Which CD or CD/SACD transport

I have two copies of Roger Waters Amused to Death, The SACD is far far superior to the cd even in the DSMP. I never bought a PWT because it simply wouldn’t play SACD’s. It’s really too bad that the new player is leaving out SACD’s. Odd since Paul is a largest fan of DSD.


After eight years of research and two years of development, PS engineering has been able to shorten
the memory requirements and improve the timing of digital audio data.

This is a quote from the DMP manual.

And I agree with that please watch the video where Bob Explains the development. He clearly states there they do not re read the disk. it was very hard for me to give up my PWT for this very reason.

Start at 8:09 of the video. Bob clearly states we used to load a large portion of the CD, now we load just enough. Never says anything about re reading.

It is all about the cost of the license. With the DMP PS Audio was able to ride the license that was paid or by Oppo. It is too costly for them to obtain their own license as they do not sell a volume large enough to justify the cost. I agree some SACD’s are clearly superior to the Redbook version. This has allot to do with how the mastering was done to both disks.

He also never mentions extraction of the data. Just that the memory is large enough to stay ahead of the bitstream.

The disc is read, then the info is put in RAM. It is played from the RAM, not directly from the disc. I believe that is the whole idea! With the PWT the amount of RAM was much greater.

I have never disagreed with that. the point you are missing is that the data is read in real time not extracted into the buffer. The buffer is an intermediary but does not control the reading of the data the way it did in the PWT. the DMP plays the disk On The Fly like every other DVD, CD, Bluray player out there. The PWT extracted the data at high speed into the buffer doing comparisons and re reading until the data was correct. The DMP uses conventional error correction. The same Oppo transport is used by MSB and other high end manufacturers. I do not know whether they use any kind of buffer on it but the basic transport controls the data recovery from the disk.

So, every CD player is a Memory Player?

No the opposite. Only a player designed to be so is. A Clock varies the speed of the spinning disk to keep the data coming off at the correct rate. In a memory player like the PWT the disk is spun at a very high rate allowing the time to extract the data and reread it if necessary to get the correct result. In an ON the FLY player the data is fed at a constant linear velociy in the case of the DMP this data goes into the active digital lens before it is handed off to the DAC. In other players with no digital lens the data is handed off to the dac directly.

1 Like

So the Ram (digital lens) is only being used as a clocking device, without correction? Is that the distinction you are making?

Yes that is correct. The DMP sound great and Bob has done wonders with the active digital lens and power supplies that is why the sound of the DMP exceeds what the PWT used to deliver. I would have never believed it could sound better if I did not have both transports here for a direct comparison.


Perhaps the buffering, rereading, and correction was hindering the SQ.
Thanks for straightening me out on that! LOL


I think the large fifo buffer was part of the issue but I believe allot of power supply work and the FPGA involvement in the digital lens are the developments that improved the sound so much. The PWT was a great sounding transport, better than allot of other ones out there the DMP just took it to another level.

If you don’t need sacd capability it would be tough to beat a used PWT with your DS DAC. Quite the combo. Can be had for around $1k.

The PWT is a great transport too for sure!

1 Like

Your wish is our command. That’s exactly what the new transport will do. You’ll be able to place a disc in the new player, start to play and then remove it. The music won’t stop.


Cool very Cool!

Very interesting indeed Paul.

Did the decision to not go SACD/DVD/BD this time around have anything to do with keeping the buffering size low (circa 700 mb for a CD)? Or with the Oppo chip and its demise?

I don’t think the decision had anything to do with buffering size. PS Audio don’t have the chops to build their own optical drive. If they could, the volumes they’d sell wouldn’t justify the unit cost. And buying them from somebody else might have difficult engineering challenges as they discovered with getting their bits to work with the Oppo bits. And a new PS SACD transport with a non-Oppo optical drive would need to work with the DS and DSJ DAC’s. Owners of SACD collections might be disappointed in the decision, but that is likely only to be a few unrealized sales from a world-wide audience that has much larger CD collections. I can understand their decision not to proceed with SACD support in the new transport.