SMSL D400ES DAC Review

[bennetng]

Thanks for the detailed post. I tried with Audirvana studio, I did upsampling PCM files (with MQA nothing can be done). With upsampling, when one of the filters on DAC is ON, the sound is very similar, but when the filter is OFF, the volume is reduced and there is no clipping. The sound is roughly the same as with the filter ON. I noticed in the review of the D400EX model that all filters up to about 10KHz go around 0 dB, as is normal. Only about 17Khz (and only one filter) reduces it to -4.25dB. With the D400ES, all filters reduce the volume from 0Hz by -4.25Hz. It doesn't make any sense.

In Amir's dashboard the level for D400ES is about 4.2Vrms at 1kHz. If you use a built-in filter with the flattest frequency response (linear phase fast roll off) then this voltage should not significantly change within 20Hz to 20kHz. In another D400EX dashboard I also saw a similar Vrms value on the dashboard.

The frequency response and filter plots are labeled as dBrA, which is a relative value. You can read in this post:

Topping D90 Balanced USB DAC Review

Now a site known for its subjective reviews is using ASR as reference. .https://audiobacon.net/2019/12/24/topping-d50s-dac-review/ These guys write the same words when a DAC measures great and doesn't cost a lot. It is sterile, not coherent, etc., etc. I don't know how it is that...

www.audiosciencereview.com

You can see in the last screenshot I configured the setting of the plot so that the top of the spectrum aligns to 0dB, it is just a graphical setting and has nothing to do with actual voltage level at analog output.

As a matter of fact, the ES model is based on ESS and EX model is AKM, and they are not doing exactly the same thing in the context of bypassing filters and the audio level after bypass the filter, what's important is both models are measured as 4.2Vrms at analog output when the filter is not bypassed. If you want to verify this you can record the analog output of both DACs with the flattest built-in filter (Sharp roll-off in the case of AKM) and compare the level of the recorded signal and see if one of them is really several dB lower than the other or not. I attached a test signal in the post below so you can try it out, read the posts before and after it to know what the topic is about:

RMAA Tests: (Welcome to add others!)

You need levels to remain the same for all devices to be able to compare. i did a bunch of these today, feeding from my rme adi2 pro fs and topping D70 at high (+24 dBU), mid (-2 dBU) and low levels (-14 dBU), to get a sense of preamp quality on those that have gain stages. a few were loopbacks...

www.audiosciencereview.com

For example, in this post you can see member KSTR complained that the AK4490 is doing 8x upsampling with 44/48k input, but only 2x upsampling with 192k input, also a screenshot indicating clipping. It may not be the case when using AK4191+AK4499EX, but a perfect example that different products upsample differently, when something is bypassed they also behave differently.

Digital filter "game"

Some of you probably have seen a lot of filter plots like these on DAC datasheets: How about making these things without using specialized software like Matlab, Octave and such? They are not particularly easy to use. So many people just "see" them rather than try to figure out the meaning...

www.audiosciencereview.com

In short, if the output voltage of both DACs are similar when the flattest built-in filter is not bypassed, then both DACs are working fine. Any level discrepancies in the case of bypassing filters are inherent to the internal structures of individual products.

 

[Aleksandar RS]

I think that the key thing is that: if the D400ES measurement was performed with the filter OFF (if we turn ON the linear phase fast filter, the volume and dynamics will drop significantly because the filter reduces by 4.25 dB from 0Hz, which would be reflected in the measurements), that would mean that they left the option for the filter OFF in order for the measurement result to be excellent. When listening, there is a very clear drop in volume and dynamics when the filter is turned ON. I will remind you that with the filter OFF, almost every track forces the amplifier into clipping, which means that you cannot listen to it at 0dB on DAC. We are not talking about a laboratory signal, but about track to which gain was added during the production, which is often the case. With the D400EX, there is no filter OFF option, so I assume that the measurements were made with the filter with the flattest frequency response. It would be extremely good to do measurements (1 kHz tone at full volume using USB connection and XLR output) with the D400ES with the flattest frequency response filter ON.

PS: The variant with 8x upsampling (SoX) and increasing the volume on the DAC to +2dB (max) gives a pretty good solution for PCM. Thanks for that.

