Has anyone added a Rossini clock to their Bartok, or had a demo? If you have I would be very interested in your impressions and thoughts. I will of course be having a demo myself but others’ views most welcome. There are plenty of reviews of the impact of adding a clock to the Rossini but not to the Bartok, at least not that I can find. Thanks!
1 Like
I’ve got a Rossini clock with my Bartok. Makes a significant difference thats very easily discernible. You’ll have to decide for yourself if the difference is worth it though. Get your dCS dealer to set it up for you 
2 Likes
Great to know, thank you.
I’m very impressed with my recently acquired Bartok and pondering whether to consider (via a demo) the clock next or try a serious power conditioner - I swapped out a couple of standard mains cables recently for Shunyata venom cables and was shocked at the improvement just those two cables on my power amps made
FYI
A Bartok + Clock almost equals the cost of a Rossini
Best
Gregg
1 Like
And underlining Gregg’s point, a Rossini alone would be better than a Bartok + Rossini clock. When your dealer demonstrates the Bartok + Rossini clock get him to demonstrate a Rossini DAC to compare.
1 Like
Both reasonable points but I happen to have a Bartok already so that makes it somewhat academic. Buying a Rossini clock Still gives me an option of upgrading the DAC at some point.
1 Like
Well, i use Bartoc dac with Rossini clock. In my opinion, the sound is a bit better in all aspects than Bartok alone
1 Like
Lets not forget that the Bartok does a few things the Rossini doesn’t. If you use the headphone amp like i do, then upgrading to a Rossini would mean some serious money being spent on a decent headphone amp.
I have just ordered the Rossini clock for my Bartok. It was the clock or an Innuos Zennith Mk3… Clock first and the Innuos at a later date.
Reviews and comments online all indicate a noticeable improvement from using a clock.
2 Likes
Thanks. All good points.
I was in the same position as you. I wanted to remove headphone listening from my dedicated two channel room and a Bartok was ordered as the foundation of that system. It’s performance far exceeded my expectations and led me to wonder how good a Rossini could actually be. On a leap of faith my Linn Klimax DS was removed from the Naim system and is now employed as the source for headphone duties.
The Bartok was returned to the dealer and a new Rossini and Master Clock will be with me shortly. They will take up residence in the Naim system.
Best
Gregg
1 Like
Greetings all! I’m a new Bartók owner, replacing a Delius/Purcell/Verona/Verdi stack which had served me well for a long long time. Needless to say the 1 box Bartók was a serious improvement over the old stack. Plus since I am also enjoying headphone usage for late nights, the Bartók headphone amp is as good as any serious hp amp I have or tried.
I am very interested to learn what level improvement can be achieved with adding a Rossini clock to the Bartók given it’s almost 50% cost of Bartók.
Thanks all for your comments and experience!
Others with more experience than me have already weighed in, but I will throw in my two cents. My first listen to dCS equipment was early this year, when I decided to audition it for my speaker system, a process I detailed elsewhere. My conclusion was that, as good as Bartok is, it is made audibly better with Rossini Clock, close to but not quite the same as a Rossini DAC. And that Rossini DAC is also made audibly better by the addition of the Clock. For me, it wasn’t anything like the laundry list of audiophile sound improvements that people use to describe equipment. It was a much more organic, “lifelike-ness,” a sense of realism that was made more tangible and apparent with each improvement. Only your ears and wallet can decide if the investment is worth it. And, of course, if headphone listening is a critical role for your Bartok, and you don’t want to swap it for a DAC and separate headphone amp, then the Clock makes a lot of sense. [Good power is very important, and while cables make a difference, I would invest in the best quality components/power first.]
1 Like
Many thanks. Very helpful thoughts, much appreciated.
1 Like
Greg,
Thanks for your input. Very sensible and with which I agree totally.
Nothing can replace a live demo at the dealer of the Bartok, with and without the Rossini clock.
Cheers!
Do you have any idea of using Puccini clock together with Bartok? Is it better than using Bartok alone? Thanks
I would expect an improvement, based on 2 sources. There was an article In Audio Beat when the Vivaldi came out, that there was an improvement just adding the Puccini clock to the Vivaldi DAC. Also there was a technical explanation by the dCS team on this forum on why a master clock with its own powered circuit can be an improvement.
The downside with previous generation is that lack of Auto clocking, which means having to select the frequency based on the music source.
Using a Puccini clock with a Bartok is not really a practical proposition IMO.
The second generation of dCS equipment , which includes the Puccini and Paganini, used only a single clock in/out connection for both frequency bases ( 44.1 and 48). The current ( third) generation (which includes Bartok) requires two distinct inputs /outputs , one for each group. The Puccini does not have this output facility and therefore cannot be successfully used with the Bartok unless you are prepared to manually change the clock groups every time that the base frequency of the file changes. Nowadays with streaming sources such as Qobuz where file resolution can change from album to album that seems to me to be too demanding for a relaxed listening session. Of course if you only ever listen to 16/44.1…
The cheapest dCS clock that matches the Bartok’s requirements is the Rossini, but then the viability of the combination becomes questionable due to the cost involved compared to buying a Rossini DAC ( sans clock).
1 Like
I concur with what Pete said with regards to trying to use a Puccini or Paganini clock with the Bartok. Having only one wordclock frequency at a time does not fully fulfil the functionality which the Rossini clock, with 2 concurrent wordclock frequecies, can provide.
But in actual use on a Bartok, having only one wordclock frequency available is not as inconvenient as it may seem. I have been experimenting with my Bartok, by adding a 44.1kHz wordclock input. The Bartok can be set to this as Wordclock 1. If a track requiring a 48kHz signal is played on the Bartok, the Bartok will automatically default to it own internal clock. Then when the next track requiring 44.1kHz comes on, the Bartok will automatically select Wordclock 1 external signal again. So it just means if fed with only 1 wordclock signal, only that external signal will be utilized. No need to reset or change settings on the Bartok as other files are played.
How was the sound with an external clock? I’m awaiting an in-home demo but interested in your perceptions. Thanks.
You will hear an improvement. However,as I have mentioned elsewhere, the improvement that an external clock brings to any DAC is IMO related more to the music than the sound. So do expect better musical flow, more emotional involvement, perhaps even new musical insights. But if you only listen by ticking off features from the audiophile lexicon e.g. better bass, treble, detail, soundstage etc. you may wonder what the fuss is about.
1 Like