News help choosing a SACD Player / transport

I understand the issue better now.   I have the following comments:  

1. It is highly unlikely it is the ripping process from a SACD to a native DSD or DFF file if you are using equipment specified by the software product you use and you are following their instructions.  The reason for this is that the SACD and the ripping protocol have multiple error correction protocols to assure bit perfect file transfers.  The error correction protocol for SACD and DSD/DFF (Scarlet Book) is more robust than for Red-Book CDs.  Therefore, I believe your rips to be bit perfect.  These ripped files should be bit perfect compared to the same downloaded DSD/DFF files, as long as it is the same master file version.  Also, SACDs are compressed and uncompressed on playback; however, it is my understanding that when ripped, the uncompressed file is downloaded.   I believe this is not an issue.  I invite comments from those more knowledgeable on this latter issue, but I do not see this as a cause.  
2. When you compared ripped files to SACD, did you compare them using the Esoteric K05 DAC function for decoding the ripped file to the Esoteric K05 playing the SACD?  This is the best comparison you can do at this point.  You are actually comparing the SQ of the Lampizator to the Esoteric (SACD played thru Esoteric K05 and DSD file played thru my system: I prefer my system).  This seems logical.  The Lampizator is a far more musical product, as good as the Esoteric is.  
3. I believe the differences you are hearing are related to differences in the playback system and the use of the Mac Mini which is introducing EMI, clocking errors (jitter), and power supply noise.  

​​​​​​​My recommendation is to forget adding a new SACD transport.  You have a phenomenal DAC.  Focus on finding a server-streamer of equal quality to your DAC.  Burn your discs and download you files to the server.  Do not look back.  Obviously, you can leverage house sound synergy by going with a Lampizator Gulf Stream.  I recommended an Aurender N200 or a preowned N20.  Both a little over your budget.  It is by leaving the computer in your past that I believe you will achieve the best sound quality.  
 

if you are mindset on a transport, I recommended two above your budget.  The Onyx Zenith recommended above by another member is also an option.  I cannot make a recommendation.  I have not auditioned them.  

@jsalerno277 

@mikelavigne 

Thank you. I appreciate your help as well as all the other comments.

Your welcome.  BTW: How are you ripping SACD to DSD/DFF?  Are you using a Sony compatible Blu-Ray player output to SACDExtractGUI on your computer?   This is the only way I know of on how to do this.  As stated, the Blu-Ray player model and computer model should not matter based on error correction protocols.  I am just interested if you identified another means to work within or around the Sony protection code imbedded into the SACD code to rip to DSD/DFF.  

Yes, I use an Oppo 203 / 205 clone (where I live commonly known as Chinopppo) but I rely on the knowledge of other person to make the ripping.

There are many forums where there are explanations on how to do that, but as I said, that is not for me.

A SACD player is not just for playing SACDs.... A SACD player will "generally" serve as a higher fidelity transport or stand alone player with redbook, shm, blu-spec, etc cds as well, in comparison to a regular cd player.

Sony themselves have moved on to a object based format called 360 reality audio and upmixers that can blow your socks off, if you figure out how to set up a high fidelity multi channel system. 

A dumbed down version of it has even flowed into their headphones. But, some kid who experienced it on 500 dollar headphones won’t be buying a sacd player and an archaic 20k stereo system because the latter will feel like a letdown to him.... no surprise, old man hifi is on its deathbed.

I’ve given up on DSD - even though my dac will play DSD.  Sacd are mostly multi channel - and the only way I can successfully play an sacd layer is to use the dac in the oppo and output all analog channels to my multi channel ht processor 

ive also found that there are few sacd recordings recorded well enough to bother with the hassle - red book cd’s on the pro ject transport sound better than the tidal streamed equivalent - but it mostly depends on the quality of the original recording -  and how many copies of dire straits / pink Floyd and steely Dan do you need to have 

id rather listen to discs through my two channel set up than the multi channel home theatre set up as the fidelity is better