Gustard A18 Balanced Desktop DAC Review

[ArturoKiwi]

They don't have supply to build it, thats why it's dead. Its a complete finished product, it works. If one likes the price, sound and features then buy it, if you can find one.

Shenzhenaaudio and Hifigo have akm dac of any brand. You have only to choose your preferred.
But I don't know if it worth the money, if they won't follow the project as for the other's.
Just my humble opinion

 

[Dannemand]

I didn't read @gustard's post to say A18 is dead, just that they are limited in what they can do because of AKM. They posted in the X16 thread that A18 is currently undergoing MQA review (don't know why only now).

Also A22 has been out over a year. Not to be confused with the new ESS based X26 Pro.

 

[curiouspeter]

I don't tknow what to think. Gustard recently released the A22 with dual AK4499EQ, but says the A18 is a dead project due to inability to improve it.
So why would anyone buy any AKM chip dac right now?

There is the X16 for significantly less.

I guess the margin on the A22 must be higher.

 

[Dannemand]

There is the X16 for significantly less.

I guess the margin on the A22 must be higher.

You almost cannot compare the two as far as component cost:

1) A22 is a dual AK4499, which is AKM's latest flagship chip and their most expensive. X16 is dual ES9068S, and while it is the newest chip in ESS' lineup, it is not their flagship. So almost certainly considerably less expensive than AK4499 -- even before the AKM factory fire multiplied the price of AK4499.

2) A22 has a discrete class-A output stage. This is a far more expensive implementation than the opamps in X16 (even though they are the OPA1612 which we discussed earlier in this thread).

3) A22 uses dual independent 50W toroidal transformers, separate for the digital and analog circuits. I doubt X16 has dual transformers, and in any case is it sure to be much smaller due to the lower power demands of the ESS chip and opamps compared to the AK4499 and class-A output stage.

Of course I am aware that X16 measures better than A22, but that is another story: It was designed specifically for perfect measurements at moderate cost. But you were talking margin. And there is zero doubt that A22 has a considerably higher BOM.

 

[curiouspeter]

You almost cannot compare the two as far as component cost:

1) A22 is a dual AK4499, which is AKM's latest flagship chip and their most expensive. X16 is dual ES9068S, and while it is the newest chip in ESS' lineup, it is not their flagship. So almost certainly considerably less expensive than AK4499 -- even before the AKM factory fire multiplied the price of AK4499.

2) A22 has a discrete class-A output stage. This is a far more expensive implementation than the opamps in X16 (even though they are the OPA1612 which we discussed earlier in this thread).

3) A22 uses dual independent 50W toroidal transformers, separate for the digital and analog circuits. I doubt X16 has dual transformers, and in any case is it sure to be much smaller due to the lower power demands of the ESS chip and opamps compared to the AK4499 and class-A output stage.

Of course I am aware that X16 measures better than A22, but that is another story: It was designed specifically for perfect measurements at moderate cost. But you were talking margin. And there is zero doubt that A22 has a considerably higher BOM.

I really like the looks of A22/X26 though. If I had more rack space I would have considered it.

 

[Dannemand]

I really like the looks of A22/X26 though. If I had more rack space I would have considered it.

You're right, they have that brushed finish. Not something I would pay twice the price for, but it does indeed look cool!

They're both kind of yesteryear's products in my opinion. But it will be interesting to see how X26 Pro fares. No way I'll ever spend $1,500 on a DAC, though: I would rather upgrade my speakers and/or buy some music for that money.

I doubt it will be a measuremaster DAC, although SMSL SU-9 proved that it IS possible with ES9038PRO. I am sure Gustard will aim high.

 

[deafenears]

I doubt it will be a measuremaster DAC, although SMSL SU-9 proved that it IS possible with ES9038PRO. I am sure Gustard will aim high.

There's measurements online, @WolfX-700 posted one:

https://www.l7audiolab.com/f/measurements-of-gustard-x26-pro/

 

[Dannemand]

There's measurements online, @WolfX-700 posted one:

https://www.l7audiolab.com/f/measurements-of-gustard-x26-pro/

Thank you for sharing that. My Chinese is a bit rusty, but Chrome made up for it...

Wow, those are impressive measurements for an older, high current DAC chip like the ES9038PRO. Particularly once you crank it up to 5v / 2.5v. It even beats the X16 in some tests (though not all).

I still don't think it's aimed at the ASR audience, given its measurements are "merely" comparable to X16, yet it costs 3X as much. But I can see an audience for this. Not me, though, my DAC budget is happily spent

 

[curiouspeter]

You're right, they have that brushed finish. Not something I would pay twice the price for, but it does indeed look cool!

They're both kind of yesteryear's products in my opinion. But it will be interesting to see how X26 Pro fares. No way I'll ever spend $1,500 on a DAC, though: I would rather upgrade my speakers and/or buy some music for that money.

I doubt it will be a measuremaster DAC, although SMSL SU-9 proved that it IS possible with ES9038PRO. I am sure Gustard will aim high.

True, at that price Matrix Element i looks promising. Better Roon integration at least.

 

[gustard]

Once again thank you for your response and your input. If there is one thing everybody here seems to agree upon (not just this thread) it is how much we appreciate your engagement on the forum!

