In case anyone's still reading tis thread, I did upgrade my Teta genVIII to the series 3, and it was a significant improvement. Much more open in the upper frequencies, more detail for sure. Also deeper and more resolving bass. I think a lot of the improvement comes from upgrading the preamp, because my turntable (which I run through the analog inputs) exhibits a lot of the same improvements. I am under the impression that Theta intentionally used a "rich" sounding preamp in the original gen8 to mask any digital harshness, and that now that the digital circuitry is more natural sounding, they can use a more neutral and revealing preamp. |
Superior sound from Bryston BDP-1 digital music player to PWD MK II dac compared to even the highest end transport, if:
- Good rips from CD's using DBpoweramp; or
- High quality download from good source; needn't be high res;
- Use the right digicable. Don't stint here, it makes an enormous SQ difference.
I was an Unbeliever, now I am not. Still one, though, as to computer itself as the source or streaming sources, as opposed to direct digital like the BDP-1.
One man's opinion.
Neal |
Many of the ultra high end guys are demoing their five and six figure speakers at shows with computer based sources. If there was a compromise they would not do this. So if you don't cut any corners, you will get similar or better quality from a computer source than a CD player. This involves using a good CD ripping program, a dedicated music server, a high grade USB converter (unless you have a DAC with very good USB input), and a good USB cable (not without controversy this one). |
Hi Guys
Slightly off topic here. Are you getting the same or maybe better sound out of your computer fed system, than from your (good) CDP?
I am struggling to get close. |
Im using 2.03 and will NOT be going back to 2.1 |
QUOTE "I do feel sympathy for people who are buying brand new MK2 DACs, find the sound to be a bit ruthless, and cannot switch to version 2.0.2 because that firmware does not work with the new front panel display of their new MK2 DAC".
Well, let's see if we can do something about that.
Pls stay tuned. |
Tonyptony, according to PS Audio, version 2.0.2 only has a problem with de-emphasis flag decoding for the S/PDIF input, not for any other digital input. So, yeah, you would have a problem if your transport is a CD player connected by coaxial cable to the Perfect Wave DAC. In that case, you can switch to version 2.0.3, which fixes the de-emphasis flag decoding for the S/PDIF input. With all other digital inputs (HDMI, AES/EBU, USB, optical), NativeX works fine in version 2.0.2.
A while back, the topic of one of Paul McGowan's daily e-mails was the mystery surrounding the differences in sound quality between different versions of PS Audio's firmware and software. He wrote, "Fact is we’ve been struggling with trying to figure out why small changes in the code that runs our products have an impact on the sound quality – why folks love one version of software and dislike another. There are many great mysteries concerning sound quality and they only become obvious once you figure them out." (Unfortunately, they have not figured out the mystery yet.) He goes on to write that differences in sound quality "might seem obvious to you but not to our designers since the changes we were making had 'nothing' to do with the data stream or the audio itself. Sometimes a change in the front panel display code would cause a major upset in sound quality." So, even Paul McGowan is admitting that a change to 2.0.2 to fix de-emphasis flag decoding for the S/PDIF input may cause 2.0.3 to sound different than 2.0.2.
In any case, PS Audio does seem to want to resolve this mystery. My only concern is that Paul McGowan has said that he likes version 2.1.0 (now 2.2.0, I guess) better than other versions. Mrtennis elsewhere has said that PS Audio's product revisions tend to make them sound more analytical. So it is by no means certain that their programmers are aiming to replicate the sound quality of 2.0.2 as they continue to revise and refine firmware. As long as they make a number of firmware versions available, as is the case now, I am not overly concerned. I do feel sympathy for people who are buying brand new MK2 DACs, find the sound to be a bit ruthless, and cannot switch to version 2.0.2 because that firmware does not work with the new front panel display of their new MK2 DAC. |
Mcondon, as you may know from reading through the PSA forums, the only difference between FW 2.0.2 and 2.0.3 was essentially enabling a flag so that pre-emphasized CDs could be properly decoded. If one tries to play a pre-emphasized CD with 2.0.2 it will not decode properly. Other than that they *supposed* to be identical. :-)
I personally have not noticed any significant differences between these two - unlike either of these and 2.1.0. Having said that, the whole issue of sonic differences between FW versions with the PWD is too tough to call. I would not contradict anyone who felt they heard a difference between 2.0.2 and 2.0.3. Paul McGowan and the PSA development team have been dissecting the sound difference problem for a while. I've tried all of them and actually prefer 2.2.0 (which is what is being shipped with the Mk.II upgrade right now), but my system has a detailed yet warm characteristic that may be a better balance for this version than 2.0.2 or .3.
