PS Audio Perfect Wave DAC without the transport

Both the PWT and Bridge act as memory players, both process digital information via a digital lens and both utilize the Is2 protocol. What makes you think transferring pure digital data from a disc into a memory buffer is any different than transferring pure digital data from an Ethernet cable into a memory buffer?

That is exactly the point. Theoretically there is no difference between the bits being read into the buffer (from ethernet or disc drive). So the only difference in SQ can be attributed to how the I2S signal is generated from the bits in the buffer, and how the I2S signal is transmitted to the PWD data bus. On both these counts the bridge has a leg up.

First, the bridge is directly plugged into the data bus while the PWT sends the I2S over an HDMI cable. Bridge 1 - PWT 0.

Second, the I2S is generated from the bits in the buffer is based on the algoritms in the firmware. PS audio is focusing its ongoing development of the firmware on the bridge - sonic differences are reported with new bridge firmware releases. Eventually this may trickly down into the PWT, but for now the bridge is ahead of the firmware curve. Bridge 2 - PWT 0.

I'd trust my ears any day over this purely thoeratical argument, but the point is there is a plausible explanation as to why the bridge may sound better than the PWT.

Unfortunately, the Bridge firmware updates do impact the sound quality. Currently however, PS Audio is working on optimizing the next update(s) based on the two best sounding firmware updates (to date); the 0.2.08 version and the 0.2.10u version.

My rebuttal to Rockitman was based on the fact that he made an incorrect statement regarding interface connectivity. His overall point – that the PWT sounds better than the Bridge – has been observed by many PWT/PWD/Bridge owners. I believe that there is something to these observations. I do not own the PWT so I cannot make any conclusions.

I am very glad though, that the PS Audio team has identified the existence of SQ differences in Bridge firmware upgrades. Many owners have reported that firmware version “…08” sounds nearly identical to the PWT, while others, including Paul himself, have identified the “u” version as sounding the best. This is good news for Bridge owners because it means that the Bridge can be “tweaked” for better SQ - with the PWT a likely reference source.

I listened to version “u” for more than an hour last night and I can tell you that the soundstage is noticeably better than with previous firmware versions (although, I have yet to go back to “…08” to verify….). With “u” one can hear well into the very wide soundstage and the overall tone is anything but digital-sounding. The Bridge – which is already an outstanding “transport” – is getting even better. I can’t imagine having to get up to load a disc anymore…!!

Even though I only have the PWT and not bridge, I'm still not convinced they sound the same....and that the PWT sounds better from the various discussion by owners of both on the PSA Discussion Bd. ie:

It’s been a while since I heard 2.08 such that I can’t remember how it sounded, but I can say u is a definite improvement over t (24/192 dropout issues aside). Better detail/soundstage than t, and generally a more realistic soundstage. “t” build had a flatter, more lifeless soundstage and not as good detail. “u” build is definitely a step in the right direction.

That said, I get magic playing CD’s from my PWT via my PWD that is missing from hi-rez FLAC via the bridge. I consistently get excellent detail/soundstaging playing CD’s via PWT. Everything tells me that the higher bit-rate recordings should blow CD’s/PWT away, but I honestly have felt a bit underwhelmed from what I’ve been getting from hi-rez FLAC over the bridge, or even FLAC’s ripped from my CD’s.

I just A/B’ed Dave Matthews/Tim Reynolds Live at Radio City flipping between playing the original CD on PWT, and a bit-perfect/AccurateRip2 FLAC rip from dbPowerAmp played over the bridge. The rip from my CD is a guaranteed bit-perfect copy of the original CD via AccurateRip2 validation. In any case, even with this latest “u” build of the bridge firmware, the soundstage and finest details are better resolved by the PWT vs. FLAC played over the bridge. I played both albums simultaneously, flipping between bridge and I2S1 inputs, with music within a second of each other on both sources.

Consistently, resolution/detail of guitar strings played during the concert recording is finer with PWT, as is soundstage of the concert hall. You can really hear the difference when listening to bridge source for 20 seconds, and then you flip to PWT. “u” definitely beats “t”, and it’s not like “u” sounds bad- it’s quite good, it’s just that I have to give the nod to the PWT for cases where I can do a direct A/B comparison. That said, given that PWD is doing the digital-analog conversion in both cases, the expectation is that sound would be identical.

I’d be interested if staff at PS Audio or folks with a PWT and a bridge (with a well broken in PWT and similarly broken in quality silver-coated HDMI cable) can hear a similar difference. At any rate, it’s another good comparison point beyond just comparing firmware versions with each other, and is one that is also I2S.

http://www.psaudio.com/ps/forum/viewthread/1948/P45/

Here's someone who compared to Bridge 2.08 & 2.08U and PWT:

Chime

Just waking up as my experiment kept me up till 3am

Last night I played for 2 hours comparing 2.08 to “u”. To my ears, 2.08 is the winner, in every respect. I understand things are subjective, however, particular with cymbals, sopranos and violins there is an edge with u that makes it a little irritating to listen to. I also find more dimension with 2.08.

Another hour of comparing 2.08 v. PWT with all the same music and 2.08 is closer to the PWT than “u: but the PWT is still superior. However, both have an ease and are more listenable, the edge gone. In particular the PWT images beautifully, well focused with better layering. Percussions on both are superb.

The PWT is the standard, period. This is what we need them to focus on, in my opinion.

http://www.psaudio.com/ps/forum/viewthread/1948/P75/

Not trying to start controversy. Just sharing experiences.

These guys have both the Bridge and the PWT. I communicate with them via the forum all the time and I can say without hesitation that they are impressed with the Bridge. That's not saying the PWT doesn't edge out the Bridge. I think it probably does.

Here's the deal though, I can sit down in my listening chair and never have to move a muscle (except to raise my beverage to my lips). I have more than 3,000 CDs ripped - that's about 35,000 songs available to me via my iTouch. Considering the Bridge delivers true high end sound, this is pretty amazing. Some people actually prefer the Bridge over the PWT, so obviously there’s not a big discrepancy in sound quality. Additionally, it now looks like the PS-A techs may have figured out a way to tweak the Bridge’s sound quality.

Since you already own the PWD, I cannot image why you haven’t jumped on ordering the Bridge…?

By the way, it’s all good; you’re not starting anything controversial. I totally respect all your input.