 

[bennetng]

I cannot take your description as fact until a measurement is shown. What I am seeing in Amir's measurement is that both DACs are operating at 4.2Vrms when the filter is not bypassed, but the ES one will clip when the filter is bypassed, which means the level differences are in the case of bypassing the filter, not the case with not bypassing.

If you are willing to spend money with these IMO rather expensive DACs, I would recommend you also buy a much cheaper Cosmos ADC and check the level for yourself.

E1DA Cosmos ADC

@IVX kindly sent me a sample of the new Cosmos ADC to try out. Here are my impressions of it so far. The Cosmos is housed in a compact metal case with rubber feet, USB Type C connector on one and dual XLR inputs on the other. Power is over USB only. Beside the USB connector is small LED that...

www.audiosciencereview.com

If you are really not seeing the same 4.2Vrms level after measurement, the only explanation is that your ES DAC has a different revision or firmware than Amir's. That's all I can say.

[edit]Here is a real world example that someone measured a different full scale level than what Amir measured on a DAC of the same model:

Ton of questions (Linearity, Resolution, Bit Depths, Windows Sampler, DACs, DA Filters)

Right. What I forgot to add was that it's often a good idea to set the software volume control to slightly below 0 dB. For example -3 dB. This mitigates the potential for intersample peaks which most DACs do not handle well. If even the Topping D10 doesn’t suffer from this...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Aleksandar RS]

Ok, although it would be nice to write at what setting the measurement was made (filter ON/OFF) because it is important, at least in this case. Usually not, because no DAC has filters that start from 0Hz with -4.25dB. Here would be significant differences in the measurement results. I will ask amirm directly how the measurement was done. In any case, thanks for your time and effort.

 

[Robbo99999]

I disagree that aesthetics are not important in the sonic experience, unless you are limiting the “sonic” experience strictly to what can be heard in a double blind test.

Pivoting slightly, the “listening” experience can be greatly impacted by aesthetic as well as acoustic influences. It’s important to delineate what can be measured and what cannot be in the listening experience. There are both subjective and objective factors. I certainly believe that some listeners might enjoy a 123 dB SINAD DAC more than a 117 dB DAC even if what comes out the speaker is not DBT verifiable due to other physical limitations. That enjoyment can come from the knowledge of having a SOTA DAC versus a lower spec one, versus hearing audible differences.

When I say "sonic", I mean sonic, ie what is strictly heard. Sure the aesthetic can influence your enjoyment potentially of the music (although that's a bit of a poor influence to admit to), and can legitimately influence the way it fits in with your room on an aesthetic level. Aesthetics aren't strictly important in the sonic experience.

 

[Aleksandar RS]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the SMSL D400ES Balanced Stereo DAC with Bluetooth support. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $800.
View attachment 256379
The D400ES is quite stylish especially if you look at it an angle where it exposes the black heatsinks. Alas, the rotary control is not my cup of tea but you can use the remote to control the full functionality. Not much else to talk about other than show you the rear terminals:

View attachment 256380
Naturally power supply is built-in. Minor nit: I wish SMSL would use color coded RCA jacks as it is hard to tell their respective channels easily.

SMSL D400ES Measurements
As usual we start with our 1 kHz tone at full volume using USB connection and XLR output:

View attachment 256381

No matter how many times I see such superb measurements out of a DAC, it still puts a smile on my face! Distortion is incredibly low at -140 dB or so making SINAD dominant by noise. That lands the D400ES easily in our top 20 best DACs ever measured:
View attachment 256382

RCA output as usual gives up a bit of performance but it is still superbly transparent:

View attachment 256383

In case you want to drive a more sensitive amplifier at lower volumes, here is that performance:
View attachment 256385

Signal to noise ratio is better than dynamic range of your hearing so you are good to go there:
View attachment 256384

Linearity is perfect:
View attachment 256386

Multitone is state of the art:
View attachment 256387

Despite use of ESS DAC, there is no hint of "ESS IMD Hump:"
View attachment 256388

Jitter over USB is perfect and nearly so using Toslink:
View attachment 256389

Numerous DAC reconstruction filters are provided:
View attachment 256390

Note that "off" is not really "off:"
View attachment 256391

Not that you would want to use it anyway as it cuts way into the audible frequency response:

View attachment 256392

As noted, Fast Linear filter seems to be the best compromise of all, resulting in excellent wideband noise+distortion vs frequency measurement:
View attachment 256393

Conclusions
SMSL D400ES delivers flawless state of the art performance in digital to audio conversion. It also looks quite attractive. The only negatives are the cost and the rotary control. Not much else to say really. In case you are comparing it to its D400EX sibling, I think it performs a bit better yet costs less.

