Just wondering what the thought process/logic behind the options for indexing the discs in an individual playlist. It will order alphabetically both ascending and descending but by album title not group. Last played is a good option but what would be so hard to have an order by group alphabetically? The current alphabetic listing is useless.
I do like the find disc option using discogs - as the ps audio database seems pretty sparse and till they put that in i was entering most disc manually - not fun.
Seems like ps audio is taking a great concept and screwing it up as best they can.
I agree that the Playlist feature could be improved in a number of ways; in fact, I sent Paul a set of suggestions about that recently. Adding an alphabetical sort by artist would be another enhancement. They could also implement a search feature.
I am curious, though; why do people search or sort the playlist at all? As far as I have been able to figure out (and it has been trial and error, since there is no documentation), the Playlist does three things when you insert a disc that has been entered into it:
provides access to track titles and cover art (so these can be displayed on the screen)
uses the track list to populate the on-screen track listing at startup rather than filling it in one track at a time as the disc plays (DMP; I'm not sure if PWT has this feature)
provides a track listing that one can look at while the disc is playing; the currently playing disc automatically moves to the top of the list, so you don't have to search for it
I guess one might wish to find out if a disc was already in the playlist, but beyond that I'm not sure why sorting or searching would be used.
I have been wondering if having the Ethernet cable plugged in is adding noise. We use jitterbugs, LanRovers, and Regents to eliminate noise from the USB input, what about noise from the Ethernet cable?
With my PWT, I can’t read it anyway from my listening seat. I would prefer that the track numbers be bigger, about half the size of what shows up when it can’t find the meta data.
Has anyone experimented with removing the Ethernet cable? Any difference in sound?
I have tried removing all cables from the PWT and DS but for the I2S. I think it sounded a tad better, but I have no idea removing which cable mattered and whether it was attached to the PWT or the DS. Plus, all inputs in the DS are occupied; e.g., the XLR is attached to a Bryston BDP-2, the coax to a Sony SACD player, etc.
I usually unplug my USB cable from the laptop when I am using other inputs on my DAC. It is very accessible, so easy to do.
When I got the Benchmark and was just starting out with PC music, it was a recommendation from the dealer. These little things are often very hard to hear, but like tweaks I think the benefits are accumulative. I am now using the Lindemann as my DAC.
Now that I have had the PWT for a while I find that having the data to be of little value, as I shut the display off. I’m surprised that when beta testing was done, years ago, that there weren’t requests for total time of discs. I find myself using the Oppo to check total time. Maybe I am the only one who will choose between two CDs based on length. For example if I have to leave in 50 minutes I chose a disc that fits that amount of time.
Paul, is there anyway that noise from the ethernet cable could effect the sound of the PWT?
I think disconnecting connections you are not using is beneficial. As you note, these things can be cumulative.
I am a long time PWT owner and never noticed it does not give total time. I also care little as to what might be on the screen.
My preference is for a nice amount of simple, dedicated buttons, a crisp monochrome screen with basic data, no touch screen. The transport equivalent to a speedometer and a tachometer.
