So how did you find the transport to compare to your prior USB streamer from your original DAC comparison?

Better sounding no doubt, with the Theta. A simplified chain and no USB meddling in at any point in the process probably helps a bit. I need to compare it with the MSB Quad module, which is something for round 2. There was absolutely no reason to want to use the USB (which granted wasn't the Quad) on the Signature V. The best sound out of that transport was LAN streaming when it is linked to the MSB DAC via I2S. This makes sense as then both the transport and DAC use the same clock, which is the DAC femto clock.

Here's some fodder to get the conversation going:

Hugo and Dave don't use any kind of DAC chip, the analogue conversion is discrete using pulse array. The key benefit of pulse array - something I have not seen any other DAC technology achieve at all - is an analogue type distortion characteristic. By this I mean, as the signal gets smaller, the distortion gets smaller too. Indeed, I have posted before about Hugo's small signal performance - once you get to below -20 dBFS distortion disappears - no enharmonic, no harmonic distortion, and no noise floor modulation as the signal gets smaller. With Dave, it has even more remarkable performance - a noise floor that is measured at -180dB and is completely unchanged from 2.5v RMS output to no signal at all.

The most impressive statistic to me is that Rob stated (in a video interview) that he was able to continue to lower DAVE's digital section S/N until he achieved an amazing -350dB, and he continued to hear improvements in depth of the reproduced signal until he reached that point. Even though the analog section does not meet that spec, he was still able to hear the improvement in the digital section by realizing that amazing spec.

http://cdn.head-fi.org/d/d6/900x900px-LL-d661dbf6_Dave2.5vagainstnosignal.png

The key benefit of pulse array - something I have not seen any other DAC technology achieve at all - is an analogue type distortion characteristic. By this I mean, as the signal gets smaller, the distortion gets smaller too.

Sign magnitude R-2R, like PCM63 or even BB1704 should have similar noise characteristics, if i'm not mistaken, in theory.
Soekris Dam is also sign magnitude architecture, thus noise floor lowers with output. It's backed up by measurements at DIYA. 

he was able to continue to lower DAVE's digital section S/N until he achieved an amazing -350dB,

This one is on LT-Spice, i assume.  , but then who am i to tell that Plank's constant can't be ignored.

So, as the signal gets bigger, the distortion gets bigger too. One of the traditionally quoted disadvantages of analogue, compared to digital.

Or, to put it another way... It all depends on the marketing department's choice of words.

Can confirm, Marketing departments are literally evil.

This one is on LT-Spice, i assume.  , but then who am i to tell that Plank's constant can't be ignored.

To quote MF - "First you get a swimming pool full of liquor..."

Kinda loving the NOS-1704 to C-2 via the DI-2014.

It's legitimately making me want to sell all of this stuff off and get a Master 11. Apparently I dig the PCM1704UK.

It's great both with my Fostex TH600 and Sennheiser HD650.

I'd rather have everything in one box if I can help it.

I can understand the desire for a one-box solution, but I'd still rather pick exactly the DAC and exactly the amp I want. I feel like that would be tougher and more likely compromised in an all-in-one solution, but, hey, maybe there's something out there that would prove me wrong.

I'd still like to see you try other multi-bit DACs, oversampled and non-oversampled, to see what you end up preferring. I think the NOS1704 you got is nice sounding for the price, but there is still much to be gained in the multi-bit sphere for you.   It's a long, expensive road if you keep up your curiosity about what else might be out there...