Just got the PS Audio Perfectwav DAC -- Amazing


For the last year my system has consisted of the Slim Devices Transporter (Transport + DAC) -> Bel Canto Ref1000 -> Anthony Gallo Ref 3.1

I listen to all my music digitally (lossless/flac). I was very happy with my original system but when the Perfectwave DAC came out I was intrigued. For quite a while I debated between the PW and keeping the transporter or modding it via Modwright.

I ended up getting the PW and though I can't compare it to a modded transporter, it blows the stock transporter out of the water. I should note that since the network bridge isnt out for the PW, I am currently streaming music via the transporter -> coaxial out (spdif) -> PW.

I have only listened for ~5 hours so far, but things I have noticed right away is much cleaner/tighter bass. The low end is so much more accurate than it was before. When comparing, the transporter sounded very muddy (even though at the time I though it was quite good). The mids and highs are tighter as well. The separation has improved quite a bit as well. I have immediately noticed that the loudness of different instruments is wider spread than listening to the same songs on the transporter.

Hope this helps! If anyone has any questions about the PW or the transporter I will try my best to answer them.
danyal711

Showing 6 responses by 2chnlben

I too have been enjoying the new PWD. It is more smooth and airy than any DAC I have thus far encountered, yet its ability to retrieve detail is exceptional; this all right out of the box via coax/squeezebox Duet. Once the Bridge device becomes available, we should be able to hear what the PWD is really capable of.

I've been reading some great things about other new digital gear too (such as the new Meridian CD and the Berkeley Alpha DAC), but they are all much more expensive than the Perfect Wave devices - which makes the PW gear a pretty good bargain. Maybe not the next “big thing” to shatter all previous digital audio protocols (as marketing hype and general consumer hype often tend to extol), but the PWD is definitely something special, and at only $3,000 (a steal compared to some of the other gear listed in the five-figures) it is definitely worthy of anyone’s audition.
I don't know why you guys are not talking about this, but I think that the real issue with using the DAC to attenuate the volume is whether that is achieved by analog or digital methods.

Good point...

The following has been copied from the PS Audio Forum:

Is the PWD perfect? Not entirely but close. Used in the last 50% of its volume setting (where any serious listening would be) you get a “free lunch” so to speak.

Can you expand on this Paul? Is that the loudest or quietest 50% percent? Why is there a difference? Also, the Slimdevices Transporter had a bug which occasionally caused full-volume output. I’m sure you’d never release a product with a bug, but that brings up a more interesting point. A product like this is probably going to benefit firmware updates. How will this be handled? An Ethernet port would have been nice (I’m sure it’ll be on the PWD II…)

The loudest 50%. The volume control is such that the loudest 50% is handled without any loss of data (it’s a digital volume control meaning it is just doing math and not an extra element in the audio chain). In the lower 50% there is a small data loss but we have this setup so for any serious listening you’re way outside of this area,
For updates, all PerfectWave products will be easily field upgradable by the customer.
Paul McGowan - 27 January 2009 01:10 PM

Hi folks, I haven’t participated in this forum for a while and just re-registered.
I’m assuming from your statement that the output level of the PWD in the lowest 50% of the VC’s range is relatively low and would produce a low volume level with the average amp and speaker combination, lower than a “serious listening” level. A logical and appropriate choice, although difficult (actually impossible) to get right with every amp and speaker combination, particularly with very high sensitivity speakers. Am I correct?
It popped into my head that given that the output stage of a DAC is similar to a preamp, that your Gain Cell level control could be used as the volume control in the PWD. Seems obvious, but things are rarely as simple as they ought to be, and there are likely many reasons why this was not done. Just wondering…

Absolutely this would be a perfect place for a Gain Cell except we don’t need one since the digital attenuation scheme obviates the need for a Gain Cell. Here’s the deal. The output of the DAC is an analog output stage (discrete type in ours) and has very little gain. It’s near a gain of 1 and is really there as an output driver and balanced device to lower any common harmonics - and to isolate the IV stage. A Gain Cell makes the most sense when you have a large dB change you want to effect as in a preamp.

The only thing cleaner than a Gain Cell is this simple output stage and the digital attenuation scheme we’re using.


For this reason, I listen through my preamp because I tend to do a lot of listening in the evening under the 50% "level." I have driven the amp direct via the PWD at levels well above the 50% range with exceptional results.

Ben
I think that the $400 DacMagic paired with a midfi preamp (altogether, less than $1k) would sound better than a $3k DAC that uses a digital volume knob.

You're thinking is way off. It simply is not possible that the $400 DacMagic paired with a midfi preamp could ever sound as good as the PWD. I assume that you have not heard the PWD for yourself and are merely speculating. If you have the opportunity, listen for yourself…

There is no loss in the upper 50 percent of the digital volume with the PWD used as a preamplifier. That said, I prefer to use a preamplifier – with the PWD volume set at 100 percent.
Trebejo

No need for the immature rhetoric…homework aside, the PWD is simply in another league compared to what you offered as a “better alternative.” The type of conjecture that you offer happens all of the time at this, and other sites – in that a someone make a generalization or even an attempted rationalization about a given product based on everything (except) hands-on experience and primary knowledge of said product. I’d say that is a bit impetuous…
What’s an MP3 anyway!
Trebejo,

Regardless of whether or not your conjecture should ever prove to be true, you already ate your crow - feathers and all, when you made sweeping generalizations about a product with which you have no applicable experience….;)
I hesitate posting the following observation because it is a little depressing and it applies to just about every thread posted at this – and other audio sites…

As I attended my daughter’s choir recital this past weekend, I was treated to a live string quartet as they played for the audience during intermission. The acoustic setting, a wonderfully well treated hall within one of the more affluent local universities, provided a perfect setting for these four members of the local symphony. As they prepared to play, I sat back and closed my eyes – ready to make a mental comparison of how the “absolute sound” compares to my home rig. Needless to say, the live sound was shockingly different (…..as in better).

In light of the aforementioned reality, there really is no right or wrong when it comes to anyone’s subjective opinion of recreated music and the associated gear with which it is recreated. To each his own