CD/Transport W/ External DAC

It send PCM pure digital signal to DAC, isn't it? Yes, in 0's and 1's, however down the chain jitter or timing of the 0's and 1's essentially sets transports apart as I understand.............

If a DAC is used that has an effective design to remove jitter, so that the data stream of 0's and 1's is properly received with the timing intact, before it is applied to the digital-to-analog converter, and if the source of the data (i.e., the CD transport) is properly built and is functioning as it should, then which model transport it is shouldn't matter, should it?

Isn't it a misnomer to say that a given transport is the "most analog-sounding" among several models? The digital data stream cannot be "analog-sounding", only the reconstituted analog signal at the DAC output. So, can't the audible differences between CD transports actually be attributed to the effectiveness of the jitter removal circuit at the DAC input and the quality of the converter and the analog output stage?

Belt driven transports have less vibration than direct drive transports, thus they read with more accuracy. Now, the CEC's, from what I understand, skimp on electronics. I am sending my CEC built Parasound transport to Dan Wright. He told me he's previously modded CEC transports and that he knew what to do with mine...

Transports are way more complicated machines than just bit readers. My McCormack SST1 transport has better slam, impact and dynamics than my Parasound. That's why Dan Wright is going to fix those shortcomings.

Importance: CDT vs DAC
When they say that the transport is the "most analog-sounding" one, doesn't "analog" mean natural?

It may be right to say that DAC can remove jitter somewhat but not completely. How can tap water be good enough if it comes from severely polluted water source? Good DAC is like water purifier that can purify water with adsorbant, filter, reverse osmosis, chemical reaction, etc.

However, tight filtering against osmotic force can remove not only the dirt but also the goodies such as minerals. Chemicals itself used to purify water can contaminate water if reaction is not perfect and if precipitation is not removed completely. The more the water contaminated, the more difficult it becomes to justify the cost of purifying the water.

If sound signal contaminated with jitter feeds DAC, the same analogy can be applied. Vigorous jitter correction may remove quantitatively trivial but essential ingredient from the sound reconstituted, may add different kind of jitter, and still is not enough for complete removal.

So I think good CDT (error-free data or data with less error) are prerequisite for good sound.

Hi Pychicanimal,

Pat from Mentor, OH pointed me in your direction. He says we have a similar approach to audio where organic materials (like paper in oil caps and pure copper connectors) yield a more organic sound.

I would very much enjoy sharing with you and learning from you on many audio related subjects but for now my questions are limited to the Parasound belt drive transports and what upgrades are done to them.

I'm a small OEM of audiophile gear; some say my power cords and non-oversampling DAC are the best for any price. I also have been doing DIY and professional upgrades for about 30 years (I started in the late 70's with some old Dynaco ST-70s).

I can do the upgrades to my Parasound if I knew what sort of upgrades were done.

Any idea what parts were changed and what circuit modifications were made?

Thanks.

Benjamin