I recently added a good preamp to my system. It now sits between the PWD2 and the ARC ref 150 power amp. Everything is connected fully balanced. After some discussion and experimentation I bought a preamp that uses directly heated triodes (101Ds), dual transformer volume control and is made by those crazy Canadians. I’m referring to the Coincident Statement Line Stage.
I personally felt I had tweaked my PWD2 to the best possible level with fuses (Hifi Tuning Supremes), firmware, power cables and isolation. A preamp had to be the next logical progression.
In my case, the improvements are not arbitrary or small. As soon as I added the CSLS the balance of the sound shifted from relatively thinner and brighter going DAC direct to richer, and more naturally balanced with the preamp. The CSLS is not yet burned in, but it has retained most of the transparency of going DAC direct. The bass is much better, especially at lower volumes.
The title is “maple syrup”, but that is not to say this preamp is “syrupy”. Rather, it add a welcome sweetness and balance to my audio dining experience, that was previously a very nice, but somewhat dry, pancake.
If only they made the CSLS in black.
Fun!
I would have expected Elk to say Yummy! 
J.P.
I would have expected Elk to say Yummy! :D
J.P.
Yes, "fun" for tweaks, "yummy" for esoteric system upgrades. This is how I read Elk anyway. Then again, I'm no Sigmund Freud.
Anyway, the point of the thread is to confirm the CSLS matches well with the PWD2, and, as now seems to be well accepted is a clear improvement over DAC direct. Secondly, for anyone interested in preamps at this sub $6k price, the Coincident is a Bargain with a capital B.
Congrats on the new pre. I’ll add it to my short list (after Paul’s new mystery toy and a P10).
stereophilus said: Then again, I’m no Sigmund Freud.
Dr. Doolittle would fair better with the Supreme Ungulate. :))
Can someone explain why the preamp would change things so much.?
As I could understand it if it tamed the highs as some tubes do. The only thing that comes to my small mind is a mismatch of output input imp . Meaning system synergy. Any explanations are welcome.
Al
We do not know.
The result is not universal. System synergy is thus a good possibility. For example, Paul prefers a pre in his room one, but without in two.
A triode running in its sweet spot is the most linear amplification device we have. It may be that a good tube triode pre is that much better driving an amp in terms of microdynamics and harmonic balance than solid state.
I use a Decware CSP2+ between the PWD Mk2 and my Decware Torii Mk III. I really wish that the PWD Mk 2 sounded better on its own straight into the amp, but the CSP2+ improves the sound in important ways. And with its input and output gain adjustment it’s quite flexible.
I am able to “ride the gain” between three gain stages: PWD Mk 2, CSP2+ (which has both input and output gain adjustment and can put out more than 5V) and the input gain stage on my Torii Mk III. Talk about being able to tailor the sound!
stereophilus said: the point of the thread is to confirm the CSLS matches well with the PWD2
I would say it matches the arc150 ;)
This all makes me wonder if reducing the value of the resistor in the PWD output would improve the sound. Currently they use 100 ohms and I wonder what it would do to reduce it to 47, 22 or even 10 ohms. This might give it a bit more control over the interconnect and the input buffer of the amp.
J.P.
This is my point I do not See the benefiting added equipment more must be worse. But yet the addition in some cases is better hence the why. Now Paul does this for a living
So why Paul. As he has a preamp this begs the question does anybody really know WHY.
Al
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 23, 2014, at 4:37 PM, “PS Audio Discussion Forum” support@psaudio.com wrote:
wingsounds13 commented on your bookmarked discussion.
[Maple Syrup]
This all makes me wonder if reducing the value of the resistor in the PWD output would improve the sound. Currently they use 100 ohms and I wonder what it would do to reduce it to 47, 22 or even 10 ohms. This might give it a bit more control over the interconnect and the input buffer of the amp.
J.P.
—
Follow the link below to check it out:
http://www.psaudio.com/forum#/discussion/comment/68060#Comment_68060
Have a great day
Elk said: Paul prefers a pre in his room one, but without in two.
Possibly because he does not have another good preamp for room #2 ;)
LMAO. I doubt he did not try it.
Al
Alekz said: Possibly because he does not have another good preamp for room #2
Paul states a pre sounds better in one, but not in two.
His hypothesis is that it relates to the very long interconnects in use in room one and the pre drives them better than the PWD.
alrainbow said: As he has a preamp this begs the question does anybody really know WHY.
Seven hours later, we still do not know.
You are a funny guy man.
But I understand Paul’s logistical issue but I am sure he would of tried a more direct connect . Wires across the floor to check right ?
I tried my PWD direct into my amp (EDGE 10.1NL) and prefer it much with a pre-amp (Pass XP-20).
Well I do not have a dedicated pre amp. As one is combo dac that has analog input with volume control and the other is my office rig and that has a active cross over so it is a preamp too . So the only example I can use as it’s fine is with headphone amps.
Al
Just like a power amp drives a loudspeaker, a preamp (or the output stage of the DAC) is driving the input stage (and interconnect cables) of the power amp. To do so it needs sufficient voltage AND current. To generate current for really deep bass a really good power supply is critical. To my view, the only way to explain the improved bass I have in my system as a result of adding a preamp, is if the PWD2 has less ability to deliver the required current to the power amp. The outboard power supply of the CSLS weighs 25kg, and is sufficient to drive a 100W power amp itself.
Lowering the output resistor value on the PWD (as JP suggests), but maintain the same voltage, would need more current supply, and is probably why it could not have been easily achieved.
What you say makes sense , but why does Paul have to say about it.
Thanks for the reply
Al
Paul has stated that the output stage of the PWD has less than 1 ohm impedance. There is a 100 ohm resistor between the output driver and the connector that was placed there to protect the output stage from shorted outputs. I suspect that the output is well capable of driving sufficient current for any rational input or cable impedance and would survive driving a 10 ohm load at full output for a moderate amount of time. I suspect that they could safely ship with 47 ohm output protection resistors. I wonder if this is something worth considering as a mod (as much as I hesitate to mod a piece of equipment this expensive).
J.P.