New PS Audio PerfectWave

Has anyone tried it? Any reviews or comparasion with the old ones?
33bc1b8f 6790 4ccf 8d68 6091b0cd4c41nasaman
My friend has the combo and it's better than his DL3 and my Ultralink 2 I used to have.
I only have the new DAC, not the transport. (disclosure- I just became a PS Audio dealer though I have been using their gear for years)- I also had the DLIII, which was nice, but not enough to make me want to stop listening to LP's mostly.

With the PWD now in the system, I have not spun an LP in over 2 weeks. I think that is the most ringing endorsement I can give, since my analog playback system is outstanding.

24/96 files sound incredibly good, but so does Redbook CD, and even mp3!!!
I am bypassing the sample rate converter - which in their design reaps sonic benefits rather than oversampling.

I also have a far way to go in optimizing the system as far as AC and balanced cables (still using stock), and I currently feed it via Mac (I understand a tricked out PC may be better sounding)

So I wouldn't be surprised if I got a significant improvement out of it in the coming months, and when the Bridge network card/digital lens is released.
I'm pretty sure the OP is referring to the new PS-A power cables -you in “Cables Forum.”
What about the combo transport and DAC? Do they sound as good as implied by PS Audio and others?
Hello Emailists,

Its great to have somebody on the forum who can get inside info.

I am also looking into PWT and PWD combo. Were you able to auditioned them both?

I have a few Hybrid SACDs and I wonder if you or anybody else auditioned CD layer with PS Audio combo and how its compared to SACD on different SACD Player. I understand, the answer will be very sugjective still of interest to me.

You can ask Mr. McGowen or whover there - they will not lie because we do have ears and lies will sell a few combos more and then bite them on the ass - they must understand it

Finally, when this Bridge will be available?

Thank you
The PWD/PWT is SOOO good. I ordered the PWD because the Bridge/PWD combination will provide the same level of performance as the PWD/PWT. With the Trade-Up promotion, I spent $2,000. If this thing DOESN'T sound as good (or even better) than the $80,000 king of the hill, it has to be close. I've not heard the "king of the hill" but the PWD/PWT was so damn good that anything better is going to be competing with the kings of the analog hill (which I don't think anyone has yet confirmed to be true). One thing’s for sure – and it’s exciting, digital is REALLY coming of age; it’s here now – and the future looks even brighter (think higher sample rates).

This is encouraging to read. I have a PWD on order and have been using similar electronics (Cullen modded DLIII, Wyred4Sound ST-500 and PSA GCP-200(incredible preamp, I can't believe it's gotten so little attention)). Would you mind sharing some of the improvements you've heard over the modded DAC?


This is encouraging to read. I have a PWD on order and have been using similar electronics (Cullen modded DLIII, Wyred4Sound ST-500 and PSA GCP-200(incredible preamp, I can't believe it's gotten so little attention)). Would you mind sharing some of the improvements you've heard over the modded DAC?

What I heard was very similar to what has been stated by the beta testers and the PS Audio guys themselves – via the PS Audio website here
Let me try to give this some “tangibility.” When I listened to a Redbook CD from Keith Jarrett, The Koln Concert, a live recording from the early 70’s, I immediately commented on how well this was recorded; the decay of the individual notes was very apparent and the timbre was very good for a Redbook recording. I liked what I heard so well that I purchased the flac download of this recording as soon as I got home from the audition. On my system the piano does not sound the same – the timbre is not nearly as lifelike as what I heard via the PWD/dealer system, nor was the discernable decay of the individual piano notes. I also felt that many of the CDs and files that I am familiar with sounded better resolved than when played on my system (i.e.: “more information was conveyed” – the sound was much less “digital.” Digital is highly dynamic and highly resolving of the information – up to 44/16, but it is the missing information that makes for “better resolved” music).

I should point out that I am very familiar with my friend’s reference system (the local dealer) and for the most part, I prefer the sound of my Krell Res II speakers to the sound of his B&W 802D speakers (I am specifically referring to the upper midrange and treble frequencies – overall, I feel that the B&Ws are more resolving). My point is, the differences that I heard at the dealer may have had something to do with his overall system compared to mine, but for my taste, I generally prefer the warmer sound of my speakers to the more analytical sound of the B&Ws (especially on piano) – so the differences that I heard on, say the Keith Jarrett CD, I attribute more to the PWD than I do the speakers or other components.

I didn’t focus on sound staging, imaging, or bass extension/control – and nothing in these areas jumped out at me either via the PWD/PWT (no great improvements in any of the aforementioned areas). I was not out to make a comparison between digital and analog either, because there was not an analog system set up for comparison. I was merely there to hear if things sounded better to me compared to what I am familiar with (digital playback). What I heard was better. As I said, music was more resolving (not analytical, bright, forward, or clarified), it was however, more lifelike (instrumental timbre and vocal tonality, as well as a more appreciable “atmosphere” - bloom/air cohesiveness). Details seemed to be more “fleshed-out” (as when Jarrett coughs during his performance, hums to the tune, or starts tapping his foot while playing the piano).

I am not one to praise cables, power cords, tweaks, or even power conditioning – I just don’t hear easily-discernable differences. What I refer to above was, for me, easily discernable. The differences, which I heard as positive (“better”) were in no way as easily discernable as when replacing speakers – which, to me, makes the most obvious difference. The differences in resolution, timbre, tonality and atmosphere were not subtle either – they were definitely discernable – which to me, was better. I can say that the PWD sounds audibly better than my PS Audio- Cullen Stage IV mod DAC – enough so, that I traded that DAC in plus two-grand for the PWD. I hope it sounds as good in my system as it did in my dealers system; there was enough discernable improvement to my ears that, even if some of what I perceived as better was system related, I’m confident that I will hear a worthwhile difference at home.

I don’t usually ramble on this much, but you asked….
Thanks, great information.
Nice thread jack. :D
i find it odd that ps audio did not use one of the 32 bit dacs readily available. the buffalo dac may rival the ps audio dac. it's too early to tell.
I think there's a discussion at the PSA forum where PS Audio states they tried many DACs, including one of the ESS Sabre Reference ones (don't know if it's the 32 bit model), and they just liked the Wolfson better. I think Wyred 4 Sound is basing a DAC on the ESS Sabre Reference, so it may be one to watch as well.
The number of bits utilized does not necessarily mean a DAC will perform better. The nearly $70,000 dCS Scarlatti utilizes a 5-bit DAC (albeit is a proprietary "Ring DAC" - interesting technology).