dCS Bartók Streaming DAC + HP amp

Audio Gear Talk dCS
145

Andrew,

I’m seriously considering the purchase of the Bartok. I’d like to ask you several questions, and apologize if a few are basic or may focus on the wrong issues. Your patience is appreciated. With that said, please accept my thanks in advance for your responses:

(1) I assume your view is that the ethernet connection is the audio equal of the USB inputs? (The other inputs don’t offer the highest resolution playback.)

(2) How sensitive is the audio quality of the Bartok to the type of ethernet router and ethernet cable? I have an older but stable Asus RT-N66R Gigabit Router, and use standard Cat 6 or 6a cables from Blue Jeans cable, which tests each cable and provides the results with the cable.

(3) How sensitive is the audio quality of the Bartok to whether the FLAC files are pulled from an external hard drive through a windows media center? (I utilize a G-Technology raid 1 unit to store my audio library.). That means that the files are passing from the hard drive, through a USB connection to the PC, and finally out the RJ45 ethernet jack on the PC to the router, and then to the Bartok.

Is there any clear advantage – in terms of audio quality – by simplifying that by using a NAS directly to the network and then to the Bartok?

(4) Finally, there is a growing list of DACs which can handle DSD 256 or even 512, see this list:

Why did dCS decide to not include DSD 256 in a new unit? There is a growing list of true DSD 256 files offered on Native DSD Music, for example.

Again, many thanks in advance for your response.

146

I would consider the Ethernet input to be superior to the USB input. It’s simply a better way of moving audio data when done right.

Not all. You’ll be fine with the router and cable you have. I highly recommend the Blue Jeans cable as a high quality product with no added BS.

The storage method, hardware, cable, server operating system, etc have absolutely no bearing on audio quality. Data transfer doesn’t work that way and up until the point that the bitstream is fed into the DAC it’s just data. No different than a document or photo on your hard drive sent via email.

In terms of audio quality, no. See above.

While high-rate DSD enjoys some conversational popularity these days, the actual market demand is very low and the amount of available content is relatively paltry. Should there be a significant change then we can develop the support and issue it as a software update. That’s one of the advantages of our architecture. It’s completely software defined so we can issue updates that fundamentally change the performance of the DAC. In other products this would require swapping out hardware or buying a new DAC altogether.

1 Like
147

That’s great to know! I was concerned I was buying a product that might potentially be obsolete in the near future if DSD 256 takes off. Your response – that you can incorporate it in the future through software – puts my mind at ease.

And I really appreciate your approach on the use of ethernet and networks. No more nonsense about buying gold platinum cables to go from a media server to a DAC!

BTW, I assume the same applies to USB. If I wanted to try USB just to compare, I assume a standard USB cable from a source like Blue Jeans Cable suffices from the media center to your DAC?

When Stereophile reviewed the Bridge, it quoted dCS as saying that you build a separate box for the network card rather than incorporating it inside the Vivaldi system because “we don’t want excessive processing or overactive power supplies to generate noise inside the box. There are advantages to having the network board, with its dedicated power supply and dedicated FPGA processor, running our code in a separate chassis that is pretty inert. This is why the Vivaldi system’s upsampling, disc playback, and advanced clocking take place in separate boxes.”

Obviously the Vivaldi is far more expensive than the Bartok. But how does the Bartok isolate or shield the DAC from the network card, since the issue of noise inside the same box was candidly identified as an issue by dCS in the Stereophile review? (I read your prior responses in this thread, and don’t believe that issue was covered.)

One more question. The manual doesn’t say what the app controls. Does the app show the format of the file; the bit depth and upsampling; switch inputs; as well as allow MQA to be turned on and off on such a file?

Again, many thanks for your patient responses to my questions. I really appreciate it.

148

What means BS for the Ethernet cable ?

149

It’s a acronym for what male cattle defecate.

In other words, Blue Jeans cables are good cables at a good price.
Something most people would agree with.

1 Like
150

To expand on this, the Blue Jeans Cat 6 and Cat 6A cables use Belden’s 10GX series cable…

Belden make very very good stuff.

Blue Jeans assemble it and test it for you before shipping.

1 Like
151

In my opinion, a DAC’s performance when playing 16/44 is one of the most important things to look at. The VAST majority of content is in this resolution, and when properly produced/mastered, it can sound amazing. In my experience, the majority of higher resolution content (I have a lot, including DSD, etc) is marginally better, and the intersection of better high res and good music is very small.

dCS DACs do an amazing job decoding 16/44. This is key.

