dCS Bartok DAC review on YouTube - GoldenSound

[Colin L]

It's in a big box because they choose to stick with linear psu, and because they choose to sell gloriously finished full width boxes because that's where the big ticket money lives.

My point was they could easily make it smaller if they chose to.

.

Not only have you to hear a Bartok, it seems you don't actually know what you are talking about.
The blue box in the picture below is the PS for the DAC circuitry. I don't actually know whether its SM or Linear. They don't say anywhere in the literature.

Per the post from the dCS website below, the headphone section is completely separate and includes linear (the toroid in the picture) and a switch mode PS for technical / design reasons to better drive a wide range of headphone types.

Frankly I'll take the opinion of what is the best design from highly skilled and experienced digital and electronic designers rather than from YouTube reviewers and random bods with an agenda and a keyboard.

Amplification for headphones
In the past, it has been common for dCS owners to use the existing line out stage on their unit to drive headphones, by making up a special cable to run from the outputs to the headphones. It actually does this job reasonably well – even though not designed for the purpose – with its low output impedance and low harmonic content and distortion, and its ability to drive a fair amount of current. When we designed the Bartók Headphone DAC, however, we decided to add a specially-designed headphone amplifier to drive a wider range of headphones (particularly low-impedance types, which wouldn’t do so well on the existing line output), both balanced and unbalanced, directly, in addition to the standard line outputs. The design, which attempts to retain the essential character of the existing line output stage while adding the functionality described above, follows a dual-mono configuration, keeping the two channels completely separate. The amplifiers are powered by a combination of linear and switch-mode power supplies that are completely separate from those employed in other parts of the product, particularly necessary as quite high ground return currents are experienced with low-impedance headphones and these need to be kept
well clear of the DAC and associated circuitry. A substantial toroidal transformer is employed in the linear PSU.

For a reason

 

[Colin L]

Yes personal taste is all that matters. Preference of music genre is also a factor in my opinion.

The above school of thought about power supplies is more than theory, it is also supported by listening tests of the designers that adopt the ideas (eg Chord, Antipodes) and the customers who buy their products, again related to personal preference of both.

The design choices do give some insight into why the Bartok is a ‘marmite’ product.

Marmite? There's not a single review I've read, apart from the YouTube Goldenballs review, that says the Bartok is anything less than a superb sounding unit.
Of course if you're including the negative opinions of people that have never actually heard one, then I get what you're saying.

 

[Mike Hughes]

Marmite? There's not a single review I've read, apart from the YouTube Goldenballs review, that says the Bartok is anything less than a superb sounding unit.
Of course if you're including the negative opinions of people that have never actually heard one, then I get what you're saying.

Are we this naive nowadays? Most magazines simply don’t review products they don’t rate and they’re very clear about that. Coming across a negative review helps provide some balance to endless positive reviews and enables a more informed view to be formed even if you disagree with aspects. I have “heard” one and said video helped mail down for me exactly what it was which left me cold. That lack of attack.

 

[Bob Edwards]

The Bartok is the least expensive DAC that blew my Naim nDAC/Pardo TXPS away. If I could afford it I’d buy one.

I think it is brilliant.

 

[Mike Hughes]

I would be genuinely shocked if it didn’t better that combo but that doesn’t mean it nevertheless doesn’t have the problem described.

 

[Hound]

Having power supplies in the same box can obviously cause problems, but then having it in a separate box also brings its own problems and I would hope a company like dCS knows what it's doing, as all of its range does it this way.
The bartock has one, plus the extra one if you have the headphone amp.
The rossini has 2, to split the digital side from the analog.
The vivaldi also has its power supplies in the same case.

Many other manufacturers of top flight dacs also do it like this, others don't. Naim have separate boxes but then they use the old way of chucking a huge noisy transformer and large caps in the box, very different and you certainly don't want them near anything sensitive and they bring there own problems to deal with to get the best from them

 

[darrenyeats]

Some random comments (pro and con).

It's good GoldenAudio has those DACs he rates to hand, and doesn't rely just on memory.

Subjective opinions are always valid.

Lately I've come to think that hi-res sounds different to CD rate. Hi-res to me is the reference point of what things should sound like.

If the "attack" of hi-res is missing that's bad. Hi-res sounds fast but smooth.

If you're wanting the "attack" you normally get from CD up-sampled with a linear brick wall filter and don't get it then (IMO) that's actually a good thing.

It's about your reference point (IMO).

I've noticed certain objective audio types flipped from saying technical performance is inaudible past a certain point, to championing reviews like this one predicated on technical performance at -120dB or lower being audible. Quite a flip.

All that said personally I'm still in learning and musing mode about this stuff, as I consider potential upgrades in the future.

I don't foresee ever bringing myself to pay Bartok money.

 

[Amber Audio]

The Bartok is the least expensive DAC that blew my Naim nDAC/Pardo TXPS away. If I could afford it I’d buy one.