The downside of the 2.0.2/2.0.3 verssions is they do not work completely correctly in NativeX mode. So there's a tradeoff there. IMO NativeX provides greater sonic benefit (in my system) than whatever those versions can add to the sound I'm already getting. |
So what firmware is loaded in the original MK I version of this dac?Is it the 2.0.2 you preferred ,or something else.Also how can you identify what firmware your dac has?Considering pulling the plug on both PS units (dac& trans.).Seems like the Mk I would be be to my liking,but then there's the firmware you prefer that might suit my tastes better.
Thanks,
Den |
Edorr, no reason to be skeptical or to blindly believe my assertions. You can buy an SD card reader at Radio Shack or Best Buy for under $10 and then try each firmware version yourself.
But I am not the only one who notices substantial differences in sound quality among different versions of the firmware. PS Audio's own community forum has a thread on the subject. The vast majority of owners who contributed to that thread preferred 2.0.2 pretty strongly to version 2.1.0. Similarly, Head-Fi has a massive thread about the Perfect Wave DAC, and toward the end, a number of people stated that they preferred the sound of the original MK1 DAC to the MK2 upgrade, finding the latter to be too bright and fatiguing for headphone listening. These folks were told to try 2.0.2 in place of 2.1.0. They then reported back that they were very happy with the upgrade once they had installed 2.0.2.
Mrtennis, I have no idea why so many Perfect Wave DACs have come up for sale here in the last year or two. The most benign explanation is that the Perfect Wave DAC had a very high market share after it was first introduced, so it naturally represents a large share of used sales now. The other possibility is that a fair number of owners are not happy with sound quality or with the complexity of setting up the Bridge + NAS + eLyric, and want something simpler or cheaper. Unfortunately, Audiogon provides a regular reminder that digital equipment is a lousy investment. |
does anyone have a theory as to why there are so many pwds, for sale, given the availability of upgrades ?? |
Mcondon, PS audio is specifically positioning the DAC as a network steaming device. The ultimate goal is to get the bridge interface to sound as good as the PWT, which theoretically it should be capable of. I personally went from using the bridge to the AES/EBU interface (I inserted a Trinnov processor in the chain before the PWD MKII), and found the differences between the bridge (I2S) and AES/EBU minimal after the MKII upgrade.
I never fiddled with firmware versions myself, and I am hugely sceptical of assertions about a DAC you would not like with firmware 2.1.0 turning into an unbeatable giant killer DAC with firmware version 2.0.2, but that's just me. |
Great report, Mcondon. The Perfect Wave DAC has a special synergy with the Perfect Wave Transport, with sound quality leagues better than from other digital sources, including computers, cheap transports, and even PS Audio's Bridge There must be a way to equal that special synergy using a computer as the source. It's the same data, you just have to deliver it to the DAC in the same way, right? Would love to hear Paul McGowan's thoughts on this. |
What has been really striking to me is how the sound quality of the MK2 Perfect Wave DAC depends so substantially on the firmware used. With an SD card reader, it is quite easy to demo the three versions of the DAC firmware that PS Audio has made available on its forum. Buy a $5 SD card reader at Radio Shack and you can try each version very easily.
Today, I installed and listened to all three firmware versions in succession for about 45 minutes each (with the PW Transport as my sourcee), starting with firmware version 2.1.0. This is the firmware that is shipping with the latest upgrade kits and is factory installed on new MK2 DACs. With 2.1.0, the sound quality is very dynamic and very extended. However, the upper frequencies seem much too forward for my tastes, making the DAC seem somewhat artificial and ultimately fatiguing. The best aspect of 2.1.0 is that bass is really impressive. It is very deep, very resolved, and moves a lot of air. If downstream equipment is fairly warm and you are looking for better bass, this firmware might be a good choice.
