DirectStream DAC General Discussion (was First Impressions)

Rob H. said

I feel that the only way to evaluate something such as the DS is to bloddy well get one, put it in your system, and listen for 30 days. Nothing else will substitute for your own direct experience. PS Audio provides this opportunity, something I’m sure we’re all grateful for having.

Reviews are interesting and informative. We often suggest to “take them with a grain of salt.” But to base one’s decision solely on the opinion of others, without direct experience, is to surrender your own authority in the matter. Not the best choice one can make, methinks.


Agreed, especially at this price point where the differences in fundamental musicality are narrow and the distinctions are idiosyncratic.

Another’s “more analog” may be your recessed low bass and a bit of dynamic compression.

Elk said
Agreed, especially at this price point where the differences in fundamental musicality are narrow and the distinctions are idiosyncratic.

Another’s “more analog” may be your recessed low bass and a bit of dynamic compression.


Yes. Also, I see brand cache come into play often when I interact with other audiophiles…like 'well even if a Corvette ever gets to be as good as a Porsche I would just never own one because…. Like others have said on this site…you just have to try it yourself.

Some time ago, I was editing a magazine and providing product testing reviews therein, not stereo related.

It’s not an easy job at all. You have to be as objective as possible, particularly on the samples you don’t favor. Even though you might prefer what you’ve been using, you have to drop your biases as much as possible in order to maintain that objectivity. Since I knew the people behind each sample, it was even more difficult to maintain objectivity if they submitted a real POS for testing. Add that to advertising concerns; the advertisers pay the bills, so you try your best not to alienate them.

It became a real study in writing between the lines – to convey your observations as accurately as possible without explicitly telling the readership “don’t waste your time.”

There simply is no replacement for direct experience, in this or any other pursuit. We all seem to know that, and yet we parse and dissect each review as though it’s actually… meaningful, or something. (That said, I am happy for Paul & Co. that most of the feedback on the DS is positive. Funny, that.)

Al and Rob H hit the nail on the head. Trust your ears first and foremost. Read reviews but don’t take any of the as dispositive. Mostly they may give a clue as to what to listen for in terms of strengths and weaknesses and then make your own judgment. And remember, all reviewers are not created equal, and even with the best, results will always vary from one system to another.

stevem2 said . . . And remember, all reviewers are not created equal . . .
Some are even dead wrong.

As I read posts here that seem to kick ps audio in the teeth and this bothers me , I also realize this is the best format for a review .

We all read or at least some here hehehehe. But in doing it it becomes personnel to us as we own ps audio products. And this reaction of protection makes us not accurate either . A example of this is found in the hugo thread on another forum. There claims of the best really did piss me off as such I gave my abrupt view . As though it was my product in jeopardy in comparison. Even though it’s not , As the hugo is below the SQ in every way this still shows a partiality on my behalf. So this is what we are also feeling with this less then perfect review.

Al

Sorry I did not know the new firmware was posted I will,load it tonight. Is there any of us non beta group people posting its sound signature ??

al

Elk said
Rob H. said

I feel that the only way to evaluate something such as the DS is to bloddy well get one, put it in your system, and listen for 30 days. Nothing else will substitute for your own direct experience. PS Audio provides this opportunity, something I’m sure we’re all grateful for having.

Reviews are interesting and informative. We often suggest to “take them with a grain of salt.” But to base one’s decision solely on the opinion of others, without direct experience, is to surrender your own authority in the matter. Not the best choice one can make, methinks.

Agreed, especially at this price point where the differences in fundamental musicality are narrow and the distinctions are idiosyncratic.

Another’s “more analog” may be your recessed low bass and a bit of dynamic compression.


I totally agree with both of you. The word “analog” is ambiguous and possibly undesirable in a great music system. It makes me think of 1) tape hiss, 2) vinyl rumble and RIAA issues, 3) “real” - as in what I hear with my ears . However nice vinyl and tape can sound they do have some real issues.

I like “real” a lot, because if you hear some live acoustic music and then listen to the hifi you can make a valid comparison about how well it is performing (with caveats due to the process to get the music to your door).

I am going to " bloddy well get one".

Listening to Mark Knopfler. Disk after disk. The first word that comes to mind is “juicy”. Then - “full-bodied”. 6115 + direct-to-the-amp is another step to nirvana. Even using an ancient laptop with a USB printer cable.

Paul McGowan said There's no reason they have a delay I am familiar with. We're getting caught up on orders and most of them are heading out to their new homes next week. I'll check with Scott to see if there's something I am not aware of.
That is music to my ears, Mr. McGowan!

I felt like it was time to detail my interconnect experiences with the DirectStream. Pardon my hijacking the thread but others may find this interesting.

