But there are also debates regarding weather the source clock is actually that important or not, or if there are other solutions where this is not needed.
Obviously, it can have a huge impact but from what i understand the dac chip is still running from the DAC clock, even if it is not the master. That is still the clock that matters at the end of the day. So just because you have a perfect master clock it doesn´t mean that your DAC clock will follow it perfectly, probably. It is still a subject for noise.
Maybe you can also make the DAC clock be as precise if you give it the best possible environment to work in (the lowest possible noise floor) using other methods, like just pure filtering options and clean power. (unless the environment/components selected sets the boundaries for the noise floor potential early) 
Having said that, there is of course much more that have importance for the sound from the DAC.

Yes, this was the theory until fairly recently at least and what many manufacturers are still working with.
I asked Hans Beekhuyzen recently, after one of his latest videos, if he still believes in re-clocking (as such), since his theories are sort of implying that they are not needed, and his answer was: No.
He was a big advocate of this previously but he has noticed that it is not actually needed if you manage to serve the DAC clock an extremely clean signal, which has always been the problem and root issue, from how i understand him.
I have to say that his latest theories makes a lot of sense and is supported by things like the Network Accoustic Muon Pro streaming system and also the similar DIY throttle choke cable concept.

I'll always trust my own ears rather than the opinions of others.  I back that up with white papers written by serious designers like John Swenson.

Reclocking (e.g. of ethernet) is really about noise reduction, of both jitter and phase noise, along the datastream.

Using an external clock into a DDC or DAC is disciplining the DAC's internal clock, making it better.  This is how the Gustard works with its clock synthesiser.

I can hear the impact of both of the above, so I don't agree with Beekhuyzen's new thinking.

Sorry but if the reclocking is improving the music why should we now stop using it ? Also adding something like the LB clock is both inexpensive and reversible . So the answer is try in your system with your ears and your music . If it sounds very much better then relax and play the next track . If not then since it send it back . While I do admire those that want to know the very minor details of why something has a positive effect on the end it the result on music that matters . I can read about the reasons at my leisure but I enjoy the improvements straight away . If and some have say that is just placebo or unconscious bias then great long may it continue because Ry Closer has never sounded so sweet .

This is to help people that are new, that want to understand what to buy and why different approaches can end up giving the same, or similar, result.
As you say, it can probably be very cost effective to use a re-clocker as well.
Talking about these things, and what is being discovered in the area that maybe wasn´t known earlier, can´t be a bad thing, in my mind.
No one is claiming that something that works very well needs to be re-done or similar (or that a new way is better).

The problem with some of these digital audio discussions is that sometimes things are presented completely false (which is of course totally OK), which is why the younger generation go bananas when they read some statements around re-clocking, for example, that just doesn´t make any sense, what so ever. To win that generation over, that often knows how digital works, you need to present something that actually makes sense logically, since we can´t measure the results as of today.

Yes, maybe my statements where a bit drastic, i apologize for that. 
What i wanted to say is that there where some holes in the re-clocking theories that are very hard to explain logically. The idea that it is easier in the next step, if something is better clocked prior, is not how digital works (from what i have learnt). When the new clock starts it doesn´t matter how it was clocked before since it doesn´t take the previous information into account. The only thing that matters in digital is that the data arrives, or it doesn´t, so there is no need for that sort of logic. (Please correct me if i am wrong)

Since the result when implementing an additional clock has been very positive, one has tried to find explanations for this, naturally. This is why this theory has been presented, i believe. Mostly because there where no better explanations, i would guess.

For those who has had very sophisticated setups, and then recently tried the full-on throttle choke concept, it has been clear that you can get the same (they seem to report better!) results just by filtering, instead of involving things like re-clocking.
These types of findings has made people re-think what is actually going on since it only seem to be about noise and its only the last clock that seem to matter.

I also haven´t tried everything, far from it, and i don´t even have an impressive setup by others standard!
But if you see what people are saying, that is switching to passive filtering (Network Accoustic and Throttle choke setups), it is very clear they do very well without re-clocking anything.
Having said this, i can certainly be very wrong! Note that I only echo what others are trying to figure out, which also seem to make sense to me, so its not something i have come up with myself.
I have however been fairly shocked (sorry for that word, I couldn´t come up with a better one...) by the result of Throttle Choke concept.

I have a boutique built dac, from Dion Audio, in my amp that is built on the Burr Brown 1795 chip.

That was fairly good 10 years ago but not so much today, i imagine. (just guessing)

My own experience is mostly built on having brought my different stages of ferrit chokes (power and WiFi client) combinations, as it evolved, to other people setups and listen together with them and by that gathered confidence in trusting the logic. But also reading and discussing what others have found in this area, during the last year on other forums, that often put a lot of effort into improving their ethernet noise floor prior to trying this.

Not easy for you to try a master clock. I think for your DAC a reclocker might help, but totally understand if you rather not try

Reclocking is just one way of reducing noise on the analogue carrier (see below). A throttle cable is another. Yet another is to use grounding boxes along the chain. And one final one is vibration control. Take your pick of methods, we have all chosen differently but all are valid.


Careful: digital data transport is impervious within boundaries. The digital data sits on top of an analogue carrier which is much more subject to noise.