I also tried version 2.0.3 today. This version is supposedly similar to version 2.0.2, although 2.0.3 corrects some minor programming issue that affects the S/PDIF input. (I have used the S/PDIF input with all three firmware versions without any difficulty.) Version 2.0.3 is less fatiguing than version 2.1.0, but bass seems overly lean to me. This firmware might work best if you have a powered sub.
Version 2.0.2 in my system still sounds head and shoulders better than the other versions. The mid-range is simply transfixing and the bass is still really solid -- perhaps not as resolved as with version 2.1.0, but still really dynamic and pleasing. With version 2.0.2, everything falls into place so coherently and musically that I stop thinking about equipment altogether and just listen to the music. Vocals really shine with 2.0.2. Image placement also seems better with this firmware.
So, experimentation with firmware (if possible) is definitely worth the effort.
I dare say that opinions of this Perfect Wave DAC in both reviews and in some DAC shootouts I have read about on other forums are probably not very meaningful. I would not like the DAC very much, especially in light of the price, if it was loaded with version 2.1.0 or even version 2.0.3. With version 2.0.2, my guess is that it would beat all comers in the general price range. (I also question the validity of DAC shootouts and reviews when owners compare the Perfect Wave DAC to Weiss, Berkeley, or AMR, using a computer as a source. The Perfect Wave DAC was not designed as a USB DAC. The Perfect Wave DAC has a special synergy with the Perfect Wave Transport, with sound quality leagues better than from other digital sources, including computers, cheap transports, and even PS Audio's Bridge.) |
Mrtennis: The most noticeable improvements of the MK2 board are bass and soundstage. That is what I noticed in a before/after comparison, not side by side. I will say that I find well-recorded CDs to sound more dialed in, immediate, and absorbing. So, it is likely that more changed than bass and soundstage. Even my wife, who takes little interest in audio, has commented on how the sound quality has improved. (I use the Transport with an HDMI cable, and haven't experimented with other digital connections.) |
Would certainly be interested in the results, if you get around to it. |
I own an OR5 and a PWD MKII with bridge, so I could do a shoot out. Problem is my system is configured to run through a processor using AEs/EBU so this would be a bit of a hassle. May be I'll get around to it some day. |
I don't really care about the jitter profile, Steve, I was just using your terminology. What I am curious about is the sound of Ethernet into the bridge compared to OR5 into I2S. |
Drubin - one would have to open-up the PWD and measure this with much care. I have not done this. Even if I did and gave you the spectrum of jitter, what could you glean from that????
Noone has even correlated this kind of measurement with sound quality yet.
IMO, our best measurement tool is our ears. This is after all what we end-up using in this application. Its kind of like designing a software simulator for a car tire design. Helpful of course, but there is nothing like driving on the tires on an obstacle course and wet and snowy roads to find out if they are any good or not.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Thanks Steve, I had read that but somehow forgot that he covered all that ground. The one missing piece is Ethernet to the bridge. What's the jitter profile of that? |
Drubin - here is Jiminias post:
http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ddgtl&1320430393&openflup&74&4#74
As for why, its simply differences in jitter magnitude and spectrum. Jitter is the #1 performance limiter in digital audio.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Question for Jiminia and anyone else: What sonic differences have you heard with the PWD between these input options:
1. Ethernet into the bridge
2. Computer USB to OR5 to PWD via I2S
3. Computer directly to PWD via USB
My main interest is the comparison between 1 and 2 and why they would be meaningfully different, if they are. |
hi mcondon:
are you suggesting that the only benefits from the 2.02 board are bass definition and an improvement in staging??
i use either i2s or coax as my input from the pwt to the pwd. |
Mrtennis: I am very sensitive about anything that sounds overly analytical or fatiguing...so I am in the same camp as you. I think the MK2 is a significant improvement over the MK1, so long as you install firmware version 2.0.2 in the MK2. The MK2 DAC using 2.0.2 firmware is more musically involving than the MK1 with better defined bass and better soundstage. In no way is the MK2 worse sounding, fatiguing, or overly analytical. The improvement is very obvious with the PW Transport in my system, although not quite "mind blowing", just substantially better. Mind you, I still think the SQ from the Perfect Wave Transport far exceeds the SQ from other inputs and from the Bridge. The Bridge has not lived up to the hype yet, which may explain why so many PW DACs are for sale. |
well worth the $$ on every front -- easy to hear, easy to justify |
Mrtennis, for some the funds of the upgrade may be better applied towards a state of the art tennis racket. For the rest of us the upgrade is a no brainier. We are enjoying our upgrade every day, some of the best bang for the buck ever in high end audio. Cheers! |
MrTennis:
Based on what I have read of your posts/threads, I truly believe that you would be thrilled with the improvement the MKII upgrade provides compared to the MKI version. Bass control may indeed be improved - as suggested by Mcondon, but what I notice most is the increased sense of air and the openness of the overall sound stage (a better definition of the combined total - i.e.: a more spacious, more involving overall presentation offering better tonal balance and timbre).
