|
Word Clock, whats the point?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Eric J |
| OK, so I have read a lot of articles that mention using an external Word clock for your audio interface. From the tone in some of these articles, it makes it seem like that just adding a word clock to your setup somehow improves the sound. I'm terribly confused by this. I can understand if you are trying to sync multiple digital devices, but san someone explain to me why you would need an external Word clock if all you have is a single audio interface? Does it really improve the sound? |
|
|
| davidbuhau |
sounds to me like somebody is trying to get us to spend MORE MONEY
don't buy this, i just don't think you need it
david |
|
|
| palm |
| theres a word clock input/output on my soundcard, i dont know what its there for but i assume u can somehow use it to sync samplerate/bitrate-phase somehow with multiple soundcards or maybe multiple computers, i dont know. for us amateurs i dont think its anything to think of. |
|
|
| No Left Turn |
If you're recording with multiple devices like preamps, ADC's, DAC's, multiple interfaces, and what not... then they all need to be clocked together so that they all stay sample accurate and record at the exact same sample rate. Even though these devices may all be set to the same sample rate, they still have their inherent fluctuations and can result in pops and clicks in the recording. Clocking them all together with a master clock, will sync them all together and ensure that they all run at the same speed/rate/whatever.
Word clock is just one of many forms of clock. You can use Word Clock through BNC or S/PDIF, though, BNC tends to be more of a stable signal. Devices can also be clocked through ADAT/Optical. Necessary if you're using multiples of the above mentioned devices, but for people that just run a sound card with plug-ins, clock is unnecessary. |
|
|
| DavidArmant |
In pro studios we use word clock to import tracks from various devices.
In home studio, there is no need unless you absolutely have to have it for something. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
I have it on my 828... never used it.
Any form of digital transmission has to use a clock*. Most devices try to generate their own clock, and if the accuracy of said clock is poor enough (jitter), it can actually cause bit errors, which sound pretty god-awful.
The clock has to be WAY off for this to happen, but supposedly it can happen. In that case, you can use an external clock to force all devices to stay in sync. Word clock is just the type of clock signal being referred to.
To make a long story short, if you (a) don't have any devices talking over S/PDIF or ADAT, and/or (b) don't have any devices that require an external clock signal, and/or (c) aren't hearing any bit errors, then you don't need a special word clock. If there were any chance of a word clock improving the sound for you, it would be in the context of eliminating very audible and obvious errors.
* Technically this isn't universally true; however, the exceptions aren't really worth mentioning here. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
OK, actually I kind of lied. Well, omitted something. If you're powering analog speakers or an analog preamp directly from your audio interface, then the quality of the clock can also affect the output of the onboard DACs.
However, if you've gone to the trouble of purchasing a reasonably high-end (say $500+) interface, it almost certainly has a stable clock signal and odds are vanishingly small that an external clock would be better enough to make an appreciable difference.
For me, this is a moot point, because my audio interface is fed digitally into yet another receiver.
If you have any intention of getting a special clock for this reason, know that it is utterly pointless if you work entirely in the digital domain, because although it might make some absurdly marginal improvement in what comes out of your speakers, the digital audio file you're bouncing will still have never left your digital computer and will be exactly the same as before.
If you route your mix through an analog compressor or mixer or something, you might care about this - but even then, as I said above, I would defy even the most trained professional to point out the difference in an A/B/X test on modern equipment. |
|
|
| Eric J |
Thanks, Digi, that's pretty much what I figured, but I thought I'd ask. I do have few outboard synths, so I am not working entirely in the digital domain, but they are all running through a MOTU 24 I/O, which I think would qualify as a reasonably high quality interface with a fairly stable clock.
Also, I just upgraded from Event PS6 monitors to higher end Mackie HR824's, so I wanted to make sure that I wasn't missing something by having some type of external clock source. The Mackies have improved my monitoring environment considerably, but I wanted to make sure that it was as accurate as possible, and by what you and others have said, the setup I have currently is just fine in terms of quality. |
|
|
|
|
