Assessing the Sound Quality of Antelope’s 64-bit Acoustically Focused Clocking

Posted on by

This is the second of the series of blog posts and videos with Igor Levin, CEO and founder of Antelope Audio talking about clocking and Antelope’s technologies.
 
In this video Igor is explaining what is hidden behind the term Acoustically Focused Clocking, which is one of the core Antelope clocking technologies.
 

Igor explains that the idea of “focused” refers to the fact that it actually affects something real. The term “acoustically” suggests that the technology is not based only on cold mathematical formulas and specs, but on the actual perception of the sound itself.
 
The innovative nature of Antelope Audio’s clocking technologies is something Igor says creates some “difficulties when we have to deal with requests for certain measurements”. The reason is Antelope’s technology is based on “addressing certain acoustical considerations and the numbers that people use are not the appropriate ways to measure it.” “It’s like trying to measure the weight of a person in meters,” says Igor.
 
Check out the video and share how you feel about assessing the sound quality. Are the numbers or human perception what finally matters?
 

 
Transcripción
 
La idea de “enfocado” sugiere que de hecho afecta a algo y es “acústicamente” implicando que no se seleccionó por sus propiedades físicas o por… ya sabes, la determinación no se hizo sólo de manera sobria usando fórmulas, sino que realmente fue encaminada a influir. En vez de influir en las especificaciones matemáticas, se trataba de influir en el sonido y eso también es algo que crea un poco de dificultad al tratar con clientes que envían peticiones: “Ok, dime cuantos picosegundos es esto o lo otro” porque quieren ponerle un número, mientras que la tecnología que hemos creado se basa en dirigir ciertas consideraciones acústicas. Debido a la tecnología que usamos, la medida del jitter estándar como cuantos picosegundos, es algo… es una medida algo ridícula. No hay acuerdo sobre las especificaciones, no hay un acuerdo universal sobre un modo técnico de medir realmente la calidad del sonido. Las medidas que usamos son algo del siglo pasado.
 
No pueden reflejar el desarrollo de la tecnología. Supongo que la ingeniería es bastante conservadora, por lo que no ha habido realmente una idea de cómo medir algo que refleja el modo en que suena. Así que, tenemos que usar términos subjetivos como, cómo suena, que suena como esto o suena como lo otro… que la tecnología afecta a la acústica.
 

2 thoughts on “Assessing the Sound Quality of Antelope’s 64-bit Acoustically Focused Clocking”

  1. This video interests me. This attitude and the ideas that are born from it interest me. The difference between audio with and without the better clock is obvious…but quite difficult to articulate. Yes the image is a bit better and maybe the low frequencies actually sound more phase coherent. But how do we measure that? Might the correct measurement come as the result of a new vocabulary? The imagination must expand first to accommodate the creation of the device yes? It has always been difficult to use language to describe a sound. Perhaps some new words?

  2. Hi Newton, thanks for your comment. You’re right it is very difficult to describe the sound. In fact this description is quite subjective and is based very much on man’s experience and the ability to evaluate the quality of sound. Here’s a link to another short video where some professionals with pretty long background in music industry are explaining their feelings about Antelope’s sound – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vmp-LvwZT1w