Precisely my point. I’d prefer to have as few additional “signatures”—electronic or mechanical—injected into the music as possible.
Pete, yes, getting a firmware-limited PlayStation 3 working can be challenging and not for the IT-averse. I’m not an IT guy, though I enjoy technology, and realize many do not. . And yes, “trivial” may be a bit of an exaggeration (though in my defense, I did say “almost” 
). The PS3 was my first foray into SACD ripping in 2012, and it took quite a few hours over several days to get it working reliably. A large part of the challenge was the difficulty of “assembling” all the instructions and making sure I had the right package installed. Anyway, I still have that PS3, and as recently as last year did a comparison rip between it and my two Oppos and MSB Transport (which uses an Oppo mechanism). This year, I added a cheap (USD$42) Sony disc player to have as backup. I have used it only once, as I have purchased only one new SACD. Like Anup, I have these devices sitting on the network in different locations, and when I need to rip an SACD, I just pop the USB stick in, load the disc, and then control the rip from the computer where I manage the library. Metadata is also not a problem so long as one makes sure to save files in .dsf form. I know classical metadata can be a little more laborious to enter, but it’s a one-time event only. Even without manually entered metadata, Roon will give its best guess based on the file name as ripped as a starting point.
I know it’s not for everybody, and maybe not even for more than 5% of anybody. In the alternative, many hires sources of downloads sourced from SACDs are available. Some sites like Acoustic Sounds are fairly explicit about file provenance, so one knows whether the files being downloaded are sourced from the same masters as the disc. And there are services that will happily rip your SACDs for you for what is generally a pretty reasonable fee. Even if one had 1000 discs fo rip, it would likely cost much less than a dCS transport.
OH NO!!! Too late!!
Actually my decision to buy the transport ( as a birthday present to myself) was only partly related to being able to continue to play SACDs. By the time I had then ripped most of my CDs but realised that with my now limited eyesight there was no chance that I could envisage entering or editing the complex metadata for large box sets ( e.g some of the 50 CD Decca boxes or various operas). As they often require reference to the booklet/libretto for full enjoyment they were not likely to go to storage anyway. I decided that I still needed a transport and wondered how much the Rossini Transport would improve upon the Paganini still in residence. Enormously was the answer.
Thanks, and yes I do purchase DSD64 downloads but I try not to re-buy muisc that I already own. However I am of course inconsistent and and am just about to re-purchase the recent Haydn Op.3 and Op.6 Concerti Grossi by the Akademie für Alte Musik Berlin which I already have in 24/96 and DSD64 but have discovered that it was all originally recorded in DXD and is available in that format. As we say in England; they saw me coming.
1 Like
The beauty of this time in history is that many more have the means to enjoy music in so many different and personalized ways. “To each his own” is not a riposte; it’s a celebration!
1 Like
Does the Bartok use the ESL2 standard for digital via dual AES transmission from a transport to the Bartok? Am also contemplating getting a transport which plays both CD and SACD discs. The Esoteric P-05x is equipped with dual digital AES output and uses the ESL2 standard for transmission.
Edwin, the real question should be whether Esoteric’s “ESL2” follows the international AES3 specification for Dual AES support 
(I believe they do).
1 Like
Thanks for the info. I only wish dCS includes a transport within their Bartok range as the Rossini transport is very expensive.
1 Like
Well, for Redbook discs, there’re plenty of very good non-dCS Transport options out there in the market, Esoteric being one of them. But if you’re looking for an SACD transport, then dCS is the only viable option due to the (proprietary) encryption required in transporting DSD bitstreams off discs.
By the way, I was curious about “ESL2”, seems it’s not a standard by any means, turns out ESL2 stands for “ES-Link 2”; an Esoteric proprietary format that carries SACD DSD bitstreams from their transports to their DACs in a 24-bit PCM encrypted format. So, no ESL2 mode won’t be compatible with dCS. 
However, Esoteric’s standard AES/XLR interfaces do appear to support AES3 compliant Dual AES (only needed when Redbook discs are upsampled on the transport of course) 
Thanks for the very useful info; saves me time going down the rabbit hole!
I have a Metronome T5 loan unit from the dealer here. It is a CD only transport. I found playing discs far more engaging than similar tracks via streaming. It was connected to the Bartok via its AES digital output. The music had more weight, wide and somehow the tempo was feet tapping. Wonder why it should even make a difference. That’s the reason why I started the transport search route. I have not discarded my CD collection as yet.
2 Likes
Hi Edwin, I got around this issue by first auditioning an Esoteric CD player to use as a transport for my Bartok. It sounded wonderful and even better with clock syncing. When using the Esoteric as a stand alone player, sound quality wise it held its own vs the Bartok dac and it was too close to call which sounded better (this did surprise me). However it did solve the problem of SACD as the Esoteric gave me the option to do so. For me a great outcome and the Bartok is now used for streaming which I am very happy with. I know this is a compromise solution but considering the cost of the Rossini transport, it’s a very viable alternative if you want SACD.
1 Like
Makes a lot of sense. Am looking at the new K-03xd though may be an overkill.
Why not look at the new Marantz SACD 30n? It is one sixth of the price of the Esoteric K-03xd and uses the same transport mechanism as the dCS Rossini Transport. That isn’t to say it is going to sound like the Rossini but it would interest me if I was in your position.
1 Like
That makes much sense, Pete. I will check it out. Thanks
I have been using Bartok with Tidal until now but as i have a nice collection of CD i decided to repair my old Audio Note CDT-zero CD transport and connect it to Bartok via coax spdif. Sound was not as detailed as from tidal but i noticed recently that really like CD reproduction much more than Tidal. I have compared many different tracks side by side and even the ripped version of my CD vs CD directly and there is more music from CD source! I would describe it as flow, fluid like CD reproduction vs a bit stiff file presentation. I listed to full CDs from the start to the end and want to jump on tracks when listening from files/tidal. There is nice coherence in CD presentation. You just want to listen to it! Strange…
2 Likes
Pro-Ject audio builds a cd transport only- very nice!
Never knew about Pro-Ject. Interesting.
I’ve been going through all of my old CD cases and getting rid of most of them while building a small set of keepers. I listen to CDs in a headphone-only system separate from the Bartok but have considered finding a transport for the Bartok.
it’s in german…he said that they re-invent the cd drive, their reference was the Philips CD pro drive…imho this looks like a serious bid of gear…
1 Like
Here is a review of it ( alongside its matching DAC). it seems to be in a higher quality league than its sister Pro-Ject “Box” companions and the price reflects this.
I experienced similar emotions when I connected AN CDT2 BG to Bartok )))
anyone tried jay’s audio cd transport oder denafrip cdt?