Saidera
Senior Member
The USB-C Dongle Market
Apparently CS43130 was a Wolfson chip.
It was Hidizs / Tempotec / Meizu that first drew my attention to CS43131.
Later in 2020 products with dual CS43131 such as iBasso DC03 began appearing.
We’ve had these pages:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...pple-vs-google-usb-c-headphone-adapters.5541/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...dizs-s8-usb-c-headphone-adapter-review.10823/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...sonata-hd-pro-review-headphone-adapter.22625/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...a-better-budget-option-than-the-hd-pro.16175/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...zu-hifi-usb-c-headphone-adapter-review.10947/
I have repeatedly read that Meizu Hifi will be affected by the quality of the 5V USB rail. On the other hand, IVX has recently again proposed Meizu Hifi as the better choice over Tempotec SHDP. This led to me getting the Meizu Hifi.
Meizu Hifi cannot record DSD, but at least it can record only 16/48 PCM mono which Tempotec SHDP cannot. Tempotec SHDP has Savitech’s ASIO driver, and so can sometimes playback DSD256. Meizu did not provide ASIO drivers. Meizu Hifi is like a longer version of Apple’s TPU dongle, except black. Meizu Hifi’s circuitry is encased in metal though. If I had to choose between Meizu and Apple, I’d choose Meizu. I value DSD and 44.1kHz multiples of PCM. I still can’t stand 24/48. But Apple can record at 24/48 mono.
It is now common knowledge that these first appeared for smartphone jack replacement, but subsequently, thanks to USB-C to USB A adaptors, could be used in PCs to replace Realtek ‘crab’ sound. Ever since Sony VAIO’s strong advertising of DSD and their Sigmatel/IDT (VAIO 2005-08) CXD9872 implementations I have had an infatuation with codec chips. Notably the CXD9872 was stated by Sony to be their ‘own’ codec chip, when in reality, buyers noticed that the foundations were from Sigmatel. Later Sony switched to ALC889DSD by Realtek, which could allow MIC IN DSD recording. Some desktops paired ALC889DSD with the Sony S-Master amp. I assume that ALC889DSD’s own amp wouldn’t be used in that case.
CXD9872 and ALC889DSD were marketed as 'Sound Reality' chip by Sony - they used to list S/N ratios on documents pertaining to walkmans, S-Master amps and VAIO Sound Reality (as chip direct output, not individual implementations). Now they don't.
That's my infatuation with codec chips and their useless and sometimes misleading specs.
Now:
I wanted to ask, some dongles only use CS46L41 (not CS46L06 of Apple)+SA9302L. Meizu has CS46L41 but still uses CS43131…why? Isn’t CS43131 superfluous? It’s not like the DAC and amp are split between chips. What’s CS46L41 doing – is it acting as a USB bridge?
Now we’re seeing PCM 32/768 on UA2. So:
I wanted to ask, why is UA2 able to use ESS ES9038Q2M DAC & Ricore RT6863 amplifier to achieve PCM 32/768 + DSD512 when the same ES9038Q2M is used in E1DA’s DAC but no PCM 32/768 is supported?
As for pricing, dual CS43131 dongles are pricey and might not be that much different, given that CS43131 is easy to implement but has little room for improvement, unlike higher ESS AKM chips. Dual CS43131 is usually for balanced output, but to be fair, they seem to be doing the same anyway for unbalanced. Just for placebo.
A rough division of price ranges for best cost performance ratio dongles:
Apple’s $9USD -$15 AUD
or $13 USD on taobao or $24 AUD on aliexpress like Meizu HIFI
or on taobao $35-$40-ish with TempoTec SHDP…
There is the question: in a volume matched comparison of various dongles in a professional studio with studio monitors (speakers) will the sound be subjectively different between dongles. If so it would it be due to implementation? We do know that CS43131 is unlikely to be vastly different across different products.
On speakers, it’s usually a comparison between terrible motherboards and actual DACs which highlight vast differences. When we get to the territory of Apple’s dongle and above, I presume it’s safe to say that subjectively perceivable differences are minimal? Is it worth testing? Is that not what quite a few reviewers (who appear to seriously spend their time listening on varied earphones etc and writing reviews) are aiming to do? Sometimes it’s possible to hear how Apple’s dongle is somewhat different, less ‘present’ as if the thickness of sound has been reduced. But maybe not. I have no standing to speak since even volume matching is beyond my ability.
Finally, Cirrus Logic has supported DSD playback, but no matter what kind of comparison you do, there is just no difference between its PCM and DSD. It’s as though DSD support is included just because the market has released DSD in the past – a mere compatibility and consumer preference issue. Many DACs originating from Japan have clearly presented a different sound when comparing PCM and DSD playback e.g. AKM, but it could be down to implementation.
So basically I have complaints about the DSD aspect of CS43131, but it is like a dream come true to have DACs with native DSD at $16-24 AUD (Meizu on taobao). This was not the case in 2018! So I wanted to express some gratitude to CS43131 for enabling DSD to be obtained on any USB C device and capable of taking anywhere.
Meizu Hifi does not support DSD DoP on some apps, since it comes out as white noise. No amount of tweaking appears to change this.
It works on HQPlayer, but not JRiver or foobar DSD Processor. Oh well.
After comparing Meizu and Meizu Pro teardown pictures from 52audio, I found that Meizu Pro has components on the bottom side as well. The only difference is the opamp. DoP support limits remain the same.
I know that Meizu Pro suffers phone antenna interference as noise. I wonder why.
