Does the Transport make a significant difference?

Ladavid, Assuming the Modwright is a Sony SCD-1/777ES, I know from developing that unit that the stock transport is only fair. However extraordinary performance can be coaxed from that unit as a standalone transport through mods to Main PCB and DC regulation. I don't know what all Dan Wright did to that model, but it's likely he focused on the replacement tube analog section and outboard supply for the analog section. It's probable that what Dan did can be preserved, while significantly improving other aspects of performance in the digitial domain with aftermarket clock & other mods.

My exp with CDPs and DACs has shown me the better build of the transport, the better the sound. Also, as was said above, IF the DAC in use does perform jitter rejection then all the better.

I have the Bel DAC 3. it espouses jitter rejection to near non existant levels.... super. It does a fine job in that regard I'd say too.

BUT, it's not perfect in it I suspect, as I've used 5 disc players with it, ranging from my $100 DVD/VHS combo, a Mitsubishi DVD player, an Oppo 980H, a Sony carosel mega changer, and my SCD XA 777es, (currently up for sale), and with each unit, in conjunction with the BC D3, I attain a difference in the sonic presentation.

At first I used a couple different digi links... then went
with the one I percieved as being the better of the two, I used a Stereovox xv2 digi cable into the DAC 3 as the IC, save for the 400CD Sony that only has an optical out.

Still there are diffs from one drive/player to the next.

My unmodded but w/new drive & lasers Sony SCD xa 777 does the best overall of the lot. IMHO

Each player by brand brought a little something different to the table. I say 'brand' as that seemed to be the sticking point for the diffs. From Sony, (3 diff players), to Oppo (1), and the Mitsubishi (1). the Diffs from one Sony to another varied a bit less so in terms of dyhnamics yet were more dyunamic than the rest overall.

The Oppo came closer in terms of a coherent sound stage depictiohn, the Mitsu and cheapies still less so.

it may well be nothing more than the circuitry being used with the laser or just the laser types. Dunno.

One last thought here .... if one discounts great depth as a viable portion of fine audio reproduction, my PC is comparable even to the XA 777.... albeit, the lack of rear of stage info.... and it's a touch dryer with poor recordings.

So even with a DAC JA says measures the best of any he's tested at that time, different drives/transports still provide differences in the timber, stage, bass, and dynamic range. Some marginal, some unmistakable.... yet diffs none the less.

Good luck.

You may try an teac vrds 10, 20, 25 cd player. They are relatively inexpensive ones, but with probably one of the best transport. It is hard to find better transport, especially one which still has replacement laser.

May be my own hearing limitations or the limitations in my downstream components, but I've used several CDPs and a dedicated server hard drive as transports into my Benchmark DAC (it reclocks) and heard very little (if any) difference. So, IME I'd tend to agree with Shadorne - if you reclock at the DAC, the differences in transport performance (if any exist) will be hard to detect.

I bought a Playback Designs MPS-5 a few months back, a one-box CD/SACD solution with an Esoteric transport and a proprietery upsampling to DSD DAC and claimed "unmeasureable" jitter. When I use my Oppo or Pioneer Elite DV-58AV as a transport it's almost as good as using the MPS-5's internal transport. There IS a difference, but the removal of glare and digital uglyness seems to all happen in the DAC/clock. So, IMHO, transports matter, but the DAC/clock combination is the most important, by far.

Dave