SMSL M500 MKIII DAC & Amp Review

[TonyJZX]

this is an MQA dac right? am I to take it that Amir wont test for MQA because...

I mean I agree with the anti MQA stance for obvious reasons.

 

[Garrincha]

Why are people talking about MQA in a review thread?

The DAC is too good to complain, so some extra trouble has been to invented.
And it is a horrible and totally unnecessary industry-forced product, it is easy to bash.

 

[pseudoid]

who are you to decide if MQA should be boycotted or not

I tend to boycott the boycotters myself, and in my own ways!
EDIT:... Unless the YMMV disclaimer is included! Maybe s/he forgot one!

 

[Garrincha]

Not going to take position on MQA but as of today there is no streaming services that offers high res in Canada, and I would assume that it's the same in many other countries. Not saying that MQA is better than Redbook 44/16 but saying that if you want High res streaming, you need Qobuz, if Qobuz is unavailable, CD quality or MQA it is. It could certainly be argued that 44/16 is all you need and I will not debate this. But In the end, Tidal is all we got here (unless I'm missing something) and yes, well that may not be because of the tech itself but in the end there are plenty of superbly sounding MQAs, I don't know why I should boycott my pleasure.

What is up with Canada? Even in kind-of third world Brazil we have Qobuz now. But isn´t there QUB Music (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qobuz) ? Or using VPN?

 

[TonyJZX]

I heard Canada internet is something... something what I dunno... but its something.

Getting a bit OT now.

A question I have is that I think prices are getting up there for these DACs I think????

I think its a format perception to me. I have no problem with a standard high rack width, 1 ru or 1 inch high unit like the D90se D300 etc. but "loaf of bread" always struck me as weird.

 

[amirm]

this is an MQA dac right? am I to take it that Amir wont test for MQA because...

I don't have test signals for MQA.

 

[PeteL]

What is up with Canada? Even in kind-of third world Brazil we have Qobuz now. But isn´t there QUB Music (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qobuz) ? Or using VPN?

I don't know how that work but Qub music is not high res, nor lossless. Quebecor is a huge media and telecommunication conglomerate in Quebec, They probably needed a way to have access to content and a framework and paying the big bucks to Qobuz is I assume was how they made it. I am not sure what was the deal but now that you mention it it may be why we don't have Qobuz. VPN would work but you also need a non Canadian Credit card to pay the bill.

 

[PeteL]

What about Amazon (Im not saying its a great user experience , but it is Hi-res. ) ?

Now actually getting all those many res' to your DAC is a challenge , for sure, but Chromecast and the Wiim mini seem to have cracked it.

I had forgot about them. I think you are right. Not sure what is their HD catalog but If some boycott MQA, on my end I definitely boycott Amazon for many reasons I won't go trough to not politicize this thread.

 

[audiotron]

Solid product. Nice review as usual.

 

[pseudoid]

I don't have test signals for MQA.

LOL!
I promise NOT to draw any conclusions about how important you feel MQA is...

 

[Grooved]

And are not other members allowed to disagree? This is an influential forum , and if boycott MQA opinion goes unchallenged, those that love MQA may get the short end without any fault

I am really sorry, but you had the opportunity to just disagree with his opinion, and you decided, instead of saying "I disagree with this part", to start with "who are you to decide if MQA should be boycotted or not?"

And then, after that, you complain about not being allowed to disagree while nobody didn't say it was not allowed to you?
I'm not talking about you, I don't know you, but I'm talking about the way you interacted in this case, and I find it funny that it was a bit like your forum name, mediocre and arrogant

On a personal POV, I disagree and don't disagree, I prefer some tracks in MQA and not other, but the first point that is not right the way they used it is the fact it's mostly as a conversion instead of capturing (while listening) during the creation of the track, and so most tracks being converted after the creation, the sound is changed, and a lot of artist or mix/mastering didn't confirm anything but got the tracks they worked on only available as converted to MQA. None of them can opposed to that since the master is propriety of the labels.
But would you agree to have your work changed (even just a little bit) by someone, and still being named as the one who done it? In any work, it should not happen, period.

What you are listening with MQA files is not a better sound, it's more a different master, that you can like more, or less.
The only way MQA could provide a potential improvement is if it was used on the whole chain, which they decided to not do.

 

[jacobacci]

I am planning to use the m500 Mk3 feeding a Violectric V280 FE HPA through XLR and active speakers containing ICEpower200ASC modules through RCA. Is there a degradation of SQ to be expected by connecting both outputs at the same time?

