For the Empirical Audio Synchro-Mesh reclocker, I posted initial impressions in # 199 on thread page 10:
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/are-transports-obsolete.30549/page-10#post-655759
Yesterday I did another detailed comparison Synchro-Mesh reclocker vs. direct from transport via AES/EBU, which turned out to be quite interesting. The CD was the famous Cantate Domino recording from 1976 in a spacious Swedish church for choir, soloists, organ and brass on the Proprius label; CD version PRCD 7762 from 1993 (in my view preferable to the CD layer of the hybrid SACD from 2003, PRSACD7762).
The church where it was recorded is Oscarskyrkan in Stockholm:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar's_Church
Recording engineer Bert Alving used a Revox A77 and only two Pearl TC4 microphones.
Three audiophile friends have heard the CD in my system (pre reclocker), and know that the sound of it does not need to stand ashamed at all in a comparison with the in audiophile circles famous LP.
I switched back and forth between reclocker and direct route transport > DAC numerous times in order to make sure that what I report on is not just a bogus impression of the moment.
Most of the comparison was on the first 2 and a half minutes of track 1 (the title track "Cantate Domino"):
The solo organ at the beginning is portrayed with great spatial depth on the recording, and is located far on the front wall upon stereo reproduction in my system (probably playing at the back wall of the church where the recording was made). The spatial depth is the same with and without reclocker, yet there is one important difference. Without reclocker the sound is equally far on the front wall, but it is more "over there": The sound does not energize the entire acoustic of the church as much. With reclocker, on the other hand, the entire acoustic is more illuminated. The organ itself, as origin of sound, is still "way over there", but the sound propagates forward and the energy fills the acoustic. Without reclocker, the sound of the organ remaining "way over there", creating a separate acoustic space, can superficially, at first glance, sound more impressive in terms of depth projection -- it is a "hifi" spectacle. Yet the sound propagation with reclocker seems more natural and real, which makes it the winner.
At first the difference in organ sound with and without reclocker may appear subtle, but once you zoom in on it, the difference in
projection of the sound into the acoustic turns out to be crucial.
The entrance of brass after more than one minute stands out more firmly with reclocker. The differentiation between brass instruments and their harmonic interplay also becomes a bit easier, and the echo projected into the acoustic more distinct.The brass sound radiates more energy into the space of the church.
After the brief brass interlude, the female choir sings softly a capella, soon to be joined by male choir voices which then leads into a rise of volume before solo organ sets in again. With reclocker, the sound of the choir is more immediate, with greater transparency as if a thin veil had been lifted, and there is greater articulation. The sound is more alive, less flat. The choir voices also make the large acoustic resonate with more energy, creating a stronger atmosphere. Even though it might be the initial impression, the greater immediacy of the choir sound is *not* the result of the choir moving forward in space compared to direct route transport > DAC; the location in the church appears to be the same. The dynamic surge in the singing towards the end of this episode projects more energy into the acoustic and thus stands out more.
***
I checked some other tracks. The greater transparency, immediacy and articulation of the choir, with enhanced projection of energy into the acoustic, is also evident in the soft a capella singing at the beginning of "Stille Nacht" (Silent Night) and in "Il est ne le divin enfant" (track 8; the beginning of the second LP side). On the latter piece, the difference of with and without reclocker is quite stunning.