• 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!

Review and Measurements of Matrix Audio Element X DAC/Streamer/Amp

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
Why measure anything then? Just link the datasheet for the chip and call it a day.

Did I say it shouldn't be measured? I believe I said we shouldn't worry about results because noise floor of these chips have been measured many times and it has been confirmed they use 32 bit integer float arithmetics to calculate volume levels.

Have you read this article? If you got how this works than you should realise there's no need to worry about it.
 

Daverz

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 17, 2019
Messages
1,294
Likes
1,451
Did I say it shouldn't be measured? I believe I said we shouldn't worry about results because noise floor of these chips have been measured many times and it has been confirmed they use 32 bit integer float arithmetics to calculate volume levels.

Have you read this article? If you got how this works than you should realise there's no need to worry about it.

Yes, I read that one, you just don't understand the depths of my neurosis:eek:. I will try to get over it. There are still people (upthread) who say that analog controls are better, though I don't know whether that is supposed to include the average volume pot. I'm glad we are all in agreement that we should measure volume control quality and put numbers to this issue.
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
Yes, I read that one, you just don't understand the depths of my neurosis:eek:. I will try to get over it.

LOL You can't be a true audiophile without some kind of OCD! :D

P.S. There are still people on this forum who claim that "D70 has deeper and more natural bass than D50" or that upsampling 44.1 to 198 gives better sound, so of course some of them will think analog is better. Measurements of course tell quite a different story, but even after you do the measurements some of them will still say analog is better because they can "hear" it. :D
 

Veri

Master Contributor
Joined
Feb 6, 2018
Messages
9,596
Likes
12,036
For the hardware, almost the same.
For the comparsion, please looking forward to King Amir's measurement. :cool:
Now that's an idea for his ASR title :D

Screen Shot 2019-06-13 at 12.47.45.png
 
Last edited:

Nango

Major Contributor
Joined
Aug 6, 2018
Messages
1,463
Likes
985
Location
D:\EU\GER\Rheinhessen
Its a question of time until folks with Topping SMSL will also release gear with similar values around -118dB for a tenth of it's price and so, so I am not very keen for spending the 3 grands for X DAC ....let's wait!!
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
Its a question of time until folks with Topping SMSL will also release gear with similar values around -118dB for a tenth of it's price and so, so I am not very keen for spending the 3 grands for X DAC ....let's wait!!

And why would you want a DAC with 118dB SINAD when our ears cannot possibly hear a difference between any of the green and blue DACs?

The same is probably true for most of the orange DACs as well but for green and blue DACs it certainly is - we simply cannot hear the difference among them. ;)

Capture.JPG
 
Last edited:

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
@Krunok

Volume. While this is great to have in order to differentiate one DAC from another (pushing the envelope), having a lower noise floor helps when you aren't running max volume, and also with things like noisy or EMI plagued environments I would also presume by extension.
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
@Krunok

Volume. While this is great to have in order to differentiate one DAC from another (pushing the envelope), having a lower noise floor helps when you aren't running max volume, and also with things like noisy or EMI plagued environments I would also presume by extension.

I don't agree. When you listen music in a typical room at say 60dB the noise of your DAC is still burried deep within the environment noise floor. I also doubt you'll be able to hear it with the super isolated headphones as it would be burried in the noise floor of the amp.

Regarding the "EMI plagued" environment - I believe Amir tested that and found that even a cheap DAC like Topping D10 is immune to it.
 
Last edited:

Tks

Major Contributor
Joined
Apr 1, 2019
Messages
3,221
Likes
5,494
Fair enough assessments. I only thought about it in theory, not actually any lived experience where such a thing was a problem for me.

Thanks for correcting me.
 

Yviena

Active Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2019
Messages
121
Likes
33
LOL You can't be a true audiophile without some kind of OCD! :D

P.S. There are still people on this forum who claim that "D70 has deeper and more natural bass than D50" or that upsampling 44.1 to 198 gives better sound, so of course some of them will think analog is better. Measurements of course tell quite a different story, but even after you do the measurements some of them will still say analog is better because they can "hear" it. :D
Miska has proven though that measurements gets objectively better by sending upsampled 768khz, with the RME 44.1khz images being in lower amplitude etc, and there is no perfect reconstruction filter yet if there will be one...
The filter brewing thread on diyaudio really opened my eyes that the frequency response of a filter is not enough to find out how it behaves, we need to also look at the ,phase, log squared impulse response, time smear, and there's stuff like stop band attenuation, pass-band ripple, it's all a matter of trade-offs.

