• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). There are daily reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Geshelli JNOG2 Review (Balanced DAC)

Rate this DAC:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 9 5.4%
  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 54 32.1%
  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 94 56.0%
  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 11 6.5%

  • Total voters
    168

alpha_logic

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 16, 2021
Messages
106
Likes
141
??? Any Topping/SMSL/Gustard/... with an ESS Sabre DAC chip and switchable filters has the same exact filter response as the J2 here.
It's bog-standard Brick wall. Nothing special about it.
Amir says this referring to the filter in his review: 'The latter is something few companies get right. Good thing as there is no way to change the filter.' I admit I don't understand that statement, since as I understand it the filters are hard-coded on the actual ESS chip, so I'm not quite sure why it would be a problem 'to get it right'. I'm sure I'm missing something, maybe you could explain?
 

thyristor

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2020
Messages
54
Likes
111
Topping E50 is a lot better value in my opinion.


SMSL DO100 is even better value. Cheaper and built in power supply.
 

retroflex

Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2021
Messages
19
Likes
34
Location
Sweden
??? Any Topping/SMSL/Gustard/... with an ESS Sabre DAC chip and switchable filters has the same exact filter response as the J2 here.
It's bog-standard Brick wall. Nothing special about it.
The cheapest Topping product reviewed by Amir with balanced output and brick wall filter seems to be the EX5 at $349. Neither the D10 Balanced ($139) nor the E50 ($269) allow you to select that filter even though they have Sabre DACs, from what I can tell (all prices from Amir's reviews). With the EX5 you get slightly better DAC performance and an excellent headphone amplifier for only $50 more, so it seems like a way better deal in the vast majority of cases. But if you don't want the USB input and the headphone amplifier for whatever reason, the extra $100 is hard to justify.

The SMSL DO100 at $239 does seem to beat the Geshelli JNOG2 in all categories, though.
 

Toni Mas

Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2022
Messages
74
Likes
77
The cheapest Topping product reviewed by Amir with balanced output and brick wall filter ...
I understand balanced output is a plus (if the amp has balanced input...), but what is exactly the magic of brick wall lpf, hitting the 20khz as close as possible and then falling as straight as possible down to the noise floor?

Imho, the slow filter of my Topping E30 ( AKM based) is my favorite one (upsampling everything at the max 705.6/768khz with squeezelite)...:eek:
 
Last edited:

Spocko

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 27, 2019
Messages
1,203
Likes
2,217
Location
Southern California
The cheapest Topping product reviewed by Amir with balanced output and brick wall filter seems to be the EX5 at $349. Neither the D10 Balanced ($139) nor the E50 ($269) allow you to select that filter even though they have Sabre DACs, from what I can tell (all prices from Amir's reviews). With the EX5 you get slightly better DAC performance and an excellent headphone amplifier for only $50 more, so it seems like a way better deal in the vast majority of cases. But if you don't want the USB input and the headphone amplifier for whatever reason, the extra $100 is hard to justify.

The SMSL DO100 at $239 does seem to beat the Geshelli JNOG2 in all categories, though.
The least expensive balanced DAC (without requiring an XLR adapter) with the minimum acceptable performance currently available is the SMSL DO100 - this is indeed an accomplishment by SMSL.
 

norcalscott

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 30, 2020
Messages
159
Likes
223
Location
Sierra Foothills
I love the fact that they are a family business, assembling things in the U.S., and performance is good. However, hard to vote this higher than fine based on the user experience and USB being optional at a pretty high price. I would recommend they find some way to shoehorn even a small LED display into the unit for user feedback, and if you insist on making USB optional, do it for <$30. The wood case does look damned sexy though, I have to say.
 

Toni Mas

Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2022
Messages
74
Likes
77
Family US business? I had never heard of them before, but the name sounds as chinese as Chang...
 

nyxnyxnyx

Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
376
Likes
311
I think price-wise, Chinese companies will probably always have an advantage for the foreseeable future. I can't recall the last time I see a handful of products that can go toe-to-toe with Topping and SMSL in price/performance ratio
 

alpha_logic

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 16, 2021
Messages
106
Likes
141
Family US business? I had never heard of them before, but the name sounds as chinese as Chang...
I think the company name 'Geshelli' is derived from the husband/wife couple who run the company, 'Geno/Sherri', hence 'Ge-Shelli' - someone correct me please if I'm wrong.
 

Toni Mas

Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2022
Messages
74
Likes
77
I think price-wise, Chinese companies will probably always have an advantage for the foreseeable future. I can't recall the last time I see a handful of products that can go toe-to-toe with Topping and SMSL in price/performance ratio
Agree... Chinese may leave a small niche market for loudspeakers (because imho they have no idea about loudspeakers, or have different ears...), but for the rest they are absolute Mambo Kings...
 

norcalscott

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Oct 30, 2020
Messages
159
Likes
223
Location
Sierra Foothills
I think price-wise, Chinese companies will probably always have an advantage for the foreseeable future. I can't recall the last time I see a handful of products that can go toe-to-toe with Topping and SMSL in price/performance ratio
I agree but they are allowing for customization and enclosure selections that high volume Chinese companies probably would never do. That is the way to compete in this environment, and they also care about performance as shown in the testing. I just think there are some rough edges that may hold them back from maximum success.
 

nyxnyxnyx

Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
376
Likes
311
Agree... Chinese may leave a small niche market for loudspeakers (because imho they have no idea about loudspeakers, or have different ears...), but for the rest they are absolute Mambo Kings...
Just unconfirmed rumors but I've heard that there are many great loudspeakers that are sold domestically in China, they don't carry the same price/performance sense though.
I agree but they are allowing for customization and enclosure selections that high volume Chinese companies probably would never do. That is the way to compete in this environment, and they also care about performance as shown in the testing. I just think there are some rough edges that may hold them back from maximum success.
Yeah there's what you said and also great customer service and the feeling of supporting a small, "indie" company like Geshelli. Their marketing is also quite nice imo as they do try to capture the balance between objective performance and subjective sentimentalism that both audiophiles and musicians love.
 

retroflex

Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2021
Messages
19
Likes
34
Location
Sweden
I understand balanced output is a plus (if the amp has balanced input...), but what is exactly the magic of brick wall lpf, hitting the 20khz as close as possible and then falling as straight as possible down to the noise floor?