I am happy to recommend SMSL D400ES DAC.

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

First, thanks for the measurements and for a great help to all fans of good sound. I also have one question. Is it during the measurement of 1 kHz tone at full volume using USB connection and XLR output at the D400ES, PCM filter was ON or OFF.

 

[Angsty]

Aesthetics aren't strictly important in the sonic experience.

In general, I agree. But the degree that we know that sighted comparisons may differ significantly from double blind tests should at least make us sensitive to aesthetics having a real world influence on our listening preferences.

 

[Robbo99999]

In general, I agree. But the degree that we know that sighted comparisons may differ significantly from double blind tests should at least make us sensitive to aesthetics having a real world influence on our listening preferences.

It would depend on the individual, I like to think I'm not influenced by aesthetics - in my previous living room for example I set it up around a perfect equilateral triangle for listening position, which did not look optimal, yet I did it. So I think I'm one of the people that aren't influenced by aesthetics when it comes to my perception of the sound quality. I haven't bought any of my audio gear based on aesthetics, didn't even enter my mind during purchase.

 

[piaseczek]

Something I remarked in these new ESS9039PRO measurements out so far, another one courtesy of RAA here
is that the harmonics are extremely controlled, some H2 and H3 but all higher harmonics are really suppressed.

ESS9038 (Q2M):
View attachment 256400
(we are talking levels below 110dB until the very end so not an audible thing, but still cool to see this measured)

ESS9039 (Pro):
View attachment 256401
In a way this is yet another thing that bridges AKM's and ESS's final analog response closer together in that they perform almost exact same. All that's left is the implementation of the oversampling filters which are still quite different between the two manufacturerers.

Thanks for the great post!

Topping d90se based on the es9038pro measures very similar to the es9039pro so it's not only a matter of a DAC chip:

Harmonic Distortion vs Level - Direct comparison of graphs RAA

Harmonic Distortion vs Level - Direct comparison of graphs Reference Audio Analyzer

reference-audio-analyzer.pro

 

[Aleksandar RS]

On this graph for the D400ES, it can be seen that all the filters initially reduce the sound intensity to -4.2dB (starting from 0Hz). Practically, first they lower the tone to -4.2db and only then work as filters. This results in a considerable loss of dynamics compared to the filter OFF. It doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[waveuk]

On this graph for the D400ES, it can be seen that all the filters initially reduce the sound intensity to -4.2dB (starting from 0Hz). Practically, first they lower the tone to -4.2db and only then work as filters. This results in a considerable loss of dynamics compared to the filter OFF. It doesn't make any sense to me.

I am trying to understand the same, as I also have this Dac; it would be great to have @amirm clarification.

If other SMSL dacs do not have the option to turn filter off, hence results are with filters on but measure very similar to the D400ES, does it mean that in a like for like comparison the D400ES actually measures worst?

 

[Aleksandar RS]

I am trying to understand the same, as I also have this Dac; it would be great to have @amirm clarification.

If other SMSL dacs do not have the option to turn filter off, hence results are with filters on but measure very similar to the D400ES, does it mean that in a like for like comparison the D400ES actually measures worst?

Depends. If the measurements of 1 kHz tone at full volume using USB connection and XLR output (and RCA) for the D400ES were made with the filter OFF, then the characteristics (Vrms and dB) with the filter ON are definitely worse, so worse than the characteristics of D400EX (how much worse only a new measurement could show) This would not normally apply, however in this case when the filters initially reduce the sound intensity to -4.2dB the measurement results would change. On the other hand, if the same measurements were made with any filter ON (probably linear fast) then the characteristics of both DAC are the practically the same.

How the measurements were made, only Amir can tell us.

