Review and Measurements of PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC

[Johnb]

Corrected. Multitasking by watching the news and typing at the same time.

Very ambitious. That should delay the onset of dementia!!!

 

[ripvw]

Why can’t people understand engineering quality performance is not a synonym for audibility quality performance to not conflate the two and be more precise in what they say?

here is a thread that attempts to determine what the audible thresholds are:

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...of-amp-and-dac-measurements.5734/#post-127757

All of the tests that Amir does on this site - as well as those that other members have done with their own test equipment - are linked to decades of research and testing done by the AES. AES standards of performance have been developed for every step of the music recording and playback process from mics to speakers and headphones. At one time it was painfully obvious that the state-of-the-art in pro audio equipment performance lagged significantly behind our ability as listeners to hear differences. Modern equipment has reached thresholds in measured performance that in blind testing by the AES and others illustrates that transparency has been reached - at least with some professional audio equipment. Well designed home hi-fi gear can also measure and perform at that level - but the blind testing in many cases has NOT been done in this area. For better or worse product testing of audio equipment at the consumer level has become a rarity - and blind testing is even more rare. Stereophile and Hi-Fi News are two magazines that I read that continue to test, but InnerFidelity apparently no longer does and many others never have. I personally believe that one of the reasons that Amir has not found any AVR's that test well SO FAR is because hardly anyone holds the manufacturers accountable for designing gear that performs to even a lenient standard. Why should a manufacturer spend the money and time to engineer for excellence in measured performance if no one holds them accountable - and if no one cares?

Fortunately for those of us who do care, Amir has spent thousands of dollars of his own money and hours and hours of time testing everything from sub-$100 DACs and headphone amps to multi-thousand dollar pro audio and high-end consumer audio gear. The thread above attempts to correlate the testing done on this site with our ability to hear differences - there are other threads similar to it that focus more deeply on one aspect or another of measurability vs audibility. This process should continue and as you and others have pointed out we all hear differently. There are also threads on this site that link to various tests that one can perform with headphones to determine own own ability to hear differences with both test tones and music sources. I personally believe that this website is a treasure trove of both data and insight into what matters - and what doesn't - when it comes to home audio music reproduction. And it appears that ASR may be making a difference in that some manufacturers have actually "upped their game" in response to poor testing on this website. I support Amir is his quest for what matters with a few bucks every month and I know many others do as well - perhaps you'll join us...

 

[Zog]

I've lived in Germany and spent a few weeks in Sydney and Cairns, and I much prefer the second as well. The huge negative of Australia is how far is, and their fu..ing customs. They worsen the effects of distance. Open customs like in HK would make AU much better.

After WWII the SS fled to New Zealand and took over the Customs. I nearly got strip searched by a cheap nylon-wearing bureaucrat (and her teenage side kick who was surely the North Island Acne champion) for bringing in a coral necklace. Then I made the blunder by telling them I had a connecting flight - music to their ears.

 

[Ron Texas]

Exactly, that's how it was for me after almost 40 years of wrestling with all the physical, technical, and convenience issues with vinyl. To this day I still can't understand the fad of vinyl resurgence. BLAH.. LOL

It's all about ritual. Personally, I don't touch the stuff.

 

[GrimSurfer]

Why should a manufacturer spend the money and time to engineer for excellence in measured performance if no one holds them accountable - and if no one cares?

I think that many people don't know why they should care... and manufacturers are quite happy for this to continue.

This site is in a position to change all of that.

 

[Zog]

Looks like the designer, Ted Smith went to the same school of PR that Schiit has with these comments on their forum:

View attachment 34464

Picks random things? Your website shows THD and IM distortions.

Amir, I have followed this thread carefully and with interest. I know as much about electric engineering as you know of the Venus Variation of 15th Century Indian Rope Dancing. My comments are therefore - shall we say - Political. Think N Korea. When the dude with the haircut issues rhetoric it is ostensibly addressed to the the old dude with the colored orange hair. In reality it is directed to his own subjects. It is the Shakespearean game of speaking while knowing you have eavesdroppers.
All a bit sad really - my perception is that you are providing a service to the audiophile community. It appears that you are stepping on some toes. It is difficult for them to react appropriately. It is not my place to give advice to the people who's toes have been misaligned but my mother taught me this: (oh and this is great way as many defence counsel will attest). Keep quiet.

