[OCC7N]

If you had bad past experience with someone, it is better to avoid comments on the beginning of the conversation which can be perceived as a derogatory generic characterisation of the respondent. It looks like looking for the automatic stamp of approval from the audience on your point of view or bringing support from individuals with wrong intent. Happily trolls didn't come up this time, but it is observed in many other places.

I accept your apology that your comment was not directed on me, but not the explanation. If you read the above paraghaph, you will understand it is all wrong. Mutual respect is neccessary for the positive outcome. Any indication of disrespect stimulate pointless aguing or turns discussion into unnecessary drivel.

I am trying to start new topic clean, as those who participate may don't know our past. Those who know, don't want experience it all over again. I am not free of limitations or mistakes, but you can not accuse me for a bad intent. It is on the conclusion, I am hope we are now fine.
--------------------------

Coming back to the topic, discussion inevitable leads to the conclusion which is consistent with my initial evaluation. @OCC7N can you hear?

1. Open port is fine, but may rise question of interferences.

2. Pin-less cap is harmless and cures suspicions of interferences.

3. Terminating cap (a) takes care of the shape of the signal we don't 'consume' (pointless), (b) gives a solution for the reflections that may not occur at all (short leads), (c) is not free of negative consequences.

I am convinced that additional switching load on power and ground planes cannot be ignored even in a good design. It is a first place where noise appear. Regression of filtration capabilities of the power supply at increased load has been covered as well, it is a second place.

Yes, I read that LDO power supply has to be current loaded for optimal filtration. Designers know well about this issue, even if they don't, the associated components draw enough current to bring LDO out of the idle zone. We don't need to investigate design level details. It looks to me brought in purpose of arguing.

Now is a time to verify our finding in practice. Some members had ordered terminators and pin-less caps, looking after test results.

Thanks . To be honest Im gonna try without and see if it works, and If I hear my neighbours dog acting more weird than usual, I will buy some caps.

 

[PeterCraig]

I thought the ock-2 master clock had selectable dip switches for 50/75 ohms.

It seems alot of sellers are offering 50 or 75 ohm options.

Can anyone shed some light on that?

I believe they will set all the dip switches to either the 50 or 75 ohm setting upon request.

Saves one the trouble of opening up the box upon arrival.

 

[dougms3]

It has for all outputs yes. Who said it does not?

I talked with the europe seller. He confirmed it is user configurable. 50 and 75 on ALL ports.

Ok was just curious because it seems they have a 50 ohm version and a 75 ohm, not sure why they do that if its selectable.

 

[PeterCraig]

TOTL Afterdark for sale 2nd hand in Canada. Reputable seller.

https://www.canuckaudiomart.com/det...-giesemann-eva-ocxo-10mhz-reference-master-c/

 

[OCC7N]

Ok was just curious because it seems they have a 50 ohm version and a 75 ohm, not sure why they do that if its selectable.

Yes this also confused me. Bu they switch the dipswitches for you I guess.

I thought they would change the connectors, but they stay “75” as I understand

 

[OCC7N]

OCK-2 OWNERS:

How hot does it get?

The switch SW8 gets very hot after some reading.

I was wondering if its the same with OCK-2

 

[PeterCraig]

About the same as room temp here.

 

[OCC7N]

About the same as room temp here.

Ok thanks. I just saw the video of changing the impedance and noticed the whole pcb is actually upside down. Thats pretty weird

 

[OCC7N]

My question was answered earlier in the thread:
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/master-clock-talk.228428/page-6

 

[OCC7N]

I only don't understand why in my OCK-2 there are two switches on "grounded" and four on "isolated"...

Did you ever find an answer why the ground and iso was set differently?

 

[dougms3]

Did you ever find an answer why the ground and iso was set differently?

I'm just gonna take a guess and say that because there are only going to be two devices connected to it the clock, the other outputs are isolated.

But would this create an issue if using those center caps with the pins because wouldn't they need to be set to ground to function properly?

Is there any danger of damaging the device if the settings are incorrect with those center pin caps? @JaMo

 

[JaMo]

I'm just gonna take a guess and say that because there are only going to be two devices connected to it the clock, the other outputs are isolated.

But would this create an issue if using those center caps with the pins because wouldn't they need to be set to ground to function properly?

Is there any danger of damaging the device if the settings are incorrect with those center pin caps? @JaMo

Hi @dougms3

I would not take that risk to damage anything with a short cut. It may be safe but I am not intending to investigate the buffer design.

I think the discussion has gone a bit "bananas". My initital suggestion for the no pin caps is based on:

1. The LHY OCK-2 is a precision device that has a brilliant shielding, fully used, both externally and internally, but..
2. if it is used with only one or two connected devices (ex. DDC, dac) as most user probably have, You have 4 or 5 open channels/tunnels right into the clock department.
I am not concerned about the centre pins with electronics as antennas but more the openings into the clock department combined.
3. With the OCK-2 we can buy a very very good Master Clock for the low price compared to the other brands on the same performance level, but..
4. You can't "get it all". If, it would cost more, and we don't want that, right?!

