PS Audio DirectStream DAC Mk.2 measurements

[Ricardus]

Review: PS Audio DirectStream DAC MK2 – The Audio Beatnik

theaudiobeatnik.com

Here's another one that falls into the same category of "fanboy reviews"
also from quite recent date.

He was "shocked by how much better the MK2 is than the previous version."

We all know that these people just don't get it, but be serious! Electronic components and design are capable of being at the cutting edge of theoretical performance now. It's just not possible for any piece of gear to be SHOCKINGLY BETTER than a previous version if the previous version was very good in the first place

 

[ahofer]

It's just not possible for any component to be SHOCKINGLY BETTER than a previous version.

Under-appreciated point. Most of the differences declared by audio rags these days don't even exist, but if they do, they are still quite difficult to tease out. Otherwise we'd be seeing 10/10 blind tests all over the place.

But if the previous version was badly compromised.....

 

[Ricardus]

.But if the previous version was badly compromised.....

Yeah, Amir tested that one I think and the transformer made the output quite a mess.

 

[ahofer]

Yeah, Amir tested that one I think and the transformer made the output quite a mess.

I’m guessing that can’t be fixed in a free software upgrade. Gee what a great company.

 

[mdsimon2]

I really wish JA would state the 22 kHz BW dynamic range in DAC reviews. I read through the PS Audio forum thread discussing this DAC on my lunch break and so many people there think that only ultrasonic noise is the issue. Obviously if you are familiar with measurements you can easily see that in addition to ultrasonic noise this DAC also has issues with audio band noise. Looking at the -90 dBFS FFT is kind of unbelievable. Below is a comparison of the Stereophile measurements of the DS Mk2 (left) and the Okto dac8 stereo (right). Red/blue are 24 bit data and magenta/cyan are 16 bit data.

Michael

 

[kevin1969]

PS Audio wants it's customers to believe that no one has really figured out how to convert digital to analog. In Paul's own words. "It's not easy stuff".

And he's right, it's not easy stuff when you convert everything into a 1 bit sample for no other reason than being able to call it DSD and then need to address the outrageous amounts of noise that needs to filtered out from the results of doing so.

 

[Matias]

I went straight to Paul Miller's comments to see if he would criticize what he measured, but was not the case. At least we got a nice inside photo.

PS Audio DirectStream DAC 2 USB DAC Lab Report

Lab Report Although PS Audio is coy about the technical updates to its 'MK2' DirectStream DAC, the fundamental differences in PCB design and layout between the last version we tested [HFN May '18] and this iteration are clear enough from our respective lid-off shots. There are differences in the...

hifinews.com

 

[AdrianusG]

Below, Another rave review for this dac, what are we missing??

PS Audio DirectStream DAC 2 USB DAC

It's arguable that the best high-end DACs all feature custom upsampling and conversion architectures – nothing 'off the shelf'! PS Audio has been part of the club for a decade... All good things come to an end, although in the world of digital hi-fi sometimes that end comes around pretty quickly.

www.hifinews.com

 

[AdrianusG]

Oh sorry, see that someone beat me to it

 

[DonR]

Below, Another rave review for this dac, what are we missing??

A hyperactive imagination.

 

[AdrianusG]

Especially this:

"Otherwise distortion has increased by up to 20dB (x10) in the MK2 below –30dBFs [see Graph 1] even if figures of 0.009-0.05% (20Hz-20kHz/–30dBFs) are still perfectly low enough. Furthermore, such is the increase in requantisation noise and 6dB shift in 'headroom' that the in-band A-wtd S/N now clocks in at a sub-16-bit 92.5dB (improving to 105.5dB with a full"

He literally states that it's even below the established CD standard.

And still maintaining that it's an improvement across the board over the MK1 version, ......mindblowing this, pure misleading and unbelievable.

greetings
Ad

 

[antcollinet]

He was "shocked by how much better the MK2 is than the previous version."

We all know that these people just don't get it, but be serious! Electronic components and design are capable of being at the cutting edge of theoretical performance now. It's just not possible for any piece of gear to be SHOCKINGLY BETTER than a previous version if the previous version was very good in the first place

No, you are wrong. There is no limit to how much the sound can be audibly improved. (<-- anti Poe's law emoji)

 

[kevin1969]

And they've improved it yet again. Although they've provided no objective measurements to back up these claims.