Imho, the slow filter of my Topping E30 ( AKM based) is my favorite one (upsampling everything at the max 705.6/768khz with squeezelite)...:eek:
With a slow reconstruction filter, the DAC will output a mirror version of your signal as ultrasonic garbage. This can cause a multitude of complications that might end up affecting the audible frequencies. And from a more philosophical point of view, having the DAC output a bunch of ultrasonic crap on top of the input signal is not really acceptable when we're chasing 120 dB SINAD perfection.

However, your upsampling process is most likely already applying a brick wall filter to the signal at 20 kHz, and a pre-filtered signal with a high sampling frequency makes the work of the DAC reconstruction filter really easy, so the slow filter is probably enough to avoid any ultrasonics. I see that the slow filter in the E30 attenuates the signal a few dB in the audible frequency range, could be that this is what you hear and prefer, although my money's on placebo (no offense, we're all but humble servants of the mighty placebo god).

index.php
 

Toni Mas

Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2022
Messages
74
Likes
77
With a slow reconstruction filter, the DAC will output a mirror version of your signal as ultrasonic garbage. This can cause a multitude of complications that might end up affecting the audible frequencies. And from a more philosophical point of view, having the DAC output a bunch of ultrasonic crap on top of the input signal is not really acceptable when we're chasing 120 dB SINAD perfection.

However, your upsampling process is most likely already applying a brick wall filter to the signal at 20 kHz, and a pre-filtered signal with a high sampling frequency makes the work of the DAC reconstruction filter really easy, so the slow filter is probably enough to avoid any ultrasonics. I see that the slow filter in the E30 attenuates the signal a few dB in the audible frequency range, could be that this is what you hear and prefer, although my money's on placebo (no offense, we're all but humble servants of the mighty placebo god).

index.php
Yes i know the theory thanks... But
With a slow reconstruction filter, the DAC will output a mirror version of your signal as ultrasonic garbage. This can cause a multitude of complications that might end up affecting the audible frequencies. And from a more philosophical point of view, having the DAC output a bunch of ultrasonic crap on top of the input signal is not really acceptable when we're chasing 120 dB SINAD perfection.

However, your upsampling process is most likely already applying a brick wall filter to the signal at 20 kHz, and a pre-filtered signal with a high sampling frequency makes the work of the DAC reconstruction filter really easy, so the slow filter is probably enough to avoid any ultrasonics. I see that the slow filter in the E30 attenuates the signal a few dB in the audible frequency range, could be that this is what you hear and prefer, although my money's on placebo (no offense, we're all but humble servants of the mighty placebo god).

index.php
These graphs show curves based at 44.1khz sampling freq because this is common CD standard. But if the sampling freq is moved one, two, four, etc... octaves higher, and lpf/anti aliasing filters are applied also one, two, four, etc ...octaves higher, so that bandwith is increased proportionally and you have no longer to worry about spurious aliasing effects in the audio band...
Btw, though upsampling + slow filters sound better for me, I admit the difference is quite subtle... But with a humble Topping E30 still audible... And this is the reason why if i would upgrade my Dac my favourite option is currently their DAC30PRO, because of that very slow filters...
 

retroflex

Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2021
Messages
19
Likes
34
Location
Sweden
Yes i know the theory thanks...
Why did you ask then?

These graphs show curves based at 44.1khz sampling freq because this is common CD standard. But if the sampling freq is moved one, two, four, etc... octaves higher, and lpf/anti aliasing filters are applied also one, two, four, etc ...octaves higher, so that bandwith is increased proportionally and you have no longer to worry about spurious aliasing effects in the audio band...
That's what I said?
 

Walter

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 25, 2020
Messages
797
Likes
1,068
The link to the manual is on our site under J2. It is working fine from the website.
Completely irrelevant. The number one search result on Google is a dead link. How many others are, also? This is easy to find and fix. I routinely run such checks for clients as part of their monthly maintenance. So should any other dev/web manager.
 
Last edited:

Walter

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Aug 25, 2020
Messages
797
Likes
1,068
No that is 100% a developer failure. They should probably have kept the old url structure, but barring that, they should have set up 301 redirects. And saying it is a Google failing is absolutely ridiculous, so maybe you were just not careful with your wording. Google has no way to know that the new URLcontains the same content as the old one. How would they? That is the purpose of a redirect. And note that just moving the site to a new host will not produce the error that was shown. There have to have been changes made to the site, as well.
That's a Google rather than a Geshelli fail, because they moved their website to a new hosting provider only a few days ago, and hence you're looking at an outdated link which Google hasn't re-indexed yet.
 
Last edited:

Swtoby

Active Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2018
Messages
165
Likes
247
I'm beginning to appreciate what a tough job it must be making audio components, regardless of the manufacturer. It seems to be an endless stream of complaints about every conceivable aspect and mostly from people who have no direct experience with the product.
 
Top Bottom