SMSL D400EX DAC Review

[juliangst]

With the Topping DM7 and the Okto DAC8 8Ch there are 2 excellently measuring DACs. The DM7 is absolutely affordable for an 8Ch DAC.

I know those very well but that’s 2 in total. We get at least 2 more stereo DACs every month in comparison.
I just wish we had more budget options; 600€ for the DM7 is still a lot and for a 2.2 setup you don’t really need 8 channels.
I’m not a manufacturer but a dumb USB in 4 channel out DAC shouldn’t be hard to develop and produce.

The DM7 is in the D90 formfactor so why not make a 4 channel version in the D30 Pro formfactor; I would buy that in a heartbeat.

 

[buz]

The specs are good enough, but still, piggy bank panther....

 

[Timmeon]

This looks okay visually besides the jumbled mess of type and colors on the screen. I'm no market researcher but I do think there's a space for a neatly packaged 2-channel DAC/Preamp with a programmable low pass filter (perhaps built-in EQ) with a trigger out. Maybe even a sexy volume knob with a clean (dimmable) display. Oh and an analog input. Simple and compact remote control that maybe isn't the one that comes with all of the Topping units? Full width?? A modern preamp for those who don't want/need full room correction and doesn't cost $2,000, basically.

 

[KiyPhi]

Some people (including myself) hope not to need EQ in a nearfield scenario, and/or have doubts if they can do manual EQ right.
Maybe irrational, maybe not. I've had a look on Dirac and it seems quite complex to me. But maybe I'll convince myself to use it finally, should my planned nearfield setup be "underwhelming". I'll know in a few weeks, the house renovation isn't ready yet.

Room correction is always necessary in my opinion. My reservation for DACs like this is always RME. Why buy this when I can buy an RME and get stellar performance but also features?

 

[Waxx]

It's good measuring but too expensive for what it is. If you ask that price you could make it at least look better or add some extra thing like a dsp. MiniDSP Flex is 2/3th of the price, measures in the same "it does not matter anymore" league, it looks a lot better and has a very good dsp and a 4ch dac...

And the Topping E70 is as good, also looks better and less than halve the price.

 

[respice finem]

Room correction is always necessary in my opinion. My reservation for DACs like this is always RME. Why buy this when I can buy an RME and get stellar performance but also features?

I have the RME, but if room correction this "coarse" will suffice, I can also take the switces of the Neumann monitors...
I do use the DSP of the RME, but rather for headphone listening (crossfeed).

 

[tabby]

Well- @amirm acknowledges some confusion in the labelling of some graphs in his OP

"Note: please excuse the mistaken label on the graphs: D400 ES instead of EX. Didn't realize which unit I was testing until I took the review picture. "

However, unless he has the ESS version to test at the same time, he definitely measured the AKM EX version as that's what is in the picture.

But imagine if some EX cases had been used to house ES internals in a factory mix up......

Time to lift some lids I reckon!

I have one, but can't seem to open it, all screws are off...

 

[KiyPhi]

I have the RME, but if room correction this "coarse" will suffice, I can also take the switces of the Neumann monitors...
I do use the DSP of the RME, but rather for headphone listening (crossfeed).

The miniDSP suggested is also a strong contender for the money though. It may not have the same level of performance but it doesn't lack in features. You could also get a digital only DSP and stick it between the source and your DAC-that-performs-similarly-for-half-the-price. I like that we have so many good options but I would love to see them start to expand on features.

 

[okok]

su9 pro review coming too

 

[Roland68]

I know those very well but that’s 2 in total. We get at least 2 more stereo DACs every month in comparison.
I just wish we had more budget options; 600€ for the DM7 is still a lot and for a 2.2 setup you don’t really need 8 channels.
I’m not a manufacturer but a dumb USB in 4 channel out DAC shouldn’t be hard to develop and produce.

The DM7 is in the D90 formfactor so why not make a 4 channel version in the D30 Pro formfactor; I would buy that in a heartbeat.

You consider the DM7 to be (too) expensive? Is there a cheaper 8 channel DAC on the market?

2.2, i.e. 2 loudspeakers and 2 subs?
You are overlooking very important factors. The market for this configuration is very small and most use miniDSP.
With such small quantities, the manufacturer has to pass on the higher costs for housing, packaging, circuit board production and assembly. In addition, of course, there are also the development costs that have to be allocated to the small number of units.

 

[elvisizer]

still waiting for a DAC to replace my mytek that will support balanced outs and pro line levels and doesn't have wacky DSD limitations like benchmark's dacs. someone someday will want to take my money I hope!

 

[HiFindingnemo]

It's good measuring but too expensive for what it is. If you ask that price you could make it at least look better or add some extra thing like a dsp. MiniDSP Flex is 2/3th of the price, measures in the same "it does not matter anymore" league, it looks a lot better and has a very good dsp and a 4ch dac...

And the Topping E70 is as good, also looks better and less than halve the price.

Very subjective. I find the E70 to look uggo! Please get knobs off my DAC.

