Gustard X16 Balanced MQA DAC Review

[Harmonie]

This cannot be true. Those are values for a headphone amp. Even thousandfold would be a good value for a dac.

It's 100 Ohm SE and 300 Ohm XLR!

That's because he's got mixed up with the H16 while this thread is about the X16 ...
https://shenzhenaudio.com/collectio...ca-balanced-headphone-amplifier-pre-amplifier

 

[m8o]

I'm tempted to buy one, though I do not need it at all
Conclusion:
This web site drives addicted members nuts !!

Just do it! I succumbed and chased the purple dragon today. Tho I have countless DACs.

Many of them have actually been measured here. All have some pretty notable, sometimes significant failings, measurement-wise. Looking forward to hear 'perfection'. Sure hope I don't think "dry and analytical".

 

[dmac6419]

Just do it! I succumbed and chased the purple dragon today. Tho I have countless DACs.

Many of them have actually been measured here. All have some pretty notable, sometimes significant failings, measurement-wise. Looking forward to hear 'perfection'. Sure hope I don't think "dry and analytical".

I bit the bullet,now I have to find something to pair it with.

 

[GTAXL]

Jitter and spurious tones are almost nonexistent (difficult in a low noise DAC) and this is even true of Coax input which these days is typically neglected

That S/PDIF jitter is excellent. I was going to ask what S/PDIF receiver they are using as implementation is solid, but it appears the S/PDIF receiver is built into the DAC chip (ES9068AS) along with a PLL. Neat! That would explain why coax is doing just as good as USB. I guess that is one way to solve jitter for S/PDIF, I hope AKM, etc. jump on board with that idea. Would love to see an AK4499 with internal S/PDIF receiver. This matters to me because I mainly use AES/EBU.

 

[Angsty]

Well, that Schiit Modi 3 I bought in February is getting long in the tooth and this one has Bluetooth, to boot! But, wait, I already have a Bluetooth transceiver. But, it's not integrated in one 121 dB SINAD unit!

Arguing with myself about when to replace a perfectly functioning unit is one of the agonizing pleasures of this hobby.

 

[Angsty]

But, really, can you genuinely hear a difference from another 100+ dB SINAD DAC?

I do recall a site with a post that said "How do you deal with people thinking a DAC has a SOUND SIGNATURE?" with lots of discussion about the double-blind audible differences of DACs.

I also recall this chart showing the threshold of audibility:

I do think we are seeing price/measured performance barriers being smashed regularly, but I also wonder what is the point of it all if we have a hard time hearing a difference.

 

[Blake Klondike]

Really thanks to Amir. The matching headphone amp H16 also has been released, and will be available in the mid of this month! We'd love to provide any service to Amir's fans. [/QUOTE

Any chance you might send Amir a review unit of the headphone amp? Would be stellar if it also measures so well!

 

[IVX]

It should be. The Gustard X-16 configuration is a dual chip one
.

ESS more tricky and measured DR of 9038 with AVG-detector instead of RMS-detector(all another measure RMS de facto) that gave 3..2.5db of "improvement". Being placed in a near to ideal environment the 9038q2m shows 126..126.5db(A-weighted RMS or -123db unweighted) dynamic range/SNR, and 3-4% of samples may have result 6db worse. Dual 9038q2m configuration improves that number for 3db i.e. 126..126.5db unweighted or 129db (A).
As you can see, 9068 is exactly the same 9038 + MQA(lossy audio format similar to AAC, mp3, APTX). I didn't see the 9068 datasheet but I'm sure they did measure DR standard way(bravo Martin!) and got 126db(A), but SNR I guess was MUTE=On Every time when DR and SNR mismatched it is fishy.

 

[IVX]

The performance of 1* ES9068AS is roughly 2* ES9038q2m.

why do you believe that? Gustard X16 performance is even a little worse than dual 9038q2m does but very close to suspect if 9038q2m+mqa = 9068.

 

[maxxevv]

ESS more tricky and measured DR of 9038 with AVG-detector instead of RMS-detector(all another measure RMS de facto) that gave 3..2.5db of "improvement". Being placed in a near to ideal environment the 9038q2m shows 126..126.5db(A-weighted RMS or -123db unweighted) dynamic range/SNR, and 3-4% of samples may have result 6db worse. Dual 9038q2m configuration improves that number for 3db i.e. 126..126.5db unweighted or 129db (A).
As you can see, 9068 is exactly the same 9038 + MQA(lossy audio format similar to AAC, mp3, APTX). I didn't see the 9068 datasheet but I'm sure they did measure DR standard way(bravo Martin!) and got 126db(A), but SNR I guess was MUTE=On Every time when DR and SNR mismatched it is fishy.

Don't have access to that data nor do I have the depth of knowledge regarding them.

My logic is pretty much looking at how a great dual-9038Q2M implementation in the form of the Soncoz SGD1 versus this one.
They are very much the same, except the ESS-hump being properly sorted out with the SGD1.

 

[JohnYang1997]

why do you believe that? Gustard X16 performance is even a little worse than dual 9038q2m does but very close to suspect if 9038q2m+mqa = 9068.

