SMSL M400 Balanced USB MQA DAC Review

[Veri]

Multiple trial, blind listening tested? If not, you can't say that you can hear a difference with any confidence.

Slow will have a high treble roll-off, if he hears up to that range it's hardly improbable.

 

[A Surfer]

Slow will have a high treble roll-off, if he hears up to that range it's hardly improbable.

In theory yes, but I'm still skeptical that while listening to music it would be that obvious. Unless the filter is also less than ideally implemented. In all my years in audio communities online I can't say I have encountered too many people who really feel they can hear the differences in filters, but that doesn't make me correct either. That is why I say do the proper testing, then report the results.

 

[sq225917]

Yes, lots of 2nd hand flicking back and forth.
Let me clarify. I have only ever been able to pick out a difference between those filters as a pair, and never between any others, including pairs with either of those filters.

With the others it's utter pot luck doing ab/x, with those 2 I get it right about 75% of the time.

 

[jcao309]

Very nice and informative review.
How does it compare to D1? BTW, I read your review on SMSL D1 and purchased one together with a P1 recently, based on your review. Initial impression: the resoution and stage of D1 and P1 pair still have room to improve. I am currently debating weather to keep them ot not. Your suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Any other alternative for DAC in the similar price range?
Many thanks.

 

[Ctsox]

Minor distortion/noise with USB input: Is anyone still experiencing this issue with the 2.06 firmware?

 

[A Surfer]

There was audible distortion? I would be shocked if anybody actually heard distortion. Has that been verified and determined to occur at a level that could possibly reach audibility? Not to darn likely. I would be beyond shocked. People read about a minor distortion and suddenly they start to hear it themselves. Funny how that works. Unless it has been verified by robust measurement and measured to be actually audible overtop of music I wouldn't put any stock in such claims. Now if it has been measured as audible distortion, that is different. Otherwise just stories people tell each other.

 

[A Surfer]

Yes, lots of 2nd hand flicking back and forth.
Let me clarify. I have only ever been able to pick out a difference between those filters as a pair, and never between any others, including pairs with either of those filters.

With the others it's utter pot luck doing ab/x, with those 2 I get it right about 75% of the time.

Yes, as you correctly note, 75% is well within the range of error. 90% detection rate, over many trials, and repeated again would lead me to have confidence in the results. 75% sounds like a substantive figure, but it falls well short and you must accept the null hypothesis.

 

[sq225917]

Yeh, if a difference isn't obvious and I in any way have to 'listen for it' to discern it then it falls below the level I care about.

 

[Turcoda]

The serious problems with M400 (half DAC used, poor optical interface, missing output buffer, plastic instead of Al…) will make people very skeptical for any future products SMSL will release in the future and this is a pity as SMSL has some very good products. I am glad I have returned mine based on my personal impressions (ears) and not based on different measurements but it was very clear to me that the audio quality was not what I was looking for and far beyond the competitors.

I think SMSL should have an internal review, lessons learnt meeting, and come back on the market with a better product because they can.

Thanks for the fair warning. I 100% would have returned this DAC when I would have inevitable found out about these these details a well. These problems disgust me, and as a result I canceled my current order for the M400. I'm sure I would have eventually found out about some of these issues myself through audible tests. I still kept the SP400 portion of my order, but I very much doubt the quality of SMSL products now. It's just inexcusable to include high end components and not design your solution to fully utilize it. In the end it makes the whole product sound lie a marketing gimmick. Proper engineers would have tailored a solution around the 4499 chip and not partially implement it just to have it listed in the specs. Every other desktop dac with the 4499 chips seems to have succeeded at that. I ordered a Sabre DAC, the VMV D1se as a replacement, but i am almost already regretting that decision.

 

[gvl]

People, what are you talking about? Who cares if not channels in the DAC are used if it delivers excellent performance? It doesn't get much better than this. High output impedance is odd but not too big of a deal with careful pairing. I'm totally enjoying mine.

 

[Turcoda]

Im not "People", I'm a person and I speak on my behalf and from my opinion. And I very much care because all these things add up to indicate poorly engineered design. This is only the surface of what we can see. I can't help but imagine all the other places where corners might have been cut.

 

[sq225917]

Funny how different people hear things differently, on xlr into a topping pre90 it's still the best dac I've heard. Better than my A18, better than the x16, better than a very souped up dual ess 9038 with multi rail battery supply, reclocker, crystek clocks and traffo output.

 

[Turcoda]

Funny how different people hear things differently, on xlr into a topping pre90 it's still the best dac I've heard. Better than my A18, better than the x16, better than a very souped up dual ess 9038 with multi rail battery supply, reclocker, crystek clocks and traffo output.