1 Like
152

We optimize the internal layout of the hardware components to minimize the impact of any noise generated by the card. Quite a bit of time is spent on this to ensure that there aren’t any issues. With Vivaldi we have fewer practical limitations so we can functionally isolate different parts of the signal path to provide further isolation. It’s best to think of the approach taken in Bartók to be very, very good but the approach taken in Vivaldi is better (and considerably more expensive).

All of the app controls and functions are detailed in the Mosaic User Guide which is separate (and online). You can peruse that here: https://dcs.community/mosaic-user-guide

153

Since I made the comment I’ll elaborate.

Indeed this is an English abbreviation for the waste product emitted from the rear end of a male bovine. In the context in which I used it the meaning was along the lines of, no added claims of sonic benefit beyond delivering what the product is supposed to be. In other words, they make Ethernet cables that actually follow the published standards, obey the laws of physics, and come with a very detailed test report confirming that the cable certifies to the claimed level of performance.

The issue with Ethernet is that it’s tightly controlled by very carefully defined engineering standards. These are published and adhered to by all companies wishing to make an Ethernet-based product so as to ensure that different devices will coexist and interoperate. Furthermore they define very specific physical and electrical properties which need to be adhered to in order for the network to function at its specified level of performance. Deviate from the standard and the behavior of the network can suffer significantly.

The issue with some audiophile Ethernet cables is that they are designed by individuals who either don’t know how Ethernet works or are operating under the delusion that they somehow have a savant-like understanding that allows them to offer a product that delivers higher performance than has been previously achieved through the work of thousands of engineers and billions of (insert your currency of choice).

Trust me, if someone really had that ability then he would not be designing audiophile cables as he would know how Ethernet works and that the cable is irrelevant as long as it certifies to the defined standard. Fun fact, most audiophile Ethernet cables don’t certify to their stated category and in some cases don’t certify at all.

3 Likes
154

I can’t thank Andrew enough for his detailed responses to my questions, and I’d also like to thank everyone else. And I apologize for double posting, first when I was trying to get educated about DACs in general, and in this thread with specific questions about the Bartok when I had narrowed my focus to that unit.

Many thanks to everyone!

155

Andrew,

(1) With regards to the Ethernet network connection, does that only work with software or an interface designed for Ethernet connections? As compared to connecting the Bartok via coax, USB or AES, in which case it is utilizing the standard audio drivers in Windows or Mac OS. Specifically, does the Bartok Ethernet connection also work with J River? According to the J River wiki, J River supports DLNA, and “DLNA is very similar to UPnP, so UPnP is also supported.” The specs for the Bartok state that it “acts as a UPnP™ renderer in Asynchronous mode.” However, the J River wiki points out that their are thousands of devices, so you need to try it and see if a specific device is compatible. Has dCS done so in the case of the Bartok and J River?

(2) Does that also apply to USB cables, since they are also a recognized computer connection cable? Does a standard cable from a source like Blue Jeans Cable work which is presumably designed to meet such a standard, as compared with either cheap generic cables or some audiophile cables that may not meet standards for USB?

Or is there any other specific USB cable that you would recommend?

Many thanks in advance for your response and the great information.

156

To be perfectly honest this is Roon’s forum and I’m not especially comfortable discussing their competitor’s product and how it relates to ours. The best answer that I can give you is that it will work up to a point, but there are known shortcomings that will likely never be addressed. The UPnP renderer interface is provided for compatibility and has limited functionality. Furthermore we are not doing any active development with this part of the code and have no plans on the roadmap to do so. The best playback options are either Roon (under continuous development) or Mosaic Control (our playback solution, also under continuous development).

The standards for USB are quite a bit looser so it is more difficult to find a quality cable. I’d apply the same comments about audiophile cables here as I do with Ethernet with the caveat that USB cables are more likely to have a sonic impact since they carry signal (time + data) rather than data alone. For instance jitter and Ethernet never intersect, but jitter and USB can be a real problem.

To be perfectly honest USB is a fundamentally flawed interface for audio for a host of reasons. We provide the USB interface for compatibility, but it’s not the path to the best sound.

2 Likes
157

I should have asked a few more questions. :slight_smile:

I’m posing these questions to have the best understanding of the Bartok interface and rear connections, in the event that I’m not using Ethernet, for one reason or another.

In that event, what is your opinion of AES (if used as a single cable connection from a PC) or of the RCA or BNC SPDIF coax connections? Are they better than USB or do they suffer from the same flaws?

Are the cables or standards for AES or SPDIF coax a bit more uniform or established than USB?

Bottom line – if for any reason Ethernet is not used, which of the other interface connectors on the Bartok is best in your opinion for PCM at up to 24 bit 192kS/s or DSD/64 in DoP format-- single AES (assuming dual AES is not available), SPDIF coax, or USB?