Make a dual 9038q2m dac and test under Amir's test condition. I have tested dual, quad 9038q2m, 9038pro in stereo, in mono. And I have all achieved under -140dB harmonics and DNR as good as the datasheet.

 

[JohnYang1997]

ESS more tricky and measured DR of 9038 with AVG-detector instead of RMS-detector(all another measure RMS de facto) that gave 3..2.5db of "improvement". Being placed in a near to ideal environment the 9038q2m shows 126..126.5db(A-weighted RMS or -123db unweighted) dynamic range/SNR, and 3-4% of samples may have result 6db worse. Dual 9038q2m configuration improves that number for 3db i.e. 126..126.5db unweighted or 129db (A).
As you can see, 9068 is exactly the same 9038 + MQA(lossy audio format similar to AAC, mp3, APTX). I didn't see the 9068 datasheet but I'm sure they did measure DR standard way(bravo Martin!) and got 126db(A), but SNR I guess was MUTE=On Every time when DR and SNR mismatched it is fishy.

9068as has potentially even better than 9038q2m mono performance as gustard only use regular opamps for i/v. You'd get degradation paralleling 9038q2m directly before the i/v.

 

[johnmato]

I wondering if it is the final solution to a DAC. If not, in which aspect do a more expensive DAC can defeat this one. As you can see, X16 is not the most expensive DAC in gustard, so there must be some shortcoming of it. It must not be better than X26,A22 or other more expensive product.

 

[JohnYang1997]

It must not be better than X26,A22 or other more expensive product.

They borrowed apx555 from another reviewer. There's the absolute possibility to make better dac cheaper.

 

[markk02474]

This product makes me very happy.
In the past period of time, I stopped measuring (because my second son was born). By the way, I lent the APX555B to Guatard for free. This product is their final result.

I am very happy to see that my dream of promoting the progress of China's audio industry is gradually realized.

Is there a way to ask Gustard some technical questions? Can you forward some?
1. Are they using SiC or soft recovery hyper FREDs in the power supply bridges yet? Replacing their generic diodes to soft recovery FREDs made a huge improvement in my X-20. These reduce diode switching noise, much like class B transistor crossover switching noise is reduced with class AB, or eliminated with Class A amplification. RF impulse noise goes both to the DAC and back out the power cord and into other system components like the preamp and amplifier.
2. How many independent regulated power supplies are used?
3. Do the clocks get their own regulated supplies?
4. Any plans to upgrade from TPS7Axx regulators to even lower noise ones like the LT3045? I realize the DAC chips have their own internal regulators, so there is sonic and cost savings benefit already.

Thank you

 

[johnmato]

They borrowed apx555 from another reviewer. There's the absolute possibility to make better dac cheaper.

I had asked gustard this question, he reply me that X26 is positioning at high-end level while X16 is at entry level, so X26 sounds better even the test results are worse, because testing results can not represent hearing experience. I think it make nosene

 

[johnmato]

Is there a way to ask Gustard some technical questions? Can you forward some?
1. Are they using soft recovery hyper FREDs in the power supply bridges yet? Replacing their generic diodes to soft recovery FREDs made a huge improvement in my X-20. These reduce diode switching noise, much like class B transistor crossover switching noise is reduced with class AB, or eliminated with Class A amplification. RF impulse noise goes both to the DAC and back out the power cord and into other system components like the preamp and amplifier.
2. How many independent regulated power supplies are used?
3. Do the clocks get their own regulated supplies?
4. Any plans to upgrade from TPS7Axx regulators to even lower noise ones like the LT3045? I realize the DAC chips have their own internal regulators, so there is sonic and cost savings benefit already.

Thank you

If you want to ask something, just go ahead by yourself. search 'gustard X16' at taobao.com and you will find him. Use google translator and pretend ur a chinese

 

[gonzoznog]

I know it's already been mentioned, but I wonder how this compares to the SU-9. I just got an SU-9 that I only use for MQA and DSD [Gumby for PCM]. Should I send the SU-9 back and get either this or the SGD1? I like the SU-9, but wish it was more 3d sounding like my Gumby [prob doesn't even matter as I am going to guess that you guys will say they all sound pretty close]. Audiophilia Nervosa in full effect, obviously...

 

[deafenears]

If you want to ask something, just go ahead by yourself. search 'gustard X16' at taobao.com and you will find him. Use google translator and pretend ur a chinese

He's also active on erji.net under the handle 'huang_cs'.

 

[amirm]

I know it's already been mentioned, but I wonder how this compares to the SU-9. I just got an SU-9 that I only use for MQA and DSD [Gumby for PCM]. Should I send the SU-9 back and get either this or the SGD1? I like the SU-9, but wish it was more 3d sounding like my Gumby [prob doesn't even matter as I am going to guess that you guys will say they all sound pretty close]. Audiophilia Nervosa in full effect, obviously...

They are so close as to not be worth talking about. If you have SU-9, just keep it.

As for 3-D sounding, DACs can't impact that. Pretend that it is more 3-D and listen more carefully and it will sound more 3-D! The effect will wear off later though...