 

[bennetng]

Ok, although it would be nice to write at what setting the measurement was made (filter ON/OFF) because it is important, at least in this case. Usually not, because no DAC has filters that start from 0Hz with -4.25dB. Here would be significant differences in the measurement results. I will ask amirm directly how the measurement was done. In any case, thanks for your time and effort.

Here are some obvious evidences that the dB values in filter plots are not based on actual voltage. Years ago Amir's reviews were not as organized as now and I am old enough in terms of membership to remember these things.

Now does it mean all these DACs have filters 30-40dB lower than the others, simply because the top of the plots are not aligned to 0dB?

Review and Measurements of Topping DX7s DAC and Headphone Amp

yes i installed them 4.14.0 You don't have to choose anything in Windows. When your player will be playing music over ASIO output the ASIO driver will automatically switch DAC to the required bitrate of the music file being played. Same thing applies for WASAPI. You should do best if you let...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Review and Measurements of Chord Mojo DAC and Amp

This is a review and detailed measurements of Chord Mojo portable DAC and headphone amplifier. It is on a kind loan from a member. Retail price is USD $599 but I see Amazon showing it for $532 including prime shipping. The Mojo is a small but chunky and heavy as portable headphone amplifiers...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Review and Measurements of Linn Akurate DSM DAC/Streamer

This is a (performance) review and detailed measurements of the Linn Akurate DSM DAC and networked streamer. A local member kindly brought it over to our house to measure. It retails for .... get ready for it... USD $10,250. Yes, we are moving up in the world! Linn is a Scottish company that...

www.audiosciencereview.com

In fact, such plots on other websites are often not aligned to 0dB, for example Stereophile.

Okto dac8 Stereo D/A processor Measurements

Sidebar 3: Measurements

www.stereophile.com

Confirming clipping without measurements but only rely on listening to arbitrary music content is a fragile approach as clipping on short transients often got unnoticed, the only reliable way is via measurement.

 

[bennetng]

Now take a look at this:

Review and Measurements of Topping DX7s DAC and Headphone Amp

yes i installed them 4.14.0 You don't have to choose anything in Windows. When your player will be playing music over ASIO output the ASIO driver will automatically switch DAC to the required bitrate of the music file being played. Same thing applies for WASAPI. You should do best if you let...

www.audiosciencereview.com

The post didn't mention the name of the filters, but some of them can be deduced from the shape of the filtered waveform. Please note that the input levels are not necessarily 0dBFS. This information is not shown in the screenshots.

This one is linear phase fast roll off.

Because this filter's stopband is at around 24kHz and it has one more visible peak in time domain. Brickwall and Apodizing on the other hand have an earlier cutoff.

This is minimum phase fast roll off. Pay attention the peak (Vpp) is about 3 while the linear phase filters are only around 2.5

These two filters are are the flattest among the built-in ones with same Vrms up to 20kHz, only Vpp differs, and if you increase the test signal to anywhere near to 0dBFS, some DACs may clip. In fact, some DACs cannot even handle a linear phase filtered square wave.

Here is another DAC (not ESS):

Review and Measurements of Cambridge DacMagic Plus

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus DAC and "digital pre-amplifier." It is on kind loan from a member and costs USD $349 from the company itself or Amazon with Prime shipping. Researching the unit, it seems to have come out around 2012. Yet it seems...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This phenomenon cannot be revealed when using 1kHz sine wave as input. It should be emphasized some published music are even more prone to this phenomenon than square waves.

Help explain intersample overs, please?

What I'm getting at is that I'm sitting at my computer, where I listen via my Topping DX7 Pro, using its digital gain knob. It's never, ever close to the 0 dB setting, which would be painfully loud even it it didn't overdrive my iLoud MTM amps into saturation. Unfortunately this also means...

www.audiosciencereview.com

The main point is, a DAC chip or a DAC box as a whole product may or may not handle these things, but the output level in terms of Vrms when outputting sine waves should match the specs. Some DACs may deliver much higher Vrms but the values are also published in the specs.