I do understand about the price variations, depending on your supply channel. And as I posted in my original question to you, I would even be OK if your answer had been that LME49860 was chosen to shave cost on the BOM, given that A18 is a more affordable AK4499 implementation.



I don't think I fully understood this part. Maybe something got lost in translation, or maybe I am just dense. "A18 should be better, but because of the accident at the AKM factory". Are you saying that you intend to improve A18 once AKM is up and running again? Or that it should be better thanks to LME49860's rail-to-rail performance (compared to using OPA1612A)?

Any additional clarification/elaboration would be great.

Thanks again!

Yeah I think he means that, due to the incident they can not really make any improvement anymore, no further R&D since the availability is gone.

Thanks Veri for the explanation

LME49860 is also a very good op amp.
Although its data sheet is not as fascinating as OPA1612.

The benchmark HPA4 uses LME49860 extensively. And it has achieved very high results on ASR. Everything is subject to actual results

Even if the result is the same, we are happy to try various paths
Find different sounds in the same performance

Thanks

 

[ceausuc]

could anyone please explain what "-3db" means in the RCA measurement graph?
the volume was lowered by 3db for the output to become 2V (from 3V)?

 

[Veri]

could anyone please explain what "-3db" means in the RCA measurement graph?
the volume was lowered by 3db for the output to become 2V (from 3V)?

Yup. When amir measured he had to go "-3" to get closest to 2V, "-4" would give around 1.9V. Full output is apparently rather "hot" for RCA.

 

[Gradius]

could anyone please explain what "-3db" means in the RCA measurement graph?
the volume was lowered by 3db for the output to become 2V (from 3V)?

-3dB = 2.1V

Max = 3V

A18 is $650 now. Too expensive.

 

[Davide]

Sorry guys, I'm a little ignorant, but if I wanted to use the A18 as preamp with the Purifi EVAL1, are there any contraindications regarding the voltages?
Because in Amirm's post it says that the EVAL1 reaches 100% of the power with 1.5V (even if I don't understand where it can be seen, in the specifications I can not find anything), while the A18 delivers 6V RMS.
Is it correct to assume that the A18 should be set to maximum -12db? (obviously I don't need 100% of the Purifi power, it is just to understand ...).
Furthermore, if it is correct to assume this, is it correct to assume that the remaining SINAD at -12db of the A18 (which from the Amirm graph seems to be about 108db) is equally higher than that of the EVAL1?
Thanks in advance for your answers.

 

[Morla]

Not directly answering your questions but I have the A18 directly attached to my audiophonics purifi amp. It has a board with jumpers that bypass it so that the dac goes directly to the purifi modules

 

[Davide]

Not directly answering your questions but I have the A18 directly attached to my audiophonics purifi amp. They have a board with jumpers that bypass it so that the dac goes directly to the purifi modules

Yes, it is an option that I have considered, but the problem is reversed a bit, as the 1ET400A modules require about 10V to provide 100% power (I think that have more headroom should be better, especially with room correction).
Furthermore there are no measurements of the A18 driving a load like those modules (atypical I suppose), therefore its performance may not be optimal.
I don't know ... I'm just trying to evaluate to avoid spending money for castrated performance.

 

[the_hamster 2]

FWIW, I have my A18 patched into the Audiophonics NC502MP amp via a Schitt SYS vol. controller and all-RCA connectors, and set the A18 at 0db…works fine, though no remote for volume changes a bit inconvenient. I did try a direct connection with DAC > amp using Mogami XLR cable with a ca. (-)25dB offset, but wasn’t sure that I was retaining full signal playback…not an expert by any means, so went the “safest” route.

 

[Davide]

FWIW, I have my A18 patched into the Audiophonics NC502MP amp via a Schitt SYS vol. controller and all-RCA connectors, and set the A18 at 0db…works fine, though no remote for volume changes a bit inconvenient. I did try a direct connection with DAC > amp using Mogami XLR cable with a ca. (-)25dB offset, but wasn’t sure that I was retaining full signal playback…not an expert by any means, so went the “safest” route.

Yes, in doubt I would also opt for a preamp, but it seems to me a useless expense since the digital volume controls of the DACs do the same job (if not better).
I hope someone can clarify the doubt about levels ...

 

[sq225917]

Dlomb, why do you require full power out of the Purifi units? Are you swallowing gain with DSP or running inefficient speakers?

My poweramps are -6db less gain than the Purifi amps and there's no way on earth I could listen to my dac at 0db, my usual level direct to amp would be around -20db.

 

[Davide]

Dlomb, why do you require full power out of the Purifi units? Are you swallowing gain with DSP or running inefficient speakers?

My poweramps are -6db less gain than the Purifi amps and there's no way on earth I could listen to my dac at 0db, my usual level direct to amp would be around -20db.

I use Dirac for room correction, which reduces the gain by a minimum of 12.5db, and I also have around 82db speakers rated at 150w into 6 ohms.

But my question is about the compatibility of the A18's 6v output (Obviously with digital volume attenuation) with the EVAL1's 1.5v input (which I'd like to understand where this value comes from).

Using the A18 directly on the EVAL1 without pre-gain it seems a waste of money to me... but i admit i don't know exactly how much the power is reduced with 3/5 of the maximum input voltage.
In any case, bypassing the gain also loses the HF filtering and I don't know if even some protection.