But I think ESS sabre chips upsample to 7xx/1.5mhz rates unlike the AKM which only does 3xx, so images should be lower in amplitude.
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
Miska has proven though that measurements gets objectively better by sending upsampled 768khz, with the RME 44.1khz images being in lower amplitude etc, and there is no perfect reconstruction filter yet if there will be one...
The filter brewing thread on diyaudio really opened my eyes that the frequency response of a filter is not enough to find out how it behaves, we need to also look at the ,phase, log squared impulse response, time smear, and there's stuff like stop band attenuation, pass-band ripple, it's all a matter of trade-offs.

But I think ESS sabre chips upsample to 7xx/1.5mhz rates unlike the AKM which only does 3xx, so images should be lower in amplitude.

I really can't see what is stopping you to realise from the measurements of the analog output of the DACs that we have entered the "overkill" zone at least a decade ago?

Let me come with the brutal analogy here.. Let's assume we have a technology to produce shoes that last 150 years for $150. Would you buy shoes that last 250 years for $1000? My guesss would be that nobody would. And yet people are readilly paying $1000 or more for DAC with THD 0.0001% and SINAD of 118dB over a $200 DAC with THD of 0.0006 and SINAD of "only" 102. Frankly, I don't get it, and I doubt I ever will.

P.S. I have no idea who Miska is but you can post his proof and his measurements here so we can discuss it. Btw, is it Miska or Mishka (Miška)? :D
 
Last edited:

FrantzM

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 12, 2016
Messages
4,337
Likes
7,730
And why would you want a DAC with 118dB SINAD when our ears cannot possibly hear a difference between any of the green and blue DACs?

The same is probably true for most of the orange DACs as well but for green and blue DACs it certainly is - we simply cannot hear the difference among them. ;)

View attachment 27636

A simple pleasure, intellectual and perhaps lasting. I am in the camp of getting one of those superlative products, knowing they wipe the floor with products costing multiple of their prices. There is a satisfaction in possessing the SOTA. Especially at a price that is not so dear...
 

Yviena

Active Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2019
Messages
121
Likes
33
I really can't see what is stopping you to realise from the measurements of the analog output of the DACs that we have entered the "overkill" zone at least a decade ago?

Let me come with the brutal analogy here.. Let's assume we have atechnology to produce shoes that last 150 years for $150. Would you buy shoes that last 250 years for $1000? My guesss would be that nobody would. And yet people are readilly paying mroe for DAC that with THD 0.0001% and SINAD of 118dB over a $200 DAC with THD of 0.0006 and SINAD of "only" 102. Frankly, I don't get it, and I doubt I ever will.

P.S. I have no idea who Miska is but you can post his proof and his measurements so we can discuss it. Btw, is it Miska or Mishka (Miška)? :D
I never said it was audible but objectively at least the RME one does measure better https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...-rme-adi-2-dac/?do=findComment&comment=926151
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
A simple pleasure, intellectual and perhaps lasting. I am in the camp of getting one of those superlative products, knowing they wipe the floor with products costing multiple of their prices. There is a satisfaction in possessing the SOTA. Especially at a price that is not so dear...