Also, and I am sure you know this already: When you critisise with falsehood that is not good but at least the defendant can respond with truth. However when you criticise with the truth - that is a different ballgame. Some people (and I have seen a couple here!) acknowledge error or the difference of opinion or relative importance of fact). Sadly most defendants resort to ad hominem. My perception is that is the response you are facing.

 

[amirm]

Do you believe that is a conscious effort to actively deceive his followers? Does he know better?

If so, that's just fundamental dishonesty. If not, is he some kind of simple charlatan? Any other options?

He is in a very tough position. Unlike software where you can quick go and fix things and release it quickly, with hardware you are stuck. Even if he can change the design, it is not in the cards and at any rate, will take forever to roll out. So in the interim he is trying to keep the boat afloat with enough technical talk to be ahead of the audience. To admit a mistake in the design of this product is a bridge too far for most designers. Personal pride and the amount of money at stake is too much to just accept the facts as they are.

This is one of the reasons I hate hardware business. Ted left that for this aggravating field. Great lesson I once learned was: "the worst thing you can do to a great hobby is to turn it into a business!" Just because you love audio, isn't enough reason to get into hardware business....

 

[amirm]

All a bit sad really - my perception is that you are providing a service to the audiophile community. It appears that you are stepping on some toes. It is difficult for them to react appropriately. It is not my place to give advice to the people who's toes have been misaligned but my mother taught me this: (oh and this is great way as many defence counsel will attest). Keep quiet.

I appreciate that advice. I don't mind addressing any technical comment provided because it is another educational opportunity to explain things. I try to keep my answers informative. And any rate, I don't want any counter technical argument left unanswered. Audiophiles deserve to see answers when they exist.

I wish every designer in audio cared about excellence and faithfulness in sound reproduction so I did not have to do this work. But we have lost our way for so long that there has been mad gold rush to build products that no longer consider the word "high fidelity" to have any meaning. By having no third-party scrutiny of their design and execution, combined with false methods of subjective audio listening, they are going south when they should be going north. I don't know any other industry that is so left alone to actually go counter purpose to its stated goal.

What they should know is that no matter how fast I review products, more is constantly coming. If I were them, I would buy proper audio analyzers, learn how to perform correct listening tests and build better products. Maybe then, I review their product as a result of that kind of due diligence, not before.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

I appreciate that advice. I don't mind addressing any technical comment provided because it is another educational opportunity to explain things. I try to keep my answers informative. And any rate, I don't want any counter technical argument left unanswered. Audiophiles deserve to see answers when they exist.

I wish every designer in audio cared about excellence and faithfulness in sound reproduction so I did not have to do this work. But we have lost our way for so long that there has been mad gold rush to build products that no longer consider the word "high fidelity" to have any meaning. By having no third-party scrutiny of their design and execution, combined with false methods of subjective audio listening, they are going south when they should be going north. I don't know any other industry that is so left alone to actually go counter purpose to its stated goal.

What they should know is that no matter how fast I review products, more is constantly coming. If I were them, I would buy proper audio analyzers, learn how to perform correct listening tests and build better products. Maybe then, I review their product as a result of that kind of due diligence, not before.

I think the worst thing about all these bad products that find their way to you is that good design doesn't cost any more than bad design. Sure a more expensive unit may have better parts, and a fancy expensive case, but some people would still rest easy with the purchase if only the product were well designed b/c they like their components to be audiophile jewelry. But when the fancy price combines with performance handily exceeded by any number of far lower priced units, that's nothing but a rip off.

 

[beefkabob]

The banality of choosing professionally engineered equipment pales in comparison.

Don't knock banal until you've tried it.

 

[beefkabob]

Why can’t people understand engineering quality performance is not a synonym for audibility quality performance to not conflate the two and be more precise in what they say?

"engineering quality performance" is not identical to "audibility quality performance" but they are synonymous. Engineering performance brings better audibility performance up to the point that the human can no longer hear the difference. Then there's just headroom. Plus, if they got that part so amazingly right, they probably got the other parts right.

