That is over generalising in my experience and opinion.
And there are way too many factors involved to say for certain which might be the dominant one.
I have listened to different generations of the ESS chips, albeit all with different makes, and output stage designs.
ES9018, ES9028Q2M, ES9038Q2m, ES9038PRO.
Subjectively, with blind volume equalisation (since I do not have the right equipment to equalise them), the ES9018 sounds somewhat different from the other chips on the list. And if anyone wishes to talk about "glare", the only one on the list that sounds like it does have the so called "glare" is the 9018. So, even from a completely subjective point of view, this "ESS Glare" thing is completely outdated. Those forum parrots need to update their listening experiences.
Now, going back to a little more logic but still subjective experience, the intrinsic output design stage of the different DAC's can play a part too.
The ES9018 DAC I used had a separate RCA output option. Direct from its headphone output, it sounded "airy" and "well separated" and a little thin in its bass presentation and was very obviously tonality wise, different from the other ESS chips on the list. (I have actually spent a full 3 hour session comparing all of them back to back. ) But then I plug the RCA output to the JDS Atom and listened to it, the differences between it and the ES9038Q2M and the ES9038PRO were much , much less discernible. For that matter, the ES9038Q2M was from a Khadas Tone Board.
So, whatever people say about the idea of "ESS Glare", its at best outdated. At worst, its their inherent bias as a result of listening to outputs with poor treble acuity prior to it or worse, using systems that have poor implementations high on distortion, which our ears are much more sensitive to from the treble range onwards than the bass frequencies.
Edit and Addendum:
All the above comparisons were done using A HD800, HD6XX and HE4XX, with all 3 headphones being used repeatedly between identical tracks for comparison.