Some of you may remember the same effort when I got my PWD. At that point it was clear my old IC - Acoustic Zen Silver Resolution II - which I had been using happily with my old DAC was not a good match with the PWD. It was okay, but seemed to “hold back” the PWD in its ability to resolve information (as reported by other owners). I tried a whole bunch of cables including Shunyata Python Zitron, Analysis Plus Silver Oval, AZ Absolute Silver, Cardas Clear, and maybe one or two others. I’ll be honest and say that I was looking for a high value solution in a nice used pair, so I limited my choices to what I could find (and if necessary flip) on Audiogon at the time for about $1K or less.

I ended up with the AZ Absolute Silver for the PWD. This cable had everything I was looking for - clarity, timber, articulation, tremendous bass quality and control, an extended but sweet high end - it was a great and musical match for the PWD in my system. When I plugged these into the DS I was surprised by what I heard. Not only did this IC accentuate the upper mid glassiness I heard in the DS (which was confirmed as being in the DS during its burn in by trying other cables), but it also showed a graininess that I never heard when used with the PWD. Either the DS was doing a much better job at showing just what everything else was doing (which is what I believe was happening) or the Absolute Silver was just a poor match for this DAC (this may have been part of it as well). I couldn’t listen to the combination for any length of time. The search was on for a better IC match.

Now coincidentally I had been examining ICs in my friend’s system and already had some idea of what I wanted to try. I didn’t want this to be a long drawn out affair so I went with what my gut said could be a good playing field - the AZ Absolute Copper, Clear Day Silver XLR, and one most of you probably never heard of, the Burley IC. You might ask why I’d even want to try another AZ cable; well, I heard a comparison of the Copper to the Silver in another system. What I heard at the time suggested it might have the qualities I might need in this new setup. Clear Day has made a name for itself in speaker cables; most people don’t know they also make ICs, and fewer still know they are available in a balanced configuration. You have to contact Paul (the owner) directly about these. Burley cables are offered through Reno HiFi; they are (near as I can tell) the cables Pass Labs uses with their equipment. I figured if it’s good enough for Pass (and since I have a Pass preamp) they might be worth a try. This time around I was able to try all new cables instead of used, not that it should matter.

First things first - all three of these cables removed that grainy quality I was hearing with the Absolute Silver. For that I was pretty happy. All three were smooth and musical without smothering the detail or information in the music. So far so good. The Clear Day wins in the transparency department, they take in the DS what surprised me as hearing things I didn’t hear before and raises it a tick or two. Unbelievable. They also have great midrange immediacy, and handle the upper harmonics in an especially engaging manner. The downside for the Clear Day is in the low end. It’s all there, the extension seems fine, but it does have that slightly “soft” quality that I’ve heard many times before in silver cables. Given how fantastic most everything else is with this cable, this (to me) shortcoming is accentuated a bit. I thought about how great the low end was with the AZ Absolute Silver… silver cables can be made to sound great in the low end, but maybe the price to pay was the harshness and graininess I didn’t know was there until I got the DS.

The Burley is interesting. While I haven’t spoken about the Absolute Copper yet, the Burley was a very nice compromise between it and the Clear Day. It’s actually a great cable for the money. It was open, neutral, well extended and controlled in both directions, and musical. Compared to some megabuck cables it’s pretty amazing, actually. I would consider these a good “go to” cable for a casual system. While it did nothing wrong, in the rarefied air of wanting to pick out something for the DS I decided it was good but not as engaging as the other two. I would not be unhappy with it if I wanted to limit myself to that price point - a finely made XLR pair is about $400.

Finally the AZ Copper. I went in cautiously with this given what happened with the Silvers. My fears were groundless. The Coppers are light years better than the Silvers (in my system). The Coppers have none of that grain or harshness but still sound open and musically gorgeous. It does the low end the best of all three cables, establishing a solid and articulate bass line in a piece of music while allowing everything else to flow in a natural, liquid manner It’s also liquid, open, extended, controlled, smooth, but most of all incredibly musical and enjoyable. It does all of this without obscuring detail, but at the same time doesn’t shove the detail in your face. It does not have quite the same “high end cues” engagement quality of the Clear Day, but I’m now entering the realm of differences rather than “better or worse”. The midrange is not quite as immediate, but the front to back space is a bit better. The harmonics are more along the lines of “drum cymbals sound a bit more bronzey while the DS sounds more brassy”, but without diminishing the extension in the high end compared to the DS.

The problem is my wife likes the Clear Day (mostly) while I like the AZ Copper (mostly). There were some pieces of music where I’d pick the Clear Day and she’d pick the Copper. Go figure. So I wound up keeping both.tmi_gifFor my listening the AZ Copper is the way I’ll go; when she wants to have the system for some daytime listening what sort of person would I be if I deprived her of her preferred cable?sorry_gif

As always, all differences described are rather small. The only jaw dropping that occurred was when I heard how grainy the AZ Silver was with the DS. The bottom line is: the cable that worked like a champ in my old setup would have pushed me to consider sending the DS back, if I hadn’t realized what it was doing to the sound.

I posted the following in response to Audiostream review by Michael Lavorgna. I have not yet upgraded the firmware to the new version.