 

[digicidal]

I think the worst thing about all these bad products that find their way to you is that good design doesn't cost any more than bad design. Sure a more expensive unit may have better parts, and a fancy expensive case, but some people would still rest easy with the purchase if only the product were well designed b/c they like their components to be audiophile jewelry. But when the fancy price combines with performance handily exceeded by any number of far lower priced units, that's nothing but a rip off.

Exactly! I for one would love to shop for gear in a world where the manufacturing cost was the sole variable - in other words, where I could reasonably expect that any piece of gear would perform near the optimum levels allowed. I think most consumers would like a product costing multiples of a cheaper device's price to be at least a small amount better in every way. Most would even understand that there would be diminishing returns in that pursuit.

There won't ever be a time where a $6000 DAC performs 20X better than a $300 DAC - especially if the $300 DAC is already at a level where it's audibly transparent to the source. However hopefully, along with the beautiful chassis, large, clear display panel, and great customer service - it is also engineered to have at least slightly better measurements. Even if we assume that the $300 version has attained such amazing levels that it simply can't be improved upon with current technologies - then at least make sure it measures 100% as well as the cheaper one. Let the consumer decide if the premium is worth it for appearance alone (you might be surprised at how many do)!

Companies like Matrix Audio, Okto Research and others have shown that it's possible to make objectively superior and subjectively appealing components. Similarly the SMSL, Topping, Khadas, etc. offerings show that by shedding the majority of the aesthetic bits (and trimming a few features)... fantastic performance is attainable within a very modest budget as well. All while leaving plenty of room for companies and individuals like @March Audio to provide products which reside somewhere in the middle.

 

[Sal1950]

I still love this one,

"The gullibility of audiophiles is what astonishes me the most, even after all these years. How is it possible, how did it ever happen, that they trust fairy-tale purveyors and mystic gurus more than reliable sources of scientific information? It wasn’t always so. Between the birth of “high fidelity,” circa 1947, and the early 1970s, what the engineers said was accepted by that generation of hi-fi enthusiasts as the truth. Then, as the ’70s decade grew older, the self-appointed experts without any scientific credentials started to crawl out of the woodwork. For a while they did not overpower the educated technologists but by the early ’80s they did, with the subjective “golden-ear” audio magazines as their chief line of communication. I remember pleading with some of the most brilliant academic and industrial brains in audio to fight against all the nonsense, to speak up loudly and brutally before the untutored drivel gets out of control, but they just laughed, dismissing the “flat-earthers” and “cultists” with a wave of the hand. Now look at them! Talk to the know-it-all young salesman in the high-end audio salon, read the catalogs of Audio Advisor, Music Direct, or any other high-end merchant, read any of the golden-ear audio magazines, check out the subjective audio websites—and weep. The witch doctors have taken over. Even so, all is not lost. You can still read Floyd Toole and Siegfried Linkwitz on loudspeakers, Douglas Self and Bob Cordell on amplifiers, David Rich (hometheaterhifi.com) on miscellaneous audio subjects, and a few others in that very sparsely populated club. (I am not including The Audio Critic, now that it has become almost silent.) Once you have breathed that atmosphere, you will have a pretty good idea what advice to ignore."

Peter Aczel

 

[JJB70]

You can never quote Peter Aczel too mant times! I still regularly read the old Audio Critic magazines and it is really both very sad and telling that his general observations could be written today and be just as true. And then audiophiles wonder why the hobby is dismissed as a bubble of snake oil by so many people.

 

[phoenixdogfan]

You can never quote Peter Aczel too mant times! I still regularly read the old Audio Critic magazines and it is really both very sad and telling that his general observations could be written today and be just as true. And then audiophiles wonder why the hobby is dismissed as a bubble of snake oil by so many people.

Peter Aczel was one of my biggest influences. I was a charter subscriber to the Audio Critic, and some of the products he pointed me in the direction of included Rogers LS 3/5as, the Hafler DH 200, the Fidelity Research FR 64s tonearm (which I paid over $1100 for in 1977 at age 24), and the Benchmark DAC 1.