Yes it is intriguing, however one should be careful here not confuse "hear things differently" with personal preferences. You didn't mention anything about technicalities, sound signature or detail retrieval of either dacs so we can't make any judgements. You are not the only one to love this dac. I suspect that this dac colors the sound and adds its own flavor and sweetness to the audio that you prefer over every other dac. Nothing wrong with that. To each their own. I made a purchase decision comparing dacs solely on linearity and detail resolution and found that a few commentators out there chose other dacs over the M400. In comparison I went with the D1se because it edged it out in the categories that meant most to me. I'm bummed out for not having found the perfect matching combo that did it all. In the end I had to mix and match an amp and dac from 2 different lineups instead of one. Trust me, I tried real hard to like the M400, but I just can't.

 

[gvl]

Fwiw, I can't hear any differences switching inputs on my SP400 through HD6XXs with the M400 feeding the XLRs and Topping D10s the RCAs, definitely nothing I could pick in on in a blind test, which is how it should be given the performance of either. The RCA issue has been corrected. As for Toslink, read through the Topping reviews about issues with those products. The M400 delivers top performance without unnecessary complications like paralleling channels which would call for more parts and higher cost, that's what good engineering is all about, use the simplest design without performance compromise.

 

[Turcoda]

You're claiming a 100$ DAC sounds on par with the M400 and you're defending the M400? I'm not disagreeing with you, as I'm not certain I would be able to pick out a difference either, but it sounds super silly to me to justify buying the M400, which is priced at 5x higher msrp, after having claimed that.

Here's a quote from soundnews in comparison to the D90: "Now, here is the interesting part: AK4499 is a quad channel design, meaning a single DAC chip can produce a true balanced output, a single AK4497 for example couldn’t do that. The clever part is that Topping used 2 outputs in parallel working as a single channel, by doing that they squeezed the best of out this silicon, I’m impressed. "

I dunno, I'm no electrical engineer so I can't comment on this. But it did raise a red flag for me at the time. Why couldn't SMSL have done this? If we are to use your logic, SMSL should have gone for a cheaper 4493 chip or 4497 chip using the "simplest design" and passed on the savings to the consumer.

 

[gvl]

You're claiming a 100$ DAC sounds on par with the M400 and you're defending the M400?

Pretty much, the M400 is a cleaner measuring DAC but the differences are inconsequential for most practical purposes. The M400 has more features which justify the higher price, but I'm of the opinion it is overpriced by $200 or so. 4499 is better spec'd than 4493, so I suspect they had to use it to hit the numbers we see. I don't get that referenced quote as pretty much all DAC chips have differential outputs these days, so getting a true balanced path is not an issue even with less expensive DAC parts. Higher priced DACs have more channels to support multichannel audio, and for stereo use they can be paralleled to squeeze a couple of dBs of dynamic range, but these improvements are inaudible as this review shows and even without these tricks you can get fully transparent performance.

 

[Turcoda]

While I do agree a few extra dbs of dynamic range would be 100% inaudible, I feel like there would be more to this story. The RME ADI 2 utilizes the 4493 and has somehow designed it with superior specs than what the chip is stated to provide in order to hit higher numbers like you say. I think there are significant engineering decisions involved in making these dacs that users will never be privy of. I still firmly believe a lot of SMSL's specs are purely for marketing, and I believe other companies do it as well. With that said I still ended up buying an SMSL dac and amp this week.

A couple of youtube reviewers have stated the signature of the M400 isn't super neutral and detailed, and is instead leaning on the slightly colored side. I suspect people fond of this DAC are favoring this type of colored sound. In comparison, the Ares II seems like a better buy and seems like its on par quality wise with the D1se, so I chose the D1se. I wish I had more technical data centered around engineering decisions to go on, but I must go with what other members of this forum have said, and I only evaluate hardware based on how it compares and holds up to other hardware in a similar price bracket. With that said, I feel like M400 could have done more for the price. For similar cost I feel like they could have implemented those 2 extra channels in the design. Indeed, I concur that this unit feels 200$ overpriced and, as such, will not be buying it.

 

[gvl]

I learned to ignore youtubers as in most cases they don't know what they are talking about and they do not conduct controlled experiments before they arrive at their "conclusions". It is surely marketing but as long as the results are fine its all good. The SP400 is a good amp, and a matching very well performing DAC is a plus in my book, even if it could technically be a bit better or cost a bit less.

 

[Turcoda]

Totally agree that most of them should be ignored. I tend to focus on the A/B comparison ones and I usually manage to etch out a bit of relevant information out of a few select channels. I've made a few purchases in the past that I've regretted from some of those other youtube channels that should not be listened to for purchasing advice. One of those channels starts with a Z.

Yeah I figured the SP400 was still gonna be a good buy because I haven't heard much to the contrary, aside from lower volume. I don't listen to very loud volumes so it'll work fine for me. I'm still disappointed I found enough fault with the matching dac to turn me away from having a matching stack, but maybe others prefer the specific coloration or uniqueness of the m400 with the sp400 and love this stack.

 

[sq225917]

Youtubers claiming a dac with -120db or thereabouts of thd+noise has a sound signature is just nonsense. As a device I preferred it, sighted over my A18, looks function etc, I couldn't hear a difference though.

As for linearity, it's perfect.

At worst one could claim there's a little grass under 200hz in the imd test, but that hovering at -120db too.