If we look at Mutec REF10's design, the BNC connectors are of a higher quality/class, They are mainly of metal, Mutec also use a tiny transformer for galvanic isolation on each output. Mutec also have the feature to "kill" unused outputs... But Mutec has another pricetag. I guess You (all) know that.

I like the LHY OCK-1 and the OCK-2 a lot. I like the LHY approach to let users get this level of performance for decent money. The OCK-1 and OCK-2 both do their thing very well and for me, now using the OCK-2 with the U18 and the R26 from Gustard, I have the caps without centre pins on the four unused outputs. It works like it should without any problems and I can sleep with peace in mind knowing that I have shut the openings and completed the shielding of the box in total. In short, I am happy with it.

/Jan

 

[OCC7N]

Hi @dougms3

I would not take that risk to damage anything with a short cut. It may be safe but I am not intending to investigate the buffer design.

I think the discussion has gone a bit "bananas". My initital suggestion for the no pin caps is based on:

1. The LHY OCK-2 is a precision device that has a brilliant shielding, fully used, both externally and internally, but..
2. if it is used with only one or two connected devices (ex. DDC, dac) as most user probably have, You have 4 or 5 open channels/tunnels right into the clock department.
I am not concerned about the centre pins with electronics as antennas but more the openings into the clock department combined.
3. With the OCK-2 we can buy a very very good Master Clock for the low price compared to the other brands on the same performance level, but..
4. You can't "get it all". If, it would cost more, and we don't want that, right?!

If we look at Mutec REF10's design, the BNC connectors are of a higher quality/class, They are mainly of metal, Mutec also use a tiny transformer for galvanic isolation on each output. Mutec also have the feature to "kill" unused outputs... But Mutec has another pricetag. I guess You (all) know that.

I like the LHY OCK-1 and the OCK-2 a lot. I like the LHY approach to let users get this level of performance for decent money. The OCK-1 and OCK-2 both do their thing very well and for me, now using the OCK-2 with the U18 and the R26 from Gustard, I have the caps without centre pins on the four unused outputs. It works like it should without any problems and I can sleep with peace in mind knowing that I have shut the openings and completed the shielding of the box in total. In short, I am happy with it.

/Jan

Hi JaMo. The question @roberto2 had was why are all the switches not the same ground/isolation.

So its something about they/factory think user will only use two of the ports and set them to ground?

I think its a legit question. But I did not understand.

Should we only dip the switches to ground for used ports and isolation for unused?

 

[JaMo]

Hi JaMo. The question @roberto2 had was why are all the switches not the same ground/isolation.

So its something about they/factory think user will only use two of the ports and set them to ground?

I think its a legit question. But I did not understand.

Should we only dip the switches to ground for used ports and isolation for unused?

Hi @OCC7N ,

I can't answer why they set the dip switches that way. In my unit, when I got it, all outputs was set to 50 Ohm and the three Sine wave outputs was set to ISO, Square wave outputs was set to GND.

When I listened and measured them they didn't differ in the resulsts (sound or measurements). I don't know why the designer wanted the outputs to "float" from GND. There is a capacitor still connected in "float" (ISO) mode. With a correct impedance matching in sender - cable - receiver, it should be fine. As I wrote in the short review earlier: In ISO mode the impedance of the receiving gear hold the valid value. Maybe it is a possibility to reduce hum (50/60Hz) in sensitive rigs.. I don't know (?)

I have put all my outputs in GND mode. For the moment I use two square wave outputs on the OCK-2.

/Jan

 

[Dandoudou]

@roberto2 lent me his OCK-2 during two weeks, so I could compare it to my OCK-1.

I compared them with two setups :
- EtherRegen (+10 mhz) > Allo USBridge Sig > Di-20 HE (+10 mhz) > R26 (+10 mhz)
- EtherRegen (+10 mhz) > R26 (+10 mhz)

Most of the time, there was no audible difference between the clocks. It was impossible to hear a difference on instrumental tracks or on male voices.
Only on some tracks with female voices, I could hear a very small difference of timbre on the voice of the singer, and the sound of the OCK-2 was very slightly smoother.
But I could not hear a difference on other tracks with female voices.

To confirm my conclusions, I submitted Mrs. Dandoudou to a blind test. It was an A/B comparison between the clocks, with 5 tracks of different female singers.
She said that the sound of the two clocks was the same. On two tracks, she preferred the OCK-2 and said the voice of the singer was slightly smoother. On one track, she said that the sound with the OCK-1 was better.

Yesterday, @roberto2 and me compared the clocks on his system that is as following :
- EtherRegen (+10 mhz) > SoTM streamer > Di-20 HE (+10 mhz) > Terminator Plus

We played a few tracks, and could not notice a difference in sound between the clocks.

Following these experiences, I can say that OCK-1 owners have no reason to upgrade to OCK-2, unless they need more outputs.