Well, ok - I can understand pleasure of owning, but mainly when it comes to art, not technology products. And although SOTA buzzword is frequently used for audio electronic products trust me there's nothing artistic in them. Except for loudspeakers, only they can be to some point considered to be art. IMHO, of course..
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
I newer said it was audible but objectively at least the RME one does measure better https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...-rme-adi-2-dac/?do=findComment&comment=926151

Shoes that would last 250 years would also measure better than the ones that would last 150 years. The point with any kind of measurements is that with them you always need to have a reference value after which you don't consider a measured product to be "better engineered" but "over engineered", and thus probably overpriced too. ;)

Would you pay for a more expensive tire that is capable of speed over 350km/h? It is for sure better engineered than Goodyear Supersport, right? Or is it maybe "over engineered"..?
 

anmpr1

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 11, 2018
Messages
3,722
Likes
6,406
The point with any kind of measurements is that with them you always need to have a reference value after which you don't consider a measured product to be "better engineered" but "over engineered", and thus probably overpriced too. ;)

Over engineered? Well, the game we are playing is, after all, engineering. Right? It seems that there are two points of view in play. First, the best is the enemy of the good. Second, there are no winners here; everyone gets a ribbon just for participating.

To my mind, the point is to reward engineering excellence. If company A can produce a device that is SOA for a 'reasonable' price, then that is what I want to buy, regardless of whether the DAC can be subjectively distinguished from its lesser counterpart. I like excellence. But that's just me. On the other hand, if pretty good is good enough, then a consumer has a choice of a lot of other audio engines, for a lot less expense. At the same time, consumers have a lot of pretty good (and sometimes not so good) options for a lot more dollars than this particular DAC/Streamer. So you pays your money and makes your choice, depending upon what's important to you, and what your pocketbook can stand.
 

Krunok

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 25, 2018
Messages
4,600
Likes
3,065
Location
Zg, Cro
Over engineered? Well, the game we are playing is, after all, engineering. Right? It seems that there are two points of view in play. First, the best is the enemy of the good. Second, there are no winners here; everyone gets a ribbon just for participating.

To my mind, the point is to reward engineering excellence. If company A can produce a device that is SOA for a 'reasonable' price, then that is what I want to buy, regardless of whether the DAC can be subjectively distinguished from its lesser counterpart. I like excellence. But that's just me. On the other hand, if pretty good is good enough, then a consumer has a choice of a lot of other audio engines, for a lot less expense. At the same time, consumers have a lot of pretty good (and sometimes not so good) options for a lot more dollars than this particular DAC/Streamer. So you pays your money and makes your choice, depending upon what's important to you, and what your pocketbook can stand.

Yes, over engineered. Calling such products a "state of the art" and providing a clever marketing to make people buy them is totally wrong, but fortunatelly doesn't happen often in other branch of industries other than audio. You wouldn't really see a 350km/h tires, home refrigerators that can achieve -40C instead of -20C etc. But follwoing your logic these products can also be called SOA and "better engineered", when in fact they are "over engineered" and overpriced. The logic of these companies is that prices should stay the same while specs increases when in fact prices should go down once specs reach satisfactory levels. Think again..

Engineering is not about about designing a product with the best possible specs, it is about designing a cheapest product which meets the reasonably defined specs. But audio industry is very good in making people think otherwise..
 

Crane

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
145
Likes
163
Yes, over engineered. Calling such products a "state of the art" and providing a clever marketing to make people buy them is totally wrong, but fortunatelly doesn't happen often in other branch of industries other than audio. You wouldn't really see a 350km/h tires, home refrigerators that can achieve -40C instead of -20C etc. But follwoing your logic these products can also be called SOA and "better engineered", when in fact they are "over engineered" and overpriced. The logic of these companies is that prices should stay the same while specs increases when in fact prices should go down once specs reach satisfactory levels. Think again..

Engineering is not about about designing a product with the best possible specs, it is about designing a cheapest product which meets the reasonably defined specs. But audio industry is very good in making people think otherwise..


A lot of the times things aren't purchased for "well-engineered", here we have a case of both excellent engineering and machined for the price I believe it is well worth it. Well possibly don't take my word for it since I did purchase this unit. Regardless though, this is where science and art have been combined.

did I need this unit? no. is this the most expensive audio gear? god no

This entire industry is of things that cost way too much, this unit is not one. Besides your definition of engineering is for an operating company where they utilize an engineer for their needs to make a fit-for-purpose product while minimizing overhead cost not where they are a business company selling something for profit. Any company looking to make a profit will not sell things at cost. It just happens to be this specific company is run by engineers who believe in best design products while making a profit.
 
Top Bottom