I was not one of the beta testers, but thought I’d weigh in on this thread with my detailed impressions of this new & improved SACD spinner anyway since some folks on this thread seem to want more detail.
For those who are in the “…Just the facts, ma’am…” camp, here are my results (YMMV).
• The transport mechanism is a huge step up over the PWT and DMP. Solid, silky smooth in operation, silent, and inspiring confidence.
• If I had to characterize the PST’s presentation in one word, that word would be “immersive.”
• The overall character of the PST’s sound tips towards the “yin.” A warmer, more analog-sounding, tube-like presentation. The sound is more relaxed, open, and “juicy” for lack of a better term. By comparison, the DMP has more “presence,” and the soundstage is pushed forward and is more compressed front to rear.
• But the PST’s “yin” comes with increased detail and spatial separation that allows low-level waaay back in the soundstage detail to come through.
• For any given instrument the PST presents less pitch and more timbre.
• I would say the PST has more bass. At times I thought the DMP had a tighter bass but, in my room, it could be that the PST is doing a better job of exciting the room nodes. In any event, the PST provides a more palpable presentation of lower-register instruments.
• The PST has a noticeably wider sound stage, especially towards the rear. As opposed to a “U” or elliptical shape, I perceive more of a “square” shaped soundstage behind the speakers with the extreme right and left rear corners of the soundstage extended and more fleshed out.
• The instruments/voices within the soundstage have more separation front to rear. By comparison, the DMP compresses the front-to-rear spacing. Overall the PST’s soundstage is more “holographic.”
• As the result of the last two points, the ambience retrieval on well-recorded live performances is the best I’ve heard.
• There is less digital glare with the PST on higher-pitched (guessing ~800 – 3,000 Hz) brass instruments, upper-register electric guitar, some female vocals, etc.
• On loud passages with multiple instruments, there is less congestion within the soundstage. There is less collapse of the “air” between voices/instruments.
• For those who have succumbed to the Matrix and associated accoutrements for their streaming/rendering setup, the nature of the SQ improvements of the PST over the DMP will be familiar but perhaps less in magnitude.
• In my case, the Matrix et.al. moved my streaming/rendering SQ slightly ahead of the DMP. (EtherRegen > Aurender N100H > Cardas Hi-Speed USB > Matrix (powered by the Aurender) > RAL HDMI > DSD). The PST is clearly better than either of those sources.
• I saved the best for last. These differences in SQ between the two transports are significantly more pronounced with Redbook CD’s than with SACD’s. As a SWAG, I would say that the degree of improvement in SACD presentation is one-third to 40% that of Redbook CD’s. This transport closes the SQ gap between Redbook and SACD to a significant extent.
Some hiccups to report. Like others, I experienced some initial difficulty in getting a “handshake” between the PST and DSD to support SACD playback using both RAL and WireWorld HDMI cables. I ultimately got both to work, but it requires a very precise and firm seating of the plug into the HDMI socket on the PST. And maybe wiggling it a bit.
Another is that when I tried a DVD +R disc that I burned, the PST was hit or miss in recognizing it. Mostly miss. When it did mount, it played without a hitch. The PS Audio software gurus are looking in to this, but I haven’t had any problems with Redbook, SACD, or CD’s that I burned with J River.