"I have both the Luxman DA-06 and the DirectStream. I too find the DA-06 very rich, especially for vocals where a very intimate presentation is possible. I dwell on higher resolution files with it over 16/44 resolution. The DirectStream just continues to grow on me. I am guessing I have maybe 400 hours on it now. It has more pop and immediacy across the spectrum and vocals are not as weighty but have more texture, but still quite smooth and not grainy. I believe spatial location is better with the DS. To dial in, I have swapped some power cord positions and even slightly moved some acoustic traps. I also played with a couple USB cords. You can considerably change the presentation on this dac by varying all these configurations, more so than I believe you can with the Luxman. I listen to far more 16/44 with the DS than with the Luxman. My listening with it is more balanced across all the various resolutions I have, including single and double DSD.

Lastly, I have been playing with the Phase button on the remote of the DS and find almost universally I prefer the Out setting. I get better imaging, depth, and texture. That is not the case with phase adjustment for me with the Luxman. I have 4-way active speakers and, consequently too many cables and interfaces. Maybe something is reversing phase, but I do prefer Out with the DS.

Michael, I much appreciate your reviews and look forward to them."

This looks a little odd.

http://app.audiogon.com/listings/da-converters-ps-audio-directstream-dac-black-2014-06-20-digital-22936-earlysville-va

I have just read the short Audio Stream review, referred to above. Frankly, I find it odd in a number of respects. The reviewer uses these words to describe the sound of the DS: clean, clear, pure, resolving, direct, transparent and controlled. But he implies the DS is not his cup of tea because it lacks “meat” and “color” compared to the Luxman and Auralic Vega DACS he cites. He notes that SQ with the DS is cable dependent. He mentions liking the firmware update in terms of sound stage improvements – not having mentioned sound stage up to this point in his review. It seems to me that his review is very narrow in scope.

In my opinion, the review seems to reflect the reviewer’s personal preference, and nothing more. He comments on the DS sound being “as if anything and everything extraneous had been stripped away.” Can anyone tell me what that means? What exactly is he referring to, having been “stripped away”? He does not say. This is a glaring omission. Furthermore, I note that he expresses many of his comments on the DS in negative ways instead of positive ways. He thus inverts the sense of his narrative by expressing positive attributes in subtly negative language. I find this odd. Examples: “I never felt the DirectStream DAC to be edgy or unnaturally bright even though the amount of resolution it extracts from your music sources is remarkable” … “This was certainly not the case” … “While I would not say the DirectStream’s way with DSD is revelatory …”

Then he makes a comment – central to his view of the DS – that he later contradicts. “If there was an area that I found the DirectStream DAC to diverge from other DACs I enjoy its [sic] with timbral complexity and midrange richness. Here is his contradiction: “That near 3D quality I’ve come to associate with DSD was clearly present as was DSD’s rich, smooth character …” And again, The MiND appears to offer even more resolution as compared to my MacBook Pro and this pairing made for a very rich and revealing combo …” So, he comments twice on the richness of the DS sound while having stated earlier that it does not have the “midrange richness” of earlier cited competing DACs. Odd indeed.

He concludes with in an equally odd way: “I enjoyed my time with PS Audio DirectStream DAC and found its sound highly resolving, pure, and…direct. If you’re looking for a DAC and digital preamp that is both well-built and sonically transparent, the DirectStream DAC should be on your short list.” He is thus stating, if build quality and transparency are your cup of tea then put the DS on your short list. As though those two attributes sum up the DS for him, or are the highlights that merit consideration. I note that Paul deftly glides by the review’s shortcomings in his comments. Does the Audio Stream review really merit serious consideration? Not in my opinion.

Referring back to the Audio Stream review, I neglected to cite two additional back-handed negative comments made by the reviewer when he states, "I would not object to someone saying … I also would not argue if someone were to suggest … ". In both cases, the reviewer creates imaginary objectors, instead of owning these comments himself. Do we need even more examples from this short review to verify his obvious bias?

An excellent analysis, DoE. Again, classic reviewspeak when they have no b@lls to say what they’re really thinking.

Tony, have you ever tried MIT cables? Especially since you have the Pass preamp ;)

The only problem is the price :confused:

tony22 said This looks a little odd.
Especially in that Earlysville, VA is Crutchfield's home address.........for returns.
Tony, have you ever tried MIT cables? Especially since you have the Pass preamp
Not recently. I tried something from their mid-priced line a few generations ago. Don't remember why I didn't pick them. Haven't really considered their current mid to upper end because frankly I don't have enough room behind my rack to accommodate the bulk.
Alekz said Tony, have you ever tried MIT cables? Especially since you have the Pass preamp

The only problem is the price :confused:


I put my 750h Shotguns back in after living with Shunyata for the past few years.

They have the boxes too but not adjustable.

Nice steo up for the DS. The Shuns were better with the PWD.

They are pretty much opposite in their concepts and technology.