 

[Aleksandar RS]

Now take a look at this:

Review and Measurements of Topping DX7s DAC and Headphone Amp

yes i installed them 4.14.0 You don't have to choose anything in Windows. When your player will be playing music over ASIO output the ASIO driver will automatically switch DAC to the required bitrate of the music file being played. Same thing applies for WASAPI. You should do best if you let...

www.audiosciencereview.com

The post didn't mention the name of the filters, but some of them can be deduced from the shape of the filtered waveform. Please note that the input levels are not necessarily 0dBFS. This information is not shown in the screenshots.

This one is linear phase fast roll off.

Because this filter's stopband is at around 24kHz and it has one more visible peak in time domain. Brickwall and Apodizing on the other hand have an earlier cutoff.
View attachment 257982
View attachment 257983


This is minimum phase fast roll off. Pay attention the peak (Vpp) is about 3 while the linear phase filters are only around 2.5

These two filters are are the flattest among the built-in ones with same Vrms up to 20kHz, only Vpp differs, and if you increase the test signal to anywhere near to 0dBFS, some DACs may clip. In fact, some DACs cannot even handle a linear phase filtered square wave.

Here is another DAC (not ESS):

Review and Measurements of Cambridge DacMagic Plus

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Cambridge Audio DacMagic Plus DAC and "digital pre-amplifier." It is on kind loan from a member and costs USD $349 from the company itself or Amazon with Prime shipping. Researching the unit, it seems to have come out around 2012. Yet it seems...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This phenomenon cannot be revealed when using 1kHz sine wave as input. It should be emphasized some published music are even more prone to this phenomenon than square waves.

Help explain intersample overs, please?

What I'm getting at is that I'm sitting at my computer, where I listen via my Topping DX7 Pro, using its digital gain knob. It's never, ever close to the 0 dB setting, which would be painfully loud even it it didn't overdrive my iLoud MTM amps into saturation. Unfortunately this also means...

www.audiosciencereview.com

The main point is, a DAC chip or a DAC box as a whole product may or may not handle these things, but the output level in terms of Vrms when outputting sine waves should match the specs. Some DACs may deliver much higher Vrms but the values are also published in the specs.

The problem with the SMSL D400ES is, which is clearly visible from the diagram, that when the filter is turned ON, the sound intensity drops by 4.2dB compared to the filter OFF (what is clearly heard when listening). It means that if the measurements of 1 kHz tone at full volume using USB connection and XLR output (and RCA) were made with the filter OFF, those results would not be relevant for the filter ON, when the dB would definitely be lower.
It's a completely different story if some DAC manufacturer implements filters starting at say -20dB, with no filter OFF above that (which, if used in the measurement, would enable better results in the measurement). In that case, the measurements are performed as only possible (with the filter ON) and are valid.
In the case of the D400ES, it is very important to get an answer from Amir how the measurements were done, with the filter OFF or with the filter ON. This is the place to discuss measurements for the D400ES so I see no reason not to get an answer. It is the shortest and safest way to solve this problem.

 

[bennetng]

The problem with the SMSL D400ES is, which is clearly visible from the diagram, that when the filter is turned ON, the sound intensity drops by 4.2dB compared to the filter OFF (what is clearly heard when listening).

It is called a sighted listening evaluation based on what you see and how you interpret the plots. There is no way to confirm the "sound intensity" you heard is affected by clipping or not.

In this review you can see Amir deliberately decreased the DAC's volume to about 4.1Vrms because this model has a higher full scale level.

SMSL SU-9n Review (Balanced Stereo DAC)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the SMSL SU-9n balanced USB stereo DAC with Bluetooth support. It was sent to be my Shenzhenaudio and costs US $399. From the outside, the SU-9 looks like the recent DACs from SMSL: And from the back side for that matter: A side story. When...

www.audiosciencereview.com

...and here is another reviewer testing another model. The reviewer used both 0dBFS and -4dBFS white noise to test the filters, and the 0dBFS ones are all clipped. This model does not have a "filter off" function".

REVIEW: S.M.S.L. DO100 DAC (dual ESS ES9038Q2M) [Part I - Overview, Filters & Jitter]. (And the likely continued contraction of MQA...)