 

[TonyJZX]

if you are releasing a dac surely it should work as well as can be measured with V1.0 firmware

disregarding stuff like fixing ESS humps

I dont think its normal to be unlocking large performance improvements several firmware revisions down the track???

it means you should not have released the dac as it was OR you're doing this deliberately to make it seem like you have 'great customer support'

if its a complex thing like a streaming AVR well that's a different story but a dac??? surely everyone has got the point that it works as intended day one?

i would give a pass to someone like RME given their dacs do a whole lot but RME wouldnt do this... they have like... standards to uphold.

 

[Mart68]

if you are releasing a dac surely it should work as well as can be measured with V1.0 firmware

disregarding stuff like fixing ESS humps

I dont think its normal to be unlocking large performance improvements several firmware revisions down the track???

it means you should not have released the dac as it was OR you're doing this deliberately to make it seem like you have 'great customer support'

if its a complex thing like a streaming AVR well that's a different story but a dac??? surely everyone has got the point that it works as intended day one?

i would give a pass to someone like RME given their dacs do a whole lot but RME wouldnt do this... they have like... standards to uphold.

The people who own these DACs think that the idea that it can get better with each update is the best thing since sliced bread.

Far from being a negative it's one of the positives they cite about their purchase. We're through the looking glass with this.

 

[Matias]

Here we go with 736284 fixes, I mean, "upgrades" trying to save the darn thing after it was released. While also having the excuse "but wait, what version was measured? Oh, that one is old and irrelevant now, the current version 937482 is A LOT better!". And another batch of update reviews on the magazines and blogs...

We have all seen this before.

Took their time to resume the standard procedure above.

 

[kevin1969]

And it solves the problem of bad reviews because "oh we fixed that" and their customer base is so gullible they believe the sound improves every time there's a firmware update. Can you imagine if a company that makes industrial control systems or optical transport gear did this shit?

 

[Ricardus]

"Improved sound quality dramatically."

I'm sure that's the final bullet point of all their releases.

Lowered ultrasonic noise by 30 dB? Citation needed.

Using noise shaping and higher clock speed to move the noise higher in the audio spectrum is a thing though. At least they're finally admitting that ultrasonic noise with DSD is a thing. Paul basically refuses to talk about it when he talks about DSD in his videos though.

 

[mdsimon2]

"Improved sound quality dramatically."

I'm sure that's the final bullet point of all their releases.

Lowered ultrasonic noise by 30 dB? Citation needed.

Using noise shaping and higher clock speed to move the noise higher in the audio spectrum is a thing though. At least they're finally admitting that ultrasonic noise withy DSD is a thing. Paul basically refuses to talk about it when he talks about DSD in his videos though.

In the video announcing the update Paul actually shows some AP results:

Of course they aren't real screen grabs but rather a shaky video filming a computer monitor screen. Also love how the y-axis on the "improved" measurements is not shown.

I've come to the conclusion that Ted Smith really doesn't know what he is doing. It is possible to design a well performing DAC that uses a FPGA, even one that upsamples to high rate DSD like the Ted Smith's PS Audio DACs. See below for some examples.

Meitner MA3 Integrated D/A processor

www.stereophile.com

EMM Labs DV2 D/A processor

For years, I've attended audio shows at which the Canadian company EMM Labs, either on its own or in conjunction with Kimber Kable and IsoMike, has displayed some of the grandest, most impressive-sounding multichannel systems I've ever heard. When everything was aligned properly, as it was at...

www.stereophile.com

Clearly Ted is not capable of doing the same.

Michael

 

[Ricardus]

I've come to the conclusion that Ted Smith really doesn't know what he is doing. It is possible to design a well performing DAC that uses a FPGA, even one that upsamples to high rate DSD like the Ted Smith's PS Audio DACs. See below for some examples.

Meitner MA3 Integrated D/A processor

www.stereophile.com

EMM Labs DV2 D/A processor

For years, I've attended audio shows at which the Canadian company EMM Labs, either on its own or in conjunction with Kimber Kable and IsoMike, has displayed some of the grandest, most impressive-sounding multichannel systems I've ever heard. When everything was aligned properly, as it was at...

www.stereophile.com

Clearly Ted is not capable of doing the same.

Michael

Yeah, incompetence seems to run rampant in that company.