New S.M.S.L. M300 SE 120$

[Niconoclaste]

Available now
10$ more as it is "upgraded"

SMSL Upgraded M300SE MQA Audio DAC CS43131*2 with 6.35/4.4mm Headphone

SMSL M300SE MQA Audio DAC CS43131*2 with 6.35/4.4mm Headphone AMP used Cirrus Logic's latest audio decoder chip CS43131, with carefully designed circuitry, achieves an unprecedented 0.00013% (-117dB) distortion performance! The new third generation XMOS XU-316, PCM support up to 32bit /768kHz...

hifi-express.com

 

[TonyJZX]

because of this:

but they're phasing out the original so it just means the new price is this

its underpriced anyway

or wait for 11/11



btw. has anyone worked out how to see the firmware revisioon?

 

[Leonm771]

btw. has anyone worked out how to see the firmware revisioon?

WTF, so they just gave up the old model?

 

[TonyJZX]

WTF, so they just gave up the old model?

I get the outrage. I have one of the old models.

BUT... this is a $120 device. I knew going in that this unit did not have EQ. In fact my other SMSL dac and SMSL amp does have the EQ. I leave it flat.

One of the owners here asked SMSL to do a firmware upgrade. They ghosted him.

And so SMSL added EQ on the updated model and want an extra $10.

Even by the high standards shown by Topping this kind of behaviour is... strange... I can only laugh.

But by the same token, I dont really care... I dont use EQ so I dont miss what I knew it never had.

So would I pay $10 for the EQ? LOL no.

Am I getting $120 worth out of the old model? Yes.

 

[Leonm771]

我感到憤怒。我有一款舊型號。

但是……這是一款 120 美元的設備。我一進去就知道這個單元沒有EQ。事實上，我的其他 SMSL dac 和 SMSL 放大器確實有 EQ。我把它放平。

這裡的一位業主要求 SMSL 進行固件升級。他們給他留下了陰影。

因此，SMSL 在更新後的型號上添加了 EQ，並希望額外支付 10 美元。

即使以托平所表現出的高標準來看，這種行為也……很奇怪……我只能笑。

但出於同樣的原因，我真的不在乎......我不使用情商，所以我不會錯過我知道它從未擁有過的東西。

那麼我會花 10 美元購買 EQ 嗎？哈哈，不。

我可以從舊型號中獲得價值 120 美元的收益嗎？是的。

At least they got xlr output

 

[rostek6]

Have you seen updated m300se marketing picture with PCM filters? Do you see what I see? 40-60 db changes in level under 20 khz and after that - flat frequency response? WTF?

Looks like all the filters (without F1) are seriously wrong. The also do NOT look like filters from CS43131 datasheet (pages 143 - 152).
If I