Quote:


It was a real mixed listening session for me - so I'm hoping Steve chimes in so I'm not really speaking for him.

I will say by the end of the night, after we worked out some issues, got a preamp in there, dialed in all the gain(s), did a bunch of A/B tests; Steve said it's the best digital source he's heard so far.

Well, the short version is that I couldn't get the quality of sound at Steve's shop that I do effortlessly at home. I brought my DAC, Mini-PC, and a cheap WiFi router and Laptop to remote control the Mini-PC. Took me all of 15 minutes to setup and worked perfectly (for once) - but didn't sound right.

Steve's XLR inputs on his personal ZMA are slightly different from mine which I think caused some gain issues. So we eventually switched to RCA, and inserted a CSP3 (which Steve said would get me to the volume I'm used to with the Oppo and Otari as source, as well as step up the sound with a little more density - and after listening I think I agree).

Steve's speakers and room are different, and I'm probably just used to my MG-944. So the imaging was off for me.

After a few hours of swapping things in and out, even trying his TEAC (which right off the bat sounded better and more musical than the DS till we got our gain issues worked out and gear warmed up), we finally got things settled and the sound was quite amazing. It took more effort to get to that point then it should have - which really put me off. When I set this up at my place, I get great sound in 15 minutes. We've not done it yet, but I'm betting when I drag my (current) setup over to Palomino's it will only take 15 minutes as well - judging from how easily the Oppo/ZMA sessions at his place went. So that's why it's such a mixed session for me. Maybe I just don't know Steve's room and gear well enough, but it was too much effort to get to that glued to the seat greatness this gear has.

I will say that after we got everything setup correctly, dialed in better, gear warmed up,  planets in alignment and sacrifice to the audio gods, the sound while playing DSD was approaching tape *if* the recording was to the level of tape. Steve kept having me play DSD files most of the night - the Opus 3 Sampler #3 - House of the Rising Sun really approached the analog sound and density I've come to associate with reel to reel playback; that is an exceptional recording, and the DS with CSP3 and Mystery Amp were up to the task and brought the recording up a step from what I'm used to at home.

What speakers were you running?

Dave asked,

"Are you getting a lot more detail from Redbook vs the PWD?  I feel like that comes up quite frequently on the PS Audio forums."

Well, I'm not sure what people mean when they say "more detail." I hear more detail in the following manner: there is a little bit more instrumental placement information which means I hear more depth, I hear more defined imaging. There's a bit more detail which makes me hear a bit more of a "body" to the treble sound, more density to the attack, and oddly, a bit less "body" to the bass sound, the bass is quicker, more precise depiction of the note itself with less accompanying "overhang."

All this also means more detail in room sound as well. More noticeable note decay and resonance.

I won't be one of those who says "I heard things I never heard before." The PWD Mk II was letting me hear all that was on the Redbook. But. . . the way it is presented is a bit different, as if the focus on the listening lens were adjusted ever so slightly so that all was clear.

So yes, I hear more detail, I was actually saying that before when I said more treble body, more depth, quicker bass. Again it's hard to quantify listening differences but maybe 15 percent more all around improvement.

"What speakers were you running?"

Zen Monoliths were the speakers hooked up.

Well, I hear you. I will add that I think you can get that with the CSP3 (or rather in my case the CSP2+ with cryo'd Jupiter caps). But it takes tube rolling, and cable rolling for your exact component and room match. Took me a while to find it and when found it's as if you don't need anything else.

I ended up preferring the PWD MK II directly into the Torri because I was able to use my very best interconnect in that configuration and it made a subtle difference with a tonal balance I prefered. I certainly lived years in the other configuration more than happily. Also my SACD player and ZP3 sound really good with the preamp in there using the next level cables, of which I have enough that they are all the same.

So see if you can get Steve to lend you one of the CSP3s and play around with it, including tube rolling, that's the best way to be sure that it may or may not offer what you are looking for. My experience with other preamps are that if you don't get it with the Decware, you probably just won't get it with any other you can afford.

Edit: Oops, you guys are fast, but this corroborates some of Lon's comments and still applies so here goes.