The MKII is clearly better than the MKI, but it is not a night and day difference for most people. Since you can discern clear differences between digital cables, the MKII upgrade will be a very noticeable improvement for you. It's smoother if anything. Definitely not more clinical. |
hi mcondon:
i appreciate the distinction between the two versions of the mark 2 upgrade.
the question is will i prefer the 2.02 upgrade to not upgrading at all ??
i know that question cannot be answered definitively, but i notice significant changes accruing from varying digital cable.
the cost of the upgrade may be better allocated to another area in the stereo system. |
Anyone have this experience with the Mk. II upgrade?:
I am getting "skips" or brief interruptions in the music, when running a MAC book via USB into the DAC (it really does "sound like vinyl"!). Happens with two different USB cables, but not with a CDP running in via coax. The problem did not happen with the Mk I board, and happens in different places on alternate playings of the same track, so I'm disinclined to blame the MAC or software. Power is dedicated circuit, running through BPT conditioner.
Have been in contact with PSA, but no resolution yet. Thoughts?
Thx,
John |
Mrtennis, my experience is that the upgrade's effect on sound quality depends critically on which version of the firmware you install after the upgrade. The SD cards that are shipping with the Mk2 board contain firmware version 2.1.0. The sound with this firmware is very extended at both frequency extremes but perhaps a bit too hot in the treble and a bit too clinical...great for a laid back system, but not so great in more highly resolving systems.
The sound quality of the Mk2 digital board is significantly different if you instead install the earlier version of the firmward, version 2.0.2. This is available on the PS Audio website in the "support" section. You just copy these files onto the SD card, replacing the files that are pre-loaded onto the SD card. This can all be done with a $5 SD card reader from Best Buy, Staples, or Radio Shack.
With the 2.0.2 firmware, my guess is that you would really like the Mk 2 upgrade. The main difference I noticed was substantially improved bass, but a mid-range and treble that is still warm and very musical. In other words, real improvement over the Mk1 DAC that doesn't veer towards overly clinical, fatiguing, or bright in any real sense.
Wit both firmware versions, the soundstage of the DAC widens pretty significantly, which is another very noticeable area of improvement. That said, the soundstage of the Perfect Wave DAC is still not all that wide.
I know there has been some debate on the PS Audio forum, with numerous upgraders complaining that they are not happy with the latest firmware version, 2.1.0. In response, PS Audio has allowed owners to download the earlier 2.0.2 version of the DAC firmware to see whether they prefer the earlier version. My impression from the PS Audio forums is that Paul McGowan prefers the latest version 2.1.0, but has kept version 2.0.2 available. Moreover, they are supposedly developing a new version that they hope will be btter than other firmware version. |
several months ago i inquired as to the sonic benefits of the upgrade.
i received , essentially, two answers.
the first, "analogue" sound, the second, a suggestion to try it for myself and return it if i wasn't satisfied.
i wonder if someone could be specific in rwo areas, namely bass and highs.
do the highs seem more extended, or do they sound less sharp ? perhaps almost rolled off ?
does the bass sound deeper or have more impact ??
considering the cost of shipping, twice if i don't care for the upgrade, i would like to have some confidence before i consider the upgrade.
as many know, i prefer a darker sound, and so i wonder if the upgrade goes in that direction ? |
What voltage level comes out of the PWD's analog outputs (both XLR and RCA)? Thank you. |
re Berkley vs PWD.
I almost kept the Berkley before I heard the PWD.
I was comparing it to QB9 and Wavelength which both sounded sweet but slightly veiled compared to the Berkley.