 

[morillon]

this is a measurement-observation, quite simple, which could be systematized as a precaution
;-)

 

[PeteL]

On a personal POV, I disagree and don't disagree, I prefer some tracks in MQA and not other, but the first point that is not right the way they used it is the fact it's mostly as a conversion instead of capturing (while listening) during the creation of the track, and so most tracks being converted after the creation, the sound is changed, and a lot of artist or mix/mastering didn't confirm anything but got the tracks they worked on only available as converted to MQA. None of them can opposed to that since the master is propriety of the labels.
But would you agree to have your work changed (even just a little bit) by someone, and still being named as the one who done it? In any work, it should not happen, period.

What you are listening with MQA files is not a better sound, it's more a different master, that you can like more, or less.
The only way MQA could provide a potential improvement is if it was used on the whole chain, which they decided to not do.

What about MP3 or AAC? Isn't it the same thing? What about remasters of old recordings? In the end yes artist could I assume potentially refuse in their contracts to have their masters tinkered with and not let anyone hear anything different than when they where right here in the studio, but in the end, very few complains about that. What we do hear tough, is for them to get more money from the streaming giants, and rightfully so. They want to get paid, but an astounding majority will not complain about new ways to get music in peoples computers, like... Beside Neil Young, who's already rich, and who most of his work have been originally mastered for vinyl anyway, who else? The masters may be the propriety of the labels, but it don't mean they can't oppose to that, that they can't be vocal about not liking what they did with their mix, but nobody does.

 

[srkbear]

Well it just sounds better to me , whatever vodoo it is, and I don’t need to subscribe to any collective consciousness, everything sounds better on tidal with Roon even more so

Likely a consequence of superior masters on Tidal—remember that MQA has negotiated access to their “provenance” masters that are approved by the original engineers/producers/artists. That’s part of their scheme to force folks to use Tidal to access these proprietary remasters, to maintain dominance over the industry (just look at who owns Tidal).

There’s absolutely no scientific basis for why MQA’s lossy format should sound “better” than lossless, unless the master itself is superior.

 

[srkbear]

Not going to take position on MQA but as of today there is no streaming services that offers high res in Canada, and I would assume that it's the same in many other countries. Not saying that MQA is better than Redbook 44/16 but saying that if you want High res streaming, you need Qobuz, if Qobuz is unavailable, CD quality or MQA it is. It could certainly be argued that 44/16 is all you need and I will not debate this. But In the end, Tidal is all we got here (unless I'm missing something) and yes, well that may not be because of the tech itself but in the end there are plenty of superbly sounding MQAs, I don't know why I should boycott my pleasure.

Highresaudio.com is not available in Canada? I access it via a VPN. Also there’s the Apple Music store. Works fine through my DAC with my iPhone…

 

[srkbear]

What about MP3 or AAC? Isn't it the same thing? What about remasters of old recordings? In the end yes artist could I assume potentially refuse in their contracts to have their masters tinkered with and not let anyone hear anything different than when they where right here in the studio, but in the end, very few complains about that. What we do hear tough, is for them to get more money from the streaming giants, and rightfully so. They want to get paid, but an astounding majority will not complain about new ways to get music in peoples computers, like... Beside Neil Young, who's already rich, and who most of his work have been originally mastered for vinyl anyway, who else? The masters may be the propriety of the labels, but it don't mean they can't oppose to that, that they can't be vocal about not liking what they did with their mix, but nobody does.

Most artists don’t own the rights to their masters, studios do. Vanishingly few, like Neil Young, are in a position to refuse to play with Tidal.

 

[Garrincha]

Likely a consequence of superior masters on Tidal—remember that MQA has negotiated access to their “provenance” masters that are approved by the original engineers/producers/artists. That’s part of their scheme to force folks to use Tidal to access these proprietary remasters, to maintain dominance over the industry (just look at who owns Tidal).

Most likely so, the quality of the recording is the most important part in the chain of reproduction, with an inferior source even the best speaker and room treatments and everthing else (dac, amp,...) still would only deliver bad sound.

There’s absolutely no scientific basis for why MQA’s lossy format should sound “better” than lossless, unless the master itself is superior.

It would even be magic for the MQA file to sound better than the master (but many audiophools believe in magic, so for them that might even be possible).

 

[srkbear]

Most likely so, the quality of the recording is the most important part in the chain of reproduction, with a inferior source even the best speaker and romm treatments and everthing else sill would only deliver bad sound.

It would even be magic for the MQA file to sound better than the master (but many audiophools believe in magic, so for them that might even be possible).

You gotta hand it to Meridian (now MQA), they pulled off a major coup with this miraculous “advance”.

 

[LaL]

What are the 2 front jacks please? 6.35mm and is the other 4.4?If so, assume this isn't "balanced" but same output as the other?

EDIT- As @VintageFlanker says , it is 6.35 and 4.4 and (based on SMSL specs and fact Amir didnt test) both output the same- so no extra voltage from 4.4mm

On these new balanced Dac's it's great to see more companies starting to remove balanced form the 4.4mm headphone output.
They do this for our convenience.