LR, About the CSP3 resolution issue you mention, I guess my in depth stories are in the CSP3 area, but I had this problem, my Tranquility and MKIV being loaded with micro information, and the Jupitered CSP3 with 6N1Ps would not allow all this important stuff through. It didn't just mask ambience and decay....but wood, string sounds, air, even bass attack and body, really everything... micro detail finishes up the real sound of everything. With cables, feet, and mostly burn in and tube work, I was able to get to a point where the resolution was very similar, though a little different.

But right now, I think it is every bit as resolving as the MkIV alone, and with the added benefit of that CSP/OTL detail that sort of consolidates sound with better dynamics and better definition without feeling like it is "detail" causing it. Attack is magnificent, especially notable on bass attack and solidity, but really I think it is throughout. And gain riding....I really like gain riding. Oddly, the MKIV does not benefit as much from gain riding as the MKIII did, but even with its more neutral presentation, it does benefit quite a bit.

I am thinking two main things are up. One, the CSP3 takes a long time to really do all it can do, expecially with a resolving source and system. And two, the tubes. I have a Siemens E288CC in the front position and some American Amperex Green Globe 6922 gold pins in the power positions. This is by far the best I have had from the CSP3 and a definate improvement on the MKIV and Tranquility alone. Oddly, I have never liked 6922s in the CSP before, but this combination is awesome. I wonder if a lot of this difference isn't the addition of Jupiter caps, the tubes sounding more textural and less tight with them.

With these tubes I had to tone down the CSP3 pots a bit to get this good, and this made a notable difference. It seems you can balance the character of the overall sound by tuning the balance of the tubes. With 7DJ8s in the power positions, also really good, but my CSP3 tends to make some of them noisy after while...not good, but with 7DJ8, or with 6BQ7As, I had been running with the fronts wide open and the backs on 7. With these tubes, I like it best with the fronts on 9, one down from the top, and the backs four down, or on 6.

Also, I am using Grover ICs from the Tranquility to the CSP3, and VHAudio Silver DIY to the MKIV. Both are more balanced and musically resolving to me than my Decware silvers.

The fascinating (and it has in the past gotten to a maddening level with me) thing about tube amplification and pre-amplification is tube rolling. The ability to tailor and transform the sound with the many different makes and types. . . this alone can suck some of us down a rabbithole of wonder and experimentation.

I've heard some really great solid state amplification and pre-amplification in my time, but just thinking of not being able to "roll" and tailor and tinker. . . how could I give that up entirely?

I couidn't.

It's true, Steve and Bob really have created products that we can personalize in ways we certainly couldn't with the gear of many other manufacturers. Maybe it's because they know most of their customers are weirdo individualists? Or maybe THEY are the weirdo individualists that just can't help themselves? Regardless, yet another reason to celebrate the great items from Decware.

Yes, I don't think I'm overstating it. For three grand to upgrade, it had BETTER be at least that good. I'm not bowled over as the PWD was such a great sound for so long, but this is a step up, so far.

A quick take on my DS, which I was told has a 100 hours on it.

Plenty of gain to drive the REF 75.

Works fine with my PWT and Auraliti PK 90.

Right now it has some undesireable bite on horns and piano, soundstage is deep but isn't as wide as my Pandora and I feel like I'm looking down at the image.

It's been two years since I sold my PWD MKII, which the Pandora blew away. Right now, I'd say the DS isn't an improvement.

Kana...what attributes of the Pandora differentiate it versus the PWD or other DACs you have used (aside from SS width/height)?  

I have not seriously listened to the Aesthetix digital products (mainly b/c there isn't a dealer close by), but they were using an Aesthetix digital front end in the Sonus Faber/AR room at Axpona, and the sound was amazing.  Of course, the speakers cost more than some houses and I think they had the speakers bi amped with ARC products (so that was likely more than a really nice car).  That said, the dealer that set these rooms up definitely knew what they were doing because all of their rooms sounded excellent. That's my long winded way of saying there may be some good synergy between the Aesthetix and ARC products.

Dave, the Pandora makes my speakers disappear and all of the details are presented in an effortless fashion. Some have said that it sounds like analog.

With the DS last night, the soundstage never moved outside of the speakers and some solo images collapsed on to the speakers and sounded distorted. I don't remember the PWD MK II doing this.

I've got the Auraliti PK 90 sending the DS files from my NAS 24/7.

