No not using EQ/PEQ yet but that is tangential to my question. To put it another way if I had EQ/PEQ could I detect a 0.2% difference in SINAD?Then buy a less expensive DAC if you are concerned about your room. Just kidding...Are you using EQ/PEQ?
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
SMSL SU-10 DAC Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Probabably not although you could hear much more in the music and everything will be better than without PEQ.
I admit I watch alot of reviews like this despite knowing better but here it goes.
For me it's bongers what these guys Sometimes hear between "high-end" devices.
I have been looking at the topping DX7 pro plus (or whatever it's called) that is basically up there with these 3 DACs in performance and comes with a really good headphone amp as well.
Why are we not Getting more devices like that from SMSL too?
For me it's bongers what these guys Sometimes hear between "high-end" devices.
I have been looking at the topping DX7 pro plus (or whatever it's called) that is basically up there with these 3 DACs in performance and comes with a really good headphone amp as well.
Why are we not Getting more devices like that from SMSL too?
Yeah, it's crazy what some reviewers say! I'm watching that video now, and at 2:18 he says the Topping is 3-5dB louder than the Denafrips DAC, and then goes on to compare the soundstage, etc differences between them - but of course it's not level matched (which he admitted by saying that the Topping is 3-5dB louder) so of course it's gonna sound different. It's a bit of a joke really. I don't think you can really take these kind of reviewers seriously.
Trell
Major Contributor
- Joined
- May 13, 2021
- Messages
- 2,752
- Likes
- 3,285
The dude is using riser feet on some of his equipment. Are they “Shock absorbers”?
Some reviews can nonetheless be informative with respect to handling, easy of use, connectivity, user interface, display quality, remote and so on
DeepSpace57
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2019
- Messages
- 312
- Likes
- 125
I think he meant the difference at the max level of volume.
Veri
Master Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2018
- Messages
- 9,597
- Likes
- 12,039
Apparently these vibration/shock absorbers make for better DAC bass and imaging........The dude is using riser feet on some of his equipment. Are they “Shock absorbers”?
Trell
Major Contributor
- Joined
- May 13, 2021
- Messages
- 2,752
- Likes
- 3,285
An unintended consequence, for them, is that their usage improves cooling which can prolong the life time of the device.
RandomEar
Senior Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2022
- Messages
- 334
- Likes
- 775
Wait a second. I thought absorbers make the sound "smoother"? Learning something new everyday
Yep, you could be right, but still it's a crazy review, lol!
Look at this MQA language SMSL is including in its marketing materials for their latest D400ES/EX flagships!
Wait, are you sure a DAC chip decodes MQA? I thought that process occurs on a separate XMOS. Both DACs that contain either of these two chips are full MQA decoders, so I’m confused…
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2021
- Messages
- 104
- Likes
- 93
Although SMSL is a brand that is new to me and, noted that it has just released a new series of DACS with dual AKM Flagship chips (D400EX) I didn't see any point in paying the additional higher cost over the SU-10. What would I be gaining? The SINAD performance is, as everyone is rightly pointing out, becoming a goal that has less meaning with each offering. the SU-10 tops the lot. What I suspect may come along to bite at the heels of Matrix Audio, is a dual chip network version at much lower cost. Matrix seems to have positioned their products with better user interfaces, better aesthetics and perceived product build quality. However, there is plenty of room for everyone in this highly competitive market. It does cause me some, growing, concern that premium brands are still choosing to ignore the product spec/cost ratio of the Chinese based producers. I've had no qualms ditching expensive cult gear that I've been loyal to for decades. Just like that. If someone is going to try to convince me to part with $25000 for a DAC or AMP they'd better be better than what is being offered for a fraction of the price. Good looking luxury items is not hi-fi, unless it can deliver extraordinary performance and now we know how much that can cost. I think ASR is doing a great job at blowing myths apart and educating us. Keep up the good work and I'll be upgrading my membership!
As always grateful for the time and dedication @amirm to do the measuring. I'd love to hear comment on how it sounds compared to other DACs. It uses the venerable POA1612A but there's 11 of them! That with the XMOS316 and a "low noise" power supply. What's it all sound like? Have the previous crowd favourites been toppled?
JSmith
Master Contributor
SABRE Audiophile DACs – ESS Technology, Inc.
www.esstech.com
ESS ES9039PRO and ES9027PRO announced
New flagship DAC from ESS announced, now with MQA supported variants... "The ES9039MPRO & ES9039PRO provide 8 channels of Flagship ultra-low noise digital conversion with a dynamic range (DNR) of +132dB, -122dB THD+N per channel and +140B DNR in mono mode. The ES9027MPRO & ES9027PRO also...
www.audiosciencereview.com
JSmith
Gradius
Addicted to Fun and Learning
Super sad they continue to promote that mqa-cra*.
Mqa CDs are a thing in Asia (mainly in Japan). So it's no surprise they would support it.
It's crap, I agree but at this price point I rather have a unit that supports mqa and DSD.
"The first 9039?SABRE Audiophile DACs – ESS Technology, Inc.
ESS ES9039PRO and ES9027PRO announced
New flagship DAC from ESS announced, now with MQA supported variants... "The ES9039MPRO & ES9039PRO provide 8 channels of Flagship ultra-low noise digital conversion with a dynamic range (DNR) of +132dB, -122dB THD+N per channel and +140B DNR in mono mode. The ES9027MPRO & ES9027PRO also...
JSmith
I really want to say a few words about this feature. The technical passport is published on the official website, no matter how you look at it, this is a stripped-down version of 9038! ? The biggest feature is a more energy efficient hyperflow modulator. What is the source of this energy saving? At first glance, I see two points from the script: 1. The reconstruction filter is worse, the removal of a brick wall, the addition of an extra minimum phase, the filter attenuation is worse. 2. Low-frequency hyperflow modulator, asynchronous mode mclk (MasterClock) 9038 is 100 MHz (> 2048 fs), and 9039 is 50 MHz (1024 fs). You should know that the data in the official 9008 document is all 40 MHz, does that mean it's done backwards? . . This mclk is associated with the final modulation process, affects the formation of noise, and also directly affects the resolution.
Although in general, while maintaining the same parameters, energy consumption decreases, and it would not be an exaggeration to call it an "upgrade", but again, the measurements are the same, and it sounds like devices that are very different from each other, surely all enthusiasts have met. This adjustment of retention parameters cannot be considered simply as an "improvement". For those who can already play 9038, why do we need 9039?"
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
