I bought a Topping E50 in this New Year sales after reading a review by a recording engineer whose views I tend to trust and then armirn’s excellent measurements on this forum. I would like to describe my subjective findings under 2 main areas:
1. how it compared to my previous Chord Qutest DAC (bettered)
2. the effected of a linear power supply (useful improvement)
(Please note that these observations are “in my humble opinion” but if you want double-blind listening tests please read no further. I am a physicist by training and have been designing & manufacturing loudspeakers for many years using both extensive measurements and listening to a wide range of music. My aim is try to achieve “like being there” at a live event and regularly attend unamplified concerts).
My previous Chord Qutest DAC was purchased (at a good price) in early 2019 also after I had read favourable reviews from people whose ears I tend to trust plus the measurements of amirn who rated it as the best at that time. At that time I thought the biggest change (from my previous Pro-ject S2 DAC) was greater ‘texture’ in the music - as though harmonic structure of the notes were more clearly defined and integrated but possibly due to the notes starting and stopping more quickly. There was also better stereo imaging, particularly depth, which is usually another sign of good micro-timing – something that Rob Watts focuses on in his FPGA chip designs for Chord.
However, compared to the Qutest I thought the Topping E50 sounded even more natural/full bodied in the midrange; deeper and tighter in the bass; and less edgy/more at ease in the treble – all without any apparent loss of resolution/detail or PRaT or of spatial imaging that were comparable to the Qutest.
I would have been very happy just to leave it at that but a colleague who is a symphony orchestra player and recording engineer said he had heard of useful improvements with a Topping D70 DAC using a linear power supply. I already had a DIY linear power supply (as shown) attached to my Qutest that had provided a modest improvement but had not moved it to the E50 because of different output leads needed – and because the consensus on this forum seemed to that a good SMPS such as the Samsumg phone charger I was using was more than adequate.
But curiosity got the better of me and I modified my linear power supply to a USB female output so I could run either the Qutest or E50. I thought the LPS improvements with the E50 were greater than with the Qutest with the notes seeming to stop and start even more quickly – leading to better timing and to better spatial resolution.
I repeat that these observations are personal and may differ from other people and other systems. The rest of my system was an HP Elite i7 computer running Jriver MC29 and 4 channels of the new Hypex NCx500 amplifier modules bi-amping Legend Kantu Be floorstanding speakers.
1. how it compared to my previous Chord Qutest DAC (bettered)
2. the effected of a linear power supply (useful improvement)
(Please note that these observations are “in my humble opinion” but if you want double-blind listening tests please read no further. I am a physicist by training and have been designing & manufacturing loudspeakers for many years using both extensive measurements and listening to a wide range of music. My aim is try to achieve “like being there” at a live event and regularly attend unamplified concerts).
My previous Chord Qutest DAC was purchased (at a good price) in early 2019 also after I had read favourable reviews from people whose ears I tend to trust plus the measurements of amirn who rated it as the best at that time. At that time I thought the biggest change (from my previous Pro-ject S2 DAC) was greater ‘texture’ in the music - as though harmonic structure of the notes were more clearly defined and integrated but possibly due to the notes starting and stopping more quickly. There was also better stereo imaging, particularly depth, which is usually another sign of good micro-timing – something that Rob Watts focuses on in his FPGA chip designs for Chord.
However, compared to the Qutest I thought the Topping E50 sounded even more natural/full bodied in the midrange; deeper and tighter in the bass; and less edgy/more at ease in the treble – all without any apparent loss of resolution/detail or PRaT or of spatial imaging that were comparable to the Qutest.
I would have been very happy just to leave it at that but a colleague who is a symphony orchestra player and recording engineer said he had heard of useful improvements with a Topping D70 DAC using a linear power supply. I already had a DIY linear power supply (as shown) attached to my Qutest that had provided a modest improvement but had not moved it to the E50 because of different output leads needed – and because the consensus on this forum seemed to that a good SMPS such as the Samsumg phone charger I was using was more than adequate.
But curiosity got the better of me and I modified my linear power supply to a USB female output so I could run either the Qutest or E50. I thought the LPS improvements with the E50 were greater than with the Qutest with the notes seeming to stop and start even more quickly – leading to better timing and to better spatial resolution.
I repeat that these observations are personal and may differ from other people and other systems. The rest of my system was an HP Elite i7 computer running Jriver MC29 and 4 channels of the new Hypex NCx500 amplifier modules bi-amping Legend Kantu Be floorstanding speakers.