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

Here is Amir's review of this model:

SMSL DO100 Review (Stereo DAC)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the SMSL DO100 stereo balanced DAC with Bluetooth. It was sent to me by Aoshida Audio and costs US 239. Sorry about the fuzzy front panel picture. It looks better in person. The rotary control makes it nice to adjust volume. Back panel is the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

If you suspect Amir deliberately manipulated the test results, then you should not expect Amir will tell the "truth" depends on what you are suspecting. In this case the only way is to measure it yourself. Not by fragile listening of unknown music content, with unknown clipping threshold and unkonwn audible clipping threshold.

 

[waveuk]

If you suspect Amir deliberately manipulated the test results, then you should not expect Amir will tell the "truth" depends on what you are suspecting. In this case the only way is to measure it yourself. Not by fragile listening of unknown music content, with unknown clipping threshold and unkonwn audible clipping threshold.

I do not think anyone is suggesting this - we just want to understand the impact of the filters in the measurements and how the measurement presented were done.

As per your example in the review done by Archimago, there is is presented the comparison at different volume levels.

 

[Snoopy]

I'm dumb so explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old... Why not just add a negative gain of a few dB in software? Shouldn't that avoid clipping?

Use the dac in fixed mode , software dsp and no Filters. Makes more sense to EQ yourself anyway instead of using some flavour like filters

 

[Aleksandar RS]

It is called a sighted listening evaluation based on what you see and how you interpret the plots. There is no way to confirm the "sound intensity" you heard is affected by clipping or not.

In this review you can see Amir deliberately decreased the DAC's volume to about 4.1Vrms because this model has a higher full scale level.

SMSL SU-9n Review (Balanced Stereo DAC)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the SMSL SU-9n balanced USB stereo DAC with Bluetooth support. It was sent to be my Shenzhenaudio and costs US $399. From the outside, the SU-9 looks like the recent DACs from SMSL: And from the back side for that matter: A side story. When...

www.audiosciencereview.com

...and here is another reviewer testing another model. The reviewer used both 0dBFS and -4dBFS white noise to test the filters, and the 0dBFS ones are all clipped. This model does not have a "filter off" function".

REVIEW: S.M.S.L. DO100 DAC (dual ESS ES9038Q2M) [Part I - Overview, Filters & Jitter]. (And the likely continued contraction of MQA...)

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

Here is Amir's review of this model:

SMSL DO100 Review (Stereo DAC)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the SMSL DO100 stereo balanced DAC with Bluetooth. It was sent to me by Aoshida Audio and costs US 239. Sorry about the fuzzy front panel picture. It looks better in person. The rotary control makes it nice to adjust volume. Back panel is the...

www.audiosciencereview.com

If you suspect Amir deliberately manipulated the test results, then you should not expect Amir will tell the "truth" depends on what you are suspecting. In this case the only way is to measure it yourself. Not by fragile listening of unknown music content, with unknown clipping threshold and unkonwn audible clipping threshold.

That doesn't even cross my mind. I ask Amir the question because I know the answer will surely be true. Isn't it so much easier than all these posts.

 

[bennetng]

I'm dumb so explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old... Why not just add a negative gain of a few dB in software? Shouldn't that avoid clipping?

Yes. But some people don't think so because they believe reducing volume before going into the DAC violates "bit-perfectness", which I call nonsense.
In fact I have a very long article published in Archimago's blog to promote the use of software volume control:

GUEST POST: Why We Should Use Software Volume Control / Management by Bennet Ng. (Plus discussions on resampling options, true peaks, etc...)

A blog for audiophiles about more objective topics. Measurements of audio gear. Reasonable, realistic, no snakeoil assessment of sound, and equipment.

archimago.blogspot.com

...and a lot of people don't know a lot of measurements are not being done in 0dBFS. Even RMAA's frequency response test signal are generated far below 0dBFS. Only the crosstalk signal reaches 0dBFS because the corsstalk test only evaluates the amount of signal leakage to another channel instead of measuring distortion.

Measurements of Motu UltraLite mk4 (AKM DAC Version)

As mentioned elsewhere I have just purchased a Motu UltraLite mk4. I already use a Motu 8A for driving my active 3 way DSP speaker system, however being only 8 channels I am unable to run the centre speaker from it. The EasyLite mk4 caught my eye as it has been upgraded over the mk3 to include...

www.audiosciencereview.com