Room correction is always necessary in my opinion. My reservation for DACs like this is always RME. Why buy this when I can buy an RME and get stellar performance but also features?

RME doesn't have bluetooth or balanced headphone out. The IEM output hisses with sensitive IEMs and the chip it uses is like 7 years old. It's not exactly a perfect product.... I prefer to do DSP/EQ through software, so ADI-2 doesn't do much for me honestly. But to each their own!

 

[fatoldgit]

Silly question.

Given our ability to hear high frequencies drops off as we age (it might all be over by the time we are 40... see below) what is the point (for older listeners) to have a DAC with a multitude of filters, given they work at the high frequencies?

And how can older reviewers claim to hear differences/prefer a specific filter..pure fantasy?

Peter

PS. Yes I accept that one filter out of the bunch can roll off quite early (i.e. anyone could hear the difference but maybe no one would ever pick it as the best/preferred) so the question is related more to the remaining sane ones

High Frequency Hearing Loss - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

 

[respice finem]

Silly question.

Given our ability to hear high frequencies drops off as we age (it might all be over by the time we are 40... see below) what is the point (for older listeners) to have a DAC with a multitude of filters, given they work at the high frequencies?

And how can older reviewers claim to hear differences/prefer a specific filter..pure fantasy?

Peter


View attachment 250463

High Frequency Hearing Loss - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

I guess they are overrated, yes. Fast vs. slow filters may affect distortion (and phase?), which can sometimes be audible, even for old farts like me. But, it's not a "day vs. night" difference, just barely noticeable (for me at least, with some RME filters), and I would be hard pressed to decide which is indeed "better".
The rest is probably bias / autosuggestion.

 

[HiFindingnemo]

I have one, but can't seem to open it, all screws are off...

Careful, I think the board is installed on the top (upside down).

 

[xeizo]

I tend to prefer slower filters, by design they should not affect phase as much as a sharp filter and the difference I hear is a more open stereo image with better layering on a slower filter. I can't hear anywhere near 20k anyway, and if a slow filter passes through white noise >26k at -80dB I'm pretty sure I can't hear that white noise ....

 

[dtaylo1066]

SMSL and Topping are putting out new model DACs at basically an unheard of frequency for a consumer products company. It's almost a bit hard to keep up with them. And almost all models seem golfer panther worthy. It's a curious business model and must be their way to attempt to capture market share, and more of late at different price levels. But DACs are getting like golf drivers, the law of diminishing returns has set in as performance has been pushed to near theoretical limits.

 

[fatoldgit]

I guess they are overrated, yes. Fast vs. slow filters may affect distortion (and phase?),st barely audible which can sometimes be audible, even for old farts like me. But, it's not a "day vs. night" difference, just barely noticeable (for me at least, with some RME filters), and I would be hard pressed to decide which is indeed "better".
The rest is probably bias / autosuggestion.

I can see the really slow filters could screw with phase/increase distortion but in general you as a listener would have to have a set of unique circumstances (system issue/room issue/hearing issue) to prefer the one or two slow filters that these dac chips have.

I have never had a dac that supports multiple filters so havent been able to play around with this.

I can potentially see it might be beneficial for specific albums where say the slow rolloff filter can mask some nasty HF issues on the recording (i.e. in the fashion that some vinyl devotees use different arms/cartridges for different albums)

Thanks

Peter

 

[fatoldgit]

SMSL and Topping are putting out new model DACs at basically an unheard of frequency for a consumer products company. It's almost a bit hard to keep up with them. And almost all models seem golfer panther worthy. It's a curious business model and must be their way to attempt to capture market share, and more of late at different price levels. But DACs are getting like golf drivers, the law of diminishing returns has set in as performance has been pushed to near theoretical limits.

Its been expressed before, but I would far rather they spent time/energy adding in robust/accurate PEQ... thats what they need to move up the food chain...not chasing another 2db in SINAD.

I want (have) a DAC with transparent PEQ and would happily lose some SINAD to get that from Topping et al.


Peter

 

[xeizo]

I can see the really slow filters could screw with phase/increase distortion but in general you as a listener would have to have a set of unique circumstances (system issue/room issue/hearing issue) to prefer the one or two slow filters that these dac chips have.

I have never had a dac that supports multiple filters so havent been able to play around with this.

I can potentially see it might be beneficial for specific albums where say the slow rolloff filter can mask some nasty HF issues on the recording (i.e. in the fashion that some vinyl devotees use different arms/cartridges for different albums)

Thanks

Peter

It's the sharp filters that screws with phase, their benefit is better frequency response/lower noise/lower distorsion, slow filter affects phase less but frequency response is worse and digital noise/distorsion comes through. The optimal filter is a balance of all that, and as you say it can be beneficial or detrimental depending on what music is playing.

Early CD-players had extreme sharp filters and a perfect frequency response because of that, but people complained it sounded "digital", possibly because of f*ed up phase.

And yes, the differences are very subtle, but can be easily heard. I have had switchable filters in my CD-players already >30 years ago, I've never preferred the perfect measuring default filter and some of the other filters may almost sound bad so one has to choose careful depending on personal taste.