SMSL SU-9n has no problems with DSD. Slide the sound on the DAC 100% and everything will work. This is all the new DACs have such a nuance.Yet another chifi DAC that has problems with DSD?
-
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!
SMSL SU-9n Review (Balanced Stereo DAC)
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
bellyofthebizd
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2018
- Messages
- 67
- Likes
- 32
??? yeeaah... more of that noise
That's not about new DACs, it is so many years already. No current OS supports volume control for DSD data (it requires different math than in PCM case). The only player which supports volume control, convolution, parametric eq and rate conversion with DSD data is HQPlayer.
dsnyder0cnn
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2019
- Messages
- 541
- Likes
- 801
…and Roon.
Sorry I wasn't enough clear. I meant it differently - without conversion to PCM and back to DSD. Only HQPlayer is capable of that.
From FAQ: Why is Roon converting to PCM?
The most common reasons why DSD is converted to PCM are:
- The audio device isn't reporting DSD support to Roon
- The audio device isn't configured to support DSD playback
- Volume leveling or Crossfade are enabled for the current zone
- Features in the DSP Engine which require PCM conversion have been enabled
- DSP volume control is enabled, and this requires a conversion to PCM
"Roon currently does not support processing DSD signals directly."
For DSD source content, HQPlayer performs DSP calculations at original DSD rate without downsampling (decimation) to lower sample rate PCM and then converting back.
Last edited:
I have a question about DPLL setting. Manual says:
- When the clock stability of the input signal is good, this value can be reduced, so that the clock performance of the system is better;
- When the clock stability of the input signal is not good, the sound may be interrupted. Increase this value can avoid the sound interruption!
I understand the latter but what does it mean when jitter in input is low, DPLL bandwidth can be reduced and „the clock performance of the system is better“ ? My understanding of DPLL bandwidth is it can be set to:
- low: lock range is small so input jitter has to be low, less of input noise but more of internal noise (vco etc) passed to output
- high: lock range is large so input jitter is OK to be large, more of input noise less of internal noise transferred to output
I understand if input is jittery, it should be high but if it has less jitter and if input (noise) is better than DAC, why making DPLL bandwidth low is a good thing ? Is it impossible for input to be better than DAC (because it is external) ? I am driving SU-9n with Gustard U18 which has a better internal clock, normally I would think since input is better than DAC, I should make DPLL bandwidth high to decrease the internal noise. I dont mean high as MAX setting, but why is it better to reduce it than lets say default ?
- When the clock stability of the input signal is good, this value can be reduced, so that the clock performance of the system is better;
- When the clock stability of the input signal is not good, the sound may be interrupted. Increase this value can avoid the sound interruption!
I understand the latter but what does it mean when jitter in input is low, DPLL bandwidth can be reduced and „the clock performance of the system is better“ ? My understanding of DPLL bandwidth is it can be set to:
- low: lock range is small so input jitter has to be low, less of input noise but more of internal noise (vco etc) passed to output
- high: lock range is large so input jitter is OK to be large, more of input noise less of internal noise transferred to output
I understand if input is jittery, it should be high but if it has less jitter and if input (noise) is better than DAC, why making DPLL bandwidth low is a good thing ? Is it impossible for input to be better than DAC (because it is external) ? I am driving SU-9n with Gustard U18 which has a better internal clock, normally I would think since input is better than DAC, I should make DPLL bandwidth high to decrease the internal noise. I dont mean high as MAX setting, but why is it better to reduce it than lets say default ?
I'm currently using a Topping E30, but I hate that it always goes into standby when power is applied. My whole setup is controlled using smart wifi-sockets...
It's already been confirmed to me that he SU-6 will resume the DAC function it was on before power was removed - so when power is applied, there's no need to explicitly turn it on with the power button or remote. Is this the same case with the SU-9N?
I'm torn between the SU-9N and the SU-6. My setup is:
Rotel RC-06, Quad 405-2 (upgraded to the max), JBL 4312A's
I have no use for balanced outputs, but in in general the SU-9N seems to measure a bit better.
It's already been confirmed to me that he SU-6 will resume the DAC function it was on before power was removed - so when power is applied, there's no need to explicitly turn it on with the power button or remote. Is this the same case with the SU-9N?
I'm torn between the SU-9N and the SU-6. My setup is:
Rotel RC-06, Quad 405-2 (upgraded to the max), JBL 4312A's
I have no use for balanced outputs, but in in general the SU-9N seems to measure a bit better.
Can't tell, I only own the SU-9n for 2 monthes.
However, I consider all those DAC as very good units.
It seems to me that DAC market is now mature concerning technical specs.
So, additional features can help making choice.
SU-9n gives (according to me) interresting features :
- Color display (adjustable) + Dimmer function (5 to 60s)
- PCM Filters + customizable filters
- Adjustable DPLL (1 to 10, 1=little jitter)
- Balanced & Unbalanced outputs (XLR/RCA)
- Firmware upgrade by user
- Integrated PSU, no brickwall...
Pick your flavor according to your budget.
Enjoy music
seems like it's already 1 month old?
can't you just use a generic xmos driver?
I am currently using an SU-8 v2 DAC with my Singxer SA-1. I've been considering a DAC upgrade for some time now, but just have not bit the bullet. Right now it would be between the D90SE at $899, the Gustard x18 at $749, and the SU-9n at $400. I have no use for MQA, so that is a null factor for me.
I've been looking at the features, specs, reviews, and factoring in price - I am having a difficult time finding a good reason to spend the extra $350 to $500 for the Gustard or Topping over the SU-9n!
Am I missing something?
I've been looking at the features, specs, reviews, and factoring in price - I am having a difficult time finding a good reason to spend the extra $350 to $500 for the Gustard or Topping over the SU-9n!
Am I missing something?
Last edited:
the difference is probably negligible, you're probably better off saving for the next generation or something with built-in parametric eq.
Last edited:
Hi all, i have a question as im a bit new to this but would really appreciate an answer.
Im thinking of a buying an smsl/topping stack but wonder whether you can connect su9-n da9 sh9 all through balaned connections? It seems not the case? Meaning i would do su9 to da9 balanced and su9 to sh9 single ended? Is this correct? I assume there is no impact on quality?
Thank you!
Adriaan
Im thinking of a buying an smsl/topping stack but wonder whether you can connect su9-n da9 sh9 all through balaned connections? It seems not the case? Meaning i would do su9 to da9 balanced and su9 to sh9 single ended? Is this correct? I assume there is no impact on quality?
Thank you!
Adriaan
I did just this on my stack. I bought xlr y cables to split the balanced output initially to both but the cables I got weren't great. I'm happy with the better cables I had to do XLR to the SH-9 and rca to the da-9.
Thank you!
@amirm >> I must thank you for including the 'rear-end' view of all the hardware in your test results, which I think reveals much more information than fascia. I find it quite interesting that when I visit most hi-end manufacturers' websites, one needs to dig quite deep to get to that answer.
It is quite dumb that such butt-shots aresometimes often omitted by many aliexpress sellers.
10q
It is quite dumb that such butt-shots are
10q
Similar threads
- Poll
