What is the difference in CD transports?


This may sound stupid, but what makes one transport better than another? I have an old Theta Data Basic transport that I'm using with a Musical Fidelity Tri-Vista DAC 21. The DAC made a world of difference compared to my Theta Gen. III or Conrad-Johnson D/A-3. I can understand that because we're dealing with newer technology, faster and more powerful computers, better decoding chips, etc. A transport however, simply has to read the 0's and 1's, or pits. A CD reader in a computer costs practically nothing and reads fine (I assume), so why should a reader that costs almost $2000.00 be less than spectacular at reading and interpretting data correctly? When Theta tells me that the Data Basic II gives a wider soundstage and deeper bass, why would it? When I hear the Theta Jade is even better, what makes it better? I guess what I'm asking is "Is there a difference, and if there is, what transports are there that will feed my MF Tri-Vista DAC 21 more and better data?" Thanks, this is just puzzling!
krell_man
Logic would dictate that using a common reference clock for the transport and DAC would improve performance. Has anybody ever thought about finding a quality transport & DAC and using one lab grade ( like HP, etc... ) external clock for both of them? Sean
>
Sean,

I think that your logical thinking is on the right track!
I think that Wadia uses 1 clk for both transport & DAC when one buys their 270 transport & 27 DAC. The clock is in the DAC unit & is fed back to the transport using a glass fibre (ST) cable. They call this their "Clock Link" technology, I think. I believe that they do the same thing inside their CD players but it is transparent to the users as the routing is all internal. I think that the fed back clock is put in a FIFO & this FIFO can be compensated for time (which is phase) delay. The time delay, of course, occuring in the fed back clk signal.
FWIW.
I believe that the discontinued Sonic Frontiers T/P combo used a common clock, as well.