But the things I internalized from his writing (like rationality and the belief that no effect can exist without a cause) counted even more, and it guides me toward informed buying decisions even today. RIP Peter.

And , btw, this is both the best of times and the worst of times (sorry CD) when it comes to audio. Yes, there's plenty of snake oil, but there's also outstanding product producing better sound than ever at really accessible price points. You just have to know where to look, and how to think.

 

[Blumlein 88]

gorgeous - but I prefer the point-to-point wired Quicksilver and Music Reference products - and they have both tested well in Stereophile:

http://quicksilveraudio.com

http://ramlabs-musicreference.com

I've owned and worked on both of those. I actually prefer VTL's. They seemed in years past to have heftier power supplies and better output xfmrs. Not as pretty however.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Plenty of love, but I find their aesthetic and machining skills to be a distant second to AR's. Plus small 2" VU vs full 15" wide edge-lit VU on glass... no comparison.

snip.........

Fair enough. I know many have VU meter fetishes. That is ok, but not for me. One of those things that looks neat, and after 5 minutes I don't care, and after 15 minutes I want to cover them up.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Why can’t people understand engineering quality performance is not a synonym for audibility quality performance to not conflate the two and be more precise in what they say?

Ok, I am ducking out before rotten eggs and tomatoes head my way.

Some people do understand that. I'm sure some treat the SINAD chart like Stereophile recommended components in class A, B, C, D etc. Some don't.

I rather like as a goal to get total system performance to 16 bit levels. Even though I've not found recordings (other than artificially created tracks) which exceed 12 bits.

In my video system, I've a pre/pro which by distortion isn't quite 16 bit. It is about 15 bits. But I'm not hearing -90 db distortion in the presence of music or movie dialogue. So not a big deal. Dynamic range, especially with movies might matter more. The unit has a over 100 db there. So about 17.5 bits. And movies with their created from scratch special effects sounds might exceed that. My speakers are fairly clean to 105 db and might do peaks of 115 db while getting dirty. And room noise in bands I can hear best are around 10 db SPL. My amps are actually quieter and have more dynamic range than the pre/pro so electronically the pre/pro is the bottleneck. So again good enough even with the bottleneck good enough. Total system this might exceed what is audible even with what is mediocre performance. It probably is 14 bit by the time I hear it.

Yet for what the pre/pro costs, with just a little care it could add 20 db to all the metrics toward the good side. If it were available for same cost, why not get that? But I understand it is just gilding the lily.

So I get what you are talking about while still thinking you are trying to poison the well. Why go on about this in a thread about a rather expensive under-performing stereo DAC? Audible or not, my pre-pro retailed for 1/4th the cost, has 9 channels, far more convenience, can do some streaming, and video all while outperforming every aspect of this PS audio unit other than jitter. The extra range beyond the audible gives me some leeway in terms of variable gain staging with multiple sources.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Ooo Ooo, Look what I just found! Don't want to take this thread too off topic so I started a new thread.
JBL has made the 705/8's purdy, passive, and bigger.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/new-jbl-and-revel-speaker-lines.9162/

Looks like they took an LSR308, and put it in a wooden box with some woofers built in.

I need that center channel though maybe with a woofer cut off each end.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I appreciate that advice. I don't mind addressing any technical comment provided because it is another educational opportunity to explain things. I try to keep my answers informative. And any rate, I don't want any counter technical argument left unanswered. Audiophiles deserve to see answers when they exist.

I wish every designer in audio cared about excellence and faithfulness in sound reproduction so I did not have to do this work. But we have lost our way for so long that there has been mad gold rush to build products that no longer consider the word "high fidelity" to have any meaning. By having no third-party scrutiny of their design and execution, combined with false methods of subjective audio listening, they are going south when they should be going north. I don't know any other industry that is so left alone to actually go counter purpose to its stated goal.

What they should know is that no matter how fast I review products, more is constantly coming. If I were them, I would buy proper audio analyzers, learn how to perform correct listening tests and build better products. Maybe then, I review their product as a result of that kind of due diligence, not before.

Yes, this times 1 million.

We have lost our way to the point the gold rush almost thinks "high fidelity" is a bad word.