 10 MHz input

• A 10 MHz oscillator does have an internal impedance Zs.
  The connected load ZL creates a voltage divider.
  A manufacture states in the data sheet the signal level for a given load - normally 50 ohm.
  
  from: Reflection coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  
  

A higher load does not reduce the signal amplitude as much as the lower load does - better with respect to jitter ,-)

Don't bother about impedance mismatch at the osc. output - most likely its Zs will differ from say 50 ohm anyway. As there will be no reflection from the proper terminated line end (MC-3+), all is fine.

hth

Ulli

Short answer: do use 75 ohm cabling to connect a 10 MHz source do the 75 ohm specified input.

 

Longer answer adresses two topics:

 

• line impedance describes who waves are traveling on a line. As long as the impedance does not change there is just a wave traveling in just one direction: from source to load.
  [ATTACH=CONFIG]15658[/ATTACH]
  from: Reflection coefficient - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  

 

=> your cable impedance should have the same impedance as its termination:

75 ohm in case of a MC-3+ 10 MHz input

 

[...]

 

Don't bother about impedance mismatch at the osc. output - most likely its Zs will differ from say 50 ohm anyway. As there will be no reflection from the proper terminated line end (MC-3+), all is fine.

 

hth

Ulli

But isn't a change from a 50 ohm source to 75 ohm cabling a break in impedance already? For example, LPFRS has CMA output which is a 50 ohm system. If you link a 75 ohm cable to a male CMA connector on the oscillator side, there's a break right there. Wouldn't running all the cabling in 50 ohm, terminate with a 50 ohm BNC terminator through a T-piece and run the MC-3+ with high impedance input be less of a break in the pipeline?

But isn't a change from a 50 ohm source to 75 ohm cabling a break in impedance already?

But, 1) what is the impedance inside the osc. before the signal reaches the connector? and 2.) line impedance is a physical description of what happens on a wire which is a valid description only in case cable length is long compared to wave length - which is about 20 m for 10 MHz on a cable.

For example, LPFRS has CMA output which is a 50 ohm system.

If you link a 75 ohm cable to a male CMA connector on the oscillator side, there's a break right there.

Wouldn't running all the cabling in 50 ohm, terminate with a 50 ohm BNC terminator through a T-piece and run the MC-3+ with high impedance input be less of a break in the pipeline?

You have to take into account the MC-3+ internal impedance which isn't infinite and which is in parallel to the terminator

=> your proposed cable termination will be lower than 50 ohm

=> your proposed cable termination causes unwanted reflections.

just my 2 ct

Ulli

Sure it is a break.

But, 1) what is the impedance inside the osc. before the signal reaches the connector? and 2.) line impedance is a physical description of what happens on a wire which is a valid description only in case cable length is long compared to wave length - which is about 20 m for 10 MHz on a cable.

Thanks for the perspective. However, given the good job that Mutec did with MC-3+, I think the new 10MHz clock would merit serious consideration when it comes out. Then impedance mismatch like this would be a moot point.

I think the new 10MHz clock would merit serious consideration when it comes out.

Then impedance mismatch like this would be a moot point.

First of all: As long as you don't know the output impedance of a given clock...

Signal strength at a given load doesn't tell anything at all about this topic...

Second, I'm pretty sure that there will be done a "good job that Mutec" again.

br

Ulli

Hi Bill,

Using MC-3+ since quite a while with various sample rate material, I can confirm: MC-3+ automatically adjusts sample rate to the input material - in both modes, with and without 10 MHz applied.

 

Let me pls add this:

LPFRS is the clock my 10 MHz journey started with - good for a first trial.

OCXOs are normally a better choice for this application - mid/long term stability is less important here...

 

hth

Ulli

Hi Ulli,

The new MC-3+ USB will adjust to the incoming sample rate on the AES/EBU or BNC input as well as with the USB input?

Any idea as to the release date or price?

Thanks for the information.

Joel

Hi Joel,

I never had the chance so far to try an MC-3+ USB smart clock - I'ld be surprised in case the new version does not adjust automatically...

Recently I could work with an MC-1.2 beta - it played via USB all sample rates without any further action - didn't even think about how to adjust sample rate at this nice gizmo ,-)

As far as I know, release was planed beginning next year. Due to the audio interface changes, a small delay might happen ,-)

Watch the small video at about 1:30 for price information, pls.

Cheers

Ulli

However, given the good job that Mutec did with MC-3+, I think the new 10MHz clock would merit serious consideration when it comes out. Then impedance mismatch like this would be a moot point.

Ref10 output impedance will be 75 ohm - good job, as expected ,-)

Ulli

Mutec now has a march 2015 Tape Op test report here on their site.

click on the image on the Mutec page to get the report.

Some nice statements:

• Two clocks in series? Those nutty audiophiles! ---snip---
  daisychaining two of the clocks together. I’m about to step into audiophile-speak here, but we were able to hear...
  

• However, audiophiles are a fascinating group who are interested in tiny, incremental improvements in their playback systems. I don’t believe that any single small improvement is really a big deal, but I do believe that enough of those improvements (or the removal of them) can add up to something significant.
  

Happy ears

Ulli

Mutec MC-1.2 Bi-directional USB & Digital Audio Interface along with the MC-3+ Smart Clock recently ordered. Shipping from Germany so it will take till the end of the month till I get to try everything out.

It will be partnered with my:

High Performance Rubidium LPFRS 10MHz Oscillator Low Phase Noise and Spurious | eBay

[ATTACH=CONFIG]8028[/ATTACH]

and an OMRON PS:

Mutec MC-1.2 Bi-directional USB & Digital Audio Interface along with the MC-3+ Smart Clock recently ordered.

Hi Bill,

good choice. The new gear will certainly be fun. Please report!

Weren't you tempted to wait for the MC3+ USB? Cannot be that long.

Cheers

Greetings, *progear.

At my age, "a little longer" could end up being longer than I have.