I think it is brilliant.

I had the NDX+TXPS > nDAC+TXPS and thoroughly enjoyed it, kept it for a while. I found I preferred the Auralic Aries G2/Vega G2 a fair bit more and the Bartok more still.

Had the Qutest and then TT2/Scaler in another system, eventually got fed up of the utterly frustrating and stupid interface of different colours, the Bartok won out over the TT2 plus it was nice and easy to use physically and by App.

All the above are obviously just my opinion. Pity Naim didn't produce the super DAC everyone was expecting.

 

[Mike Hughes]

Rather falls to pieces when HR often doesn’t sound good at all.

 

[darrenyeats]

Almost if not all hi-res I have is new stuff. Hi-res transfers of old recordings are a gamble.

 

[Heckyman]

I have “heard” one and said video helped mail down for me exactly what it was which left me cold. That lack of attack.

Similar experience for me with the Qutest. After some weeks in my system I found it had decreased my enjoyment of music despite ticking some "audiophile" boxes. Later I saw GS's video on it and then I understood it was not just me. Until that point, all I'd ever come across were positive reviews and/or comments from owners.

I have no opinion on the Bartok as I haven't heard it, I would expect it to be very good. dCS do things differently with their Ring DAC, so it seems obvious that this would alter the sound a bit. I'd expect that some would prefer it and some not (vs an alternative in the same category).

 

[Mike Hughes]

Almost if not all hi-res I have is new stuff. Hi-res transfers of old recordings are a gamble.

My experience again differs. Some new HR sounds great. Some dies not. Some old stuff moved to HR sounds great. Some does not. It’s simply not the case that all recent HR is superior to CD quality stuff.

 

[narabdela]

I'd expect that some would prefer it and some not.

As with most things. There are no absolutes, yet there are those who seem to get terribly upset when their opinions are challenged.

 

[Joe Hutch]

I don't see how an opinion can be challenged anyway, other than by simple contradiction, which gets us nowhere. I hate the taste (and indeed the smell) of Marmite. How are you going to usefully or successfully challenge my opinion?

 

[Amber Audio]

I don't see how an opinion can be challenged anyway, other than by simple contradiction, which gets us nowhere. I hate the taste (and indeed the smell) of Marmite. How are you going to usefully or successfully challenge my opinion?

If your hate of Marmite = 1. How much do you hate XO? Just curious

​

 

[flutteringwow]

I don't see how an opinion can be challenged anyway, other than by simple contradiction, which gets us nowhere. I hate the taste (and indeed the smell) of Marmite. How are you going to usefully or successfully challenge my opinion?

Because, if you haven't tasted it, and relied on some graphs 'about' the taste etc, you still wouldn't know how it tasted. So you cant form an opinion on the taste, without tasting it!

So I challenge your opinion because it is formed on an incomplete experience, and hopefully this will usefully prompt you to sample the product, unless you have internal bias that wouldn't allow you an honest opinion even by doing so.

 

[Yank]

Rather falls to pieces when HR often doesn’t sound good at all.

Almost if not all hi-res I have is new stuff. Hi-res transfers of old recordings are a gamble.

And a hi-res transfer of the latest brick-wall-compressed master will stink too. As Tony likes to say, mastering trumps format. HR from streaming services lacks provenance, you never know exactly which version you're getting.

 

[darrenyeats]

. It’s simply not the case that all recent HR is superior to CD quality stuff.

I agree Mike!

It's also true that not all CD is superior to Spotify quality stuff. This is because mastering is more important than format.

If you disagree that hi-res has the capacity to sound audibly better, then I think it would be better to write just that. And I'll respect that - that's covered by my several "IMO"s.

The principle we surely must agree on (use the best digital formats when deciding "what good sounds like" if you're a reviewer). OTOH I can easily see how people will disagree whether CD should be included as such a best digital format.

I should make clear all my music is digital and 95% at CD quality - my aim is making it sound good via sympathetic up-sampling (a manufacturer may use a certain topology or whatever to try to help, I suppose). My aim isn't trashing people's choice of format.

Edit: @Yank see above.

 

[narabdela]

I don't see how an opinion can be challenged anyway, other than by simple contradiction, which gets us nowhere.

Very true.

Because, if you haven't tasted it, and relied on some graphs 'about' the taste etc, you still wouldn't know how it tasted. So you cant form an opinion on the taste, without tasting it!

So I challenge your opinion because it is formed on an incomplete experience, and hopefully this will usefully prompt you to sample the product, unless you have internal bias that wouldn't allow you an honest opinion even by doing so.

Q.E.D. ?

 

[sq225917]

I love marmite, I don't like the XO stuff, it's just too salty. I'd suggest that might be inciteful enough for anyone who also likes marmite, but doesn't want it any saltier to make a purchasing decision.

Much like GS's thoughts on the Bartok