My original DAC for almost 20 years was the Meitner Bidat with a few mods over the years to keep the components fresh.
The PWD was closer to a Bidat with a very good update plus the added benefit of Hi-res.
It is just more musical than the Berkley.
I forget I am serving from a computer. Especially with the MKII upgrade. YMMV |
Ben maybe my post was not stated correctly. What I was alluding to was the case of uprez ripping then played replayed sans src; vs. a bit perfect rip and uprezed at the dac? Hope thats not too incoherant.
Whats your favorite digital cable? |
Groben - I'm contemplating the Berkeley and PS. Can you describe the differences in sound between the two? Especially in regard to resolution and bass bloom. |
Lewhite:
Native - or NativeX - does not affect/impact the bit rate or the sample rate. Trans-coding only impacts the CODEC (FLAC to WAV).
So, yes it does matter what "rez" you stream from the SS. The higher rez will (should) sound better than lower rez material (24/192 vs 16/44.1). Native/NativeX does not alter the bit/sample rates - it simply bypasses any filters or SRC... |
Would it matter what rez would come out of the SS? Native is still native. Transcode on the fly at the SS shouldnt matter either. Right? |
Ben
The option to engage or not is there as a "choice" right now ans also to future proof the MKII since who knows what resolution will eventually come out of the Silent Server.
It just gives more user options in case something else changes [ like a new brdge]. |
Well, the posts over at the PS forum indicate that the new Digital Lens is only engaged when NativeX is activated. My assumptions were therefore incorrect. |
I'm not sure about my aforementioned assumptions as stated in the above post. I have posed over at PS Audio to confirm/verify... |
that's how i understood it too Ben. sure would be nice to find out for sure though. |
Lewhite.
Native is indeed a bypass of the SRC. NativeX indeed benefits from the new "Digital Lens" built into the new MKII board. I'm not sure of the exact protocol.
I assume that NativeX also bypasses the SRC. What I don't know for sure, but what I also assume to be true, is that the new digital lens is an active component in the signal path (i.e.: that you don't necessarily bypass it when NativeX is not activated - what would be the point of bypassing such an integral component of the new board...?). So my guess is - someone correct me if I'm wrong - that the signal is always routed through the new "Digital Lens," while NativeX bypasses the SRC (as does Native)...?? |
Not sure how my edits all got posted?
My apologies.. |
I responded to your questions this morning, but for some reason its not been posted yet. Here it is again - maybe this one will get posted quicker.
I use USB for two reasons: First, its 100% reliable. No network issues, no dropouts, no flaky software, and it can sound superb when done right. Second, I like the option of the digital outputs from the converter so I can run other devices (like a DAC/headphone amp, for example).
The PS Audio-compatible I2S is available in the Off-Ramp 5, which I know Steve is tweaking right now. I'd be surprised if it can be retrofitted to older units, but that's a question best addressed to him. |
"Are you saying that Steve is using PSA's I2S offering it as an option?"
It's not an option. Standard on the OR5.
"I wonder if my Pace-Car can be modded with the same?"
Sorry, but no. HDMI I2S is a completely different electrical interface.
Steve N.
Empirical Audio |
Yes the Berkley was a dealer demo so it had break-in and hours on it.
It's a great dac too.
If I could afford to keep them all, they all have their signature, then I could select based on my mood.
I needed to make a decision so PWD was the one that kept me in my chair longer. Less wires too! |
Two reasons I use USB: First, its 100% reliable. No dropouts, no network issues, and no flaky software, and with the right converter it sounds superb. Second, I like having the digital out options on the Off-Ramp to feed other devices (like a DAC/headphone amp, for example).
The I2S in hdmi format will be part of Nugent's new Off-Ramp, the 5. I'd be very surprised if any of his older units can be retrofitted, but that's a question best addressed to him. |
I am under the impression that native and nativeX are two different things. Is not native a bypass of the sample rate converter; and nativeX a fifo buffer aka digital lens that resides close to dac processor chip instead of in the transport? |
Jiminia: why would you use USB (or converted usb) to feed the pwd? |
@jiminia,
Are you saying that Steve is using PSA's I2S offering it as an option? I wonder if my Pace-Car can be modded with the same?
@Grobec,
That is good news. Was the Berkeley fully broken-in? |