Apparently CS43130 was a Wolfson chip.
It was Hidizs / Tempotec / Meizu that first drew my attention to CS43131.
Later in 2020 products with dual CS43131 such as iBasso DC03 began appearing.
We’ve had these pages:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...pple-vs-google-usb-c-headphone-adapters.5541/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...dizs-s8-usb-c-headphone-adapter-review.10823/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...sonata-hd-pro-review-headphone-adapter.22625/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...a-better-budget-option-than-the-hd-pro.16175/
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...zu-hifi-usb-c-headphone-adapter-review.10947/
I have repeatedly read that Meizu Hifi will be affected by the quality of the 5V USB rail. On the other hand, IVX has recently again proposed Meizu Hifi as the better choice over Tempotec SHDP. This led to me getting the Meizu Hifi.
Meizu Hifi cannot record DSD, but at least it can record only 16/48 PCM mono which Tempotec SHDP cannot. Tempotec SHDP has Savitech’s ASIO driver, and so can sometimes playback DSD256. Meizu did not provide ASIO drivers. Meizu Hifi is like a longer version of Apple’s TPU dongle, except black. Meizu Hifi’s circuitry is encased in metal though. If I had to choose between Meizu and Apple, I’d choose Meizu. I value DSD and 44.1kHz multiples of PCM. I still can’t stand 24/48. But Apple can record at 24/48 mono.
It is now common knowledge that these first appeared for smartphone jack replacement, but subsequently, thanks to USB-C to USB A adaptors, could be used in PCs to replace Realtek ‘crab’ sound. Ever since Sony VAIO’s strong advertising of DSD and their Sigmatel/IDT (VAIO 2005-08) CXD9872 implementations I have had an infatuation with codec chips. Notably the CXD9872 was stated by Sony to be their ‘own’ codec chip, when in reality, buyers noticed that the foundations were from Sigmatel. Later Sony switched to ALC889DSD by Realtek, which could allow MIC IN DSD recording. Some desktops paired ALC889DSD with the Sony S-Master amp. I assume that ALC889DSD’s own amp wouldn’t be used in that case.
CXD9872 and ALC889DSD were marketed as 'Sound Reality' chip by Sony - they used to list S/N ratios on documents pertaining to walkmans, S-Master amps and VAIO Sound Reality (as chip direct output, not individual implementations). Now they don't.
That's my infatuation with codec chips and their useless and sometimes misleading specs.
Now:
I wanted to ask, some dongles only use CS46L41 (not CS46L06 of Apple)+SA9302L. Meizu has CS46L41 but still uses CS43131…why? Isn’t CS43131 superfluous? It’s not like the DAC and amp are split between chips. What’s CS46L41 doing – is it acting as a USB bridge?
Now we’re seeing PCM 32/768 on UA2. So:
I wanted to ask, why is UA2 able to use ESS ES9038Q2M DAC & Ricore RT6863 amplifier to achieve PCM 32/768 + DSD512 when the same ES9038Q2M is used in E1DA’s DAC but no PCM 32/768 is supported?
As for pricing, dual CS43131 dongles are pricey and might not be that much different, given that CS43131 is easy to implement but has little room for improvement, unlike higher ESS AKM chips. Dual CS43131 is usually for balanced output, but to be fair, they seem to be doing the same anyway for unbalanced. Just for placebo.
A rough division of price ranges for best cost performance ratio dongles:
Apple’s $9USD -$15 AUD
or $13 USD on taobao or $24 AUD on aliexpress like Meizu HIFI
or on taobao $35-$40-ish with TempoTec SHDP…
There is the question: in a volume matched comparison of various dongles in a professional studio with studio monitors (speakers) will the sound be subjectively different between dongles. If so it would it be due to implementation? We do know that CS43131 is unlikely to be vastly different across different products.
On speakers, it’s usually a comparison between terrible motherboards and actual DACs which highlight vast differences. When we get to the territory of Apple’s dongle and above, I presume it’s safe to say that subjectively perceivable differences are minimal? Is it worth testing? Is that not what quite a few reviewers (who appear to seriously spend their time listening on varied earphones etc and writing reviews) are aiming to do? Sometimes it’s possible to hear how Apple’s dongle is somewhat different, less ‘present’ as if the thickness of sound has been reduced. But maybe not. I have no standing to speak since even volume matching is beyond my ability.
Finally, Cirrus Logic has supported DSD playback, but no matter what kind of comparison you do, there is just no difference between its PCM and DSD. It’s as though DSD support is included just because the market has released DSD in the past – a mere compatibility and consumer preference issue. Many DACs originating from Japan have clearly presented a different sound when comparing PCM and DSD playback e.g. AKM, but it could be down to implementation.
So basically I have complaints about the DSD aspect of CS43131, but it is like a dream come true to have DACs with native DSD at $16-24 AUD (Meizu on taobao). This was not the case in 2018! So I wanted to express some gratitude to CS43131 for enabling DSD to be obtained on any USB C device and capable of taking anywhere.
Meizu Hifi does not support DSD DoP on some apps, since it comes out as white noise. No amount of tweaking appears to change this.
It works on HQPlayer, but not JRiver or foobar DSD Processor. Oh well.
After comparing Meizu and Meizu Pro teardown pictures from 52audio, I found that Meizu Pro has components on the bottom side as well. The only difference is the opamp. DoP support limits remain the same.
I know that Meizu Pro suffers phone antenna interference as noise. I wonder why.