Lon...your change in image (guitar vs. amp) throws me off...

That said, it occurred to me on the way into work this morning that I never finished my thought from last evening

Point is...I would not want to do anything to my system that diminishes the benefit of micro detail and hearing the space.  Sounds like having a pre-amp in the chain requires a lot of tube rolling/cable matching so it doesn't have a negative impact on these core attributes.  While I am not opposed to this, I still question whether 'adding a component' will ever get you to the simplicity of 'not having it there'.  In theory, transparency would always decrease as you pass the signal through additional components...

O.K, so the principle is simple is better.  I wonder if Steve created pre-amps b/c of poor digital front ends.  Digital was pretty terrible early on and still is with poor implementation.  But, feed a Torii or ZMA direct with a great DAC and the music really sings.      

Net, I don't want something in the signal chain that masks the critical details in music...

For me, one of the attributes of the PWD that differentiates it vs other front ends is micro detail and spacial information (macro detail is cost of entry for a 'high end system').  

That said, I find these details to be subtle.  It's like two jazz musicians that have superb tone, but one excels in phrasing.  It may not hit you over the head, but it really does make a difference in how the music is communicated.  And if you had to choose, you would always pick the musician that nails both tone and phrasing (and you might not ever be able to describe why).  Or you would say something as ambiguous as, "I just like this musician better".  

Does that in any way diminish the impact of the benefit?  For me, it has a significant impact on my overall listening enjoyment, and is often the difference between toe tapping and drifting off.

My system/room is very resolving, gorgeous at micro detail, and with a very real sounding tonal and dynamic balance across the spectrum. Timbre is crazy good. Nuance is sweet. It can make me weep. It is seriously tuned basically for a live and real instruments in the room sound. So what happens here, is based on that.

For me, the CSP3 did not wipe out subtle micro information by any stretch of the imagination. It did mask it enough in my very revealing system for me to not like it though. And I did not notice this as an issue with my CSP3 with stock caps and with the Torii MkIII. It just changed the sound in a very pleasing CSP3 way. Adding the Jupiter caps made the CSP3 feel more resolving, but with the MKIV, the masking of micro info was too much for what I wanted.

I really can't figure it out altogether because I changed amps while the caps were changed on the CSP, but I will speculate.... I think part is that the MKIV with the reconstructive feedback on is very revealing of micro info, and without being hard or edgy. This let's the Tranquility and its brilliant ability with micro detail really sing. There is an amazing synergy between them.

And though they may not seem like it the way they are made, I think the Jupiters really do need burnin, perhaps lots of it. They sounded quite good in my Zstage at first, but just kept on getting better, finally not sounding like anything...just very good music, time being the only change.

I did not like the Jupiters more than the stock caps in the CSP3 at first...some gains, some losses by my tastes. But that has changed in stages. First it got more transparent, more limber and fresh. Then recently, I got a heightened dose of the subtle dynamic clarity and body it had with the stock caps, but with the more natural sound of the Jupiters.

Finally, I wonder if 6N1P are just not a good match with the Jupiters in the CSP3, especially if the system reveals all subtle information and you want to keep it that way. With the MKIII, I used them happily in the power position for a while with the stock caps, but they hobbled the sound in my system with the Jupiters and MKIV.

Once broken in, with the right tubes, the Jupitered CSP3 does however add something awesome that is CSP territory, for me, without sacrifice to subtle information, and I would be very surprised if the Tranquility reveals less micro information than the PWD MKII.

Subtle in some ways, but very present and musical, the CSP3 can bring body, weight, clarity, definition, space, and dynamics. And the Jupiters doing it with natural refinement, it was worth the effort and wait. I have been getting exceptional, transparent sound for quite a while, but the depth of the CSP thing has come out more lately with these particular Amperex 6922s. With the CSP sort of magic, and gain riding, I really like it. To be able to musically tune in more or less body, weight, and dynamics to balance the crazy range of recordings is a great tool.

That said, I agree with Lon that it depends on how you weigh things out and either way is good. For me, the MKIV needed riding less than the MKIII. I listened to the MKIV without pre quite happily for many months as I was learning its nature and tuning it into the system. Then for while, as I struggled to integrate the Jupitered CSP3, I was contemplating selling it, things were so good between the Tranquility and MKIV. I did have a hard time with it, but after it got sorted out, I am glad I took the time. Listening now, it is so beautiful.