158

It’s not an easy question to answer as it’s going to be heavily source-dependent. All things being equal AES and S/PDIF can be superior interfaces to USB. The problem is that I’ve rarely seen an off-the-shelf S/PDIF or AES interface for a PC that is of high quality. They’re typically noisy and have pretty awful driver circuits.

If you’re doing file-based playback from a PC or a NAS then Ethernet is the superior interface. If for whatever reason you can’t use Ethernet then use USB. The performance won’t be as high but our implementation is about the best you’re going to find.

159

Thanks again. I’ve been very impressed by your knowledge of the Bartok; of dCS products; of audio in general; and your expertise in this area. As all of the participants in the forum know, that is not always the case with representatives of manufacturers.

You’re an asset to the forum, and I’d like to thank you for your assistance. And consider this a thanks in advance, as I’m sure I’ll have more questions!

160

Andrew:

Two questions about the Bartok. Many thanks in advance for your response and assistance.

(1) Do you know if the Bartok can be controlled by Control4? Before I ask my Control4 dealer, I thought I’d start with you, as I’m sure you’ve had that question before. I would simply like to control the Bartok volume through my master C4 remote which controls my entire system. Specifically, if the output of the Bartok is connected directly to an amplifier, it would be great to be able to then change the Bartok volume using a C4 master remote control.

I realize you have your own app, but for anyone with a C4 controlled system, the ability to use a C4 remote to control all components is far more convenient, especially when it comes to simple control of volume.

C4 commonly utilizes ethernet to operate components, and in a very sophisticated way. For example, C4 provides full control of TiVos through ethernet drivers. Since the Bartok utilizes the network, that would be an obvious method. However, it is my understanding that this requires dCS (or someone) to provide an ethernet driver for this purpose.

My C4 unit also has a serial RS232 input, although I’ve never utilized it to control any components. The Bartok manual states that the RS232 interface “is for use with a household automation system,” and that is a perfect description of what Control4 is all about. Do you know if Control4 can control the Bartok volume through either an ethernet driver, or by utilizing RS232?

My C4 dealer does almost all programming remotely, so if he has to show up to type in the “help” command to see a list of program commands, that would be a difficult (and more expensive) way to go about this. It would be easiest if I only had to connect the dCS to C4 using RS232, and the C4 dealer knew what program commands to utilize to control volume on the Bartok.

(2) The Bartok includes filters for both PCM and DSD. Apologies if I’m asking a dumb question reflecting my own lack of knowledge of DACs. With that said, which filter for PSM and DSD do you regard as entirely neutral, i.e. it simply passes the digital to analog conversion without any alteration?

Many thanks again.

161

We publish command sets for IR and RS232 in this document:

Bartok and Rossini use the same command sets so everything that you need to do should be easily programmed by your installer.

If you’re using Roon then go with a Nucleus or Nucleus+ and then you’ll be able to use Roon’s module for Control 4. That will provide you with a complete playback interface including volume and mute control.

We don’t publish the command set that our app uses to communicate with our products via Ethernet as this interface is in a constant state of flux. The last thing we want is for a change meant to enhance the app breaking someone’s home automation configuration.

This is impossible to answer as it is completely dependent on system configuration and personal preference. I answered a similar question in the thread linked below. That one was more focused on upsampling settings, but the message is the same. You’ll find an explanation for why I can’t answer this question in the second half of the response.

162

Andrew, my only goal is to be able to control Bartok volume with a C4 remote. Since the Bartok can take IR commands, I assume there is an infrared eye included in the window display of the Bartok? The C4 remote can send infrared commands, so it would be easy to accomplish, with the slight caveat that sometimes it is necessary for C4 to “learn” IR commands from the remote provided by the manufacturer, which leads to my next question.

The specifications for the Bartok on the dCS web site also states that a “dCS Universal IR remote control is available as an optional extra.” What does it cost?

163

It has an IR receiver in the front panel adjacent to the dCS logo. There is also an IR receiver on the rear panel for use in CI installations to avoid having to put an emitter on the front panel.

The document that I linked to in my last post includes the RC5 codes that you’ll want to use instead of learning. This includes the discrete codes for input selection as well as mute state, power standby, and some other useful ones. No need to attempt to teach any codes.

You’ll need to contact your dealer for pricing on the remote.

164

Many thanks again for your assistance. I missed the brief reference to the IR remote on page 27 of the manual. :slight_smile:

The manual doesn’t have any reference or illustration of an IR receiver on the rear panel of the Bartok, however, unless I missed that in the manual as well. (I’m not looking at the unit at the moment.) The Bartok manual shows an IR receiver on the rear of the Rossini, but not the Bartok. Are you certain that it is a feature on the Bartok? If not, I’ll just use an emitter on the front panel.