Once again, this process has taught me that once a system/room gets really, really good, it gets harder to integrate new stuff to make it better. And the synergy of what is there defines what a new piece will do.

Lon...I have been meaning to ask you, did PS Audio return your PWD mkii boards to you after the DS conversion?

Lon,

Mahalo for the tip.

Started listening last night, but the power went out as Tropical Storm Iselle hit the island. We also got Hurricane Julio moving in.

I'm listening without the preamp right now as I mentioned in another post. I moved from the CSP2+ pfeamp I was using up until then with the PWD Mk II about six weeks ago I think. I realized I could use my best interconnect to do so and that made a subtle difference in a better tonal balance, or one I liked more. This allowed me to continue to run my SACD player through the CSP2 and instead of running the ZP3 straight into the amp, run the ZP3 through the preamp. The ZP3 sounds great either way to be honest. You can't make the ZP3 sound bad! The SACD player is helped by the CSP2+.

So I'm listening straight into the Torii from the DS. It really made a change today, leapt ahead. I have been listening to the DVR and Blu-ray inputs simply by listening to the material, and I've been doing a lot of listening to the PWT input as well, but when I'm not around I began running the PWt into the DS with the 20db attenuation engaged and using a Stereophile burn-in track from one of their cds. That seems to have born fruit on the PWT input. Sound surprised me.

I'm with you on the room sound details making things more natural sounding (my preferred term, as no reproduced music has actually, specifically sounded "real" to me.) I've done some listening today to my most useful reference recordings, one I made in my then living space, and the ambiance in the recording sounds quite "right." I also always engage reverb with my guitar amps, I use a Fender '63 Reverb reissue head and a Schreyer Audio Spring-Verb.

From the manual:

INPUT IMPEDANCE: 100 K OHMS

Ah, found that in the manual too:

INPUT SENSITIVITY: FULL POWER @ 2.0 VOLTS

They gave the all clear after the first hurricane, so I pushed the button on the SCA 5.0 SE and powered up the front end of my system and started pumping files from the PK 90 into the DS. Also did the 1.17 firmware upgrade.

After voting in our primary election and a dip in the pool, I did some more listening.

Lon's tip fixed the distortion I was hearing and the imaging has now come up to eye level.

The DS still doesn't sound as "real" as the the Pandora. The air/space I hear with the Pandora are still MIA.

I'm still having some USB issues with the DS and my media PC. Since bringing it home from Steve's listening room from our Tuesday listening session, the Media PC can't see the USB on the DS. I've been plugging at it on and off all week while listening to music streamed from the Oppo via CoAx (doesn't sound as good to me!). After trying three different PCs and three different USB cables with no go, I thought I'd be sending in my DS to PS Audio - got fed up and powered it off from the back power switch and stomped off to let myself cool off a bit. Let it set for 5 minutes, and decided to give it one more try (I have a listening session planned for Wednesday with Palomino and another friend - the show must go on!)

After sitting truly off for 5 minutes, suddenly the USB is detected by the PC! WTF!! Definitely something on the DS side, and not the PC like I had been assuming since day one.

It's sounding friggen amazing tonight, even at the low volume I have it running - so I think I can forgive it. I'm letting PS Audio know I have this issue and seeing what they suggest for me. My DAC won't travel as much as Paul's, but it will travel. So I need this fixed - at least I know how to get it back on it's feet now.

I know. Nothing reproduced has really ever seemed "Real" to me, but this one gets a few aspects in reproduced sound that are shared by the sound of real instruments, more than any other digital front end.

I like it. I'm still quite aware I'm not listening to real musical instruments played in my room, etc.

Every time I spin a disc via the PWT it sounds more musical vs. my computer via Audirvana (significantly more toe tapping from the PWT vs. the computer).

I am currently running a MacBook Pro with Audirvana.  iTunes has been disabled and I am using Audirvana to create playlists.

I really want to like computer audio, but I still don't have it figured out yet...

I'm not familiar with the Auraliti, but sounds like it's a step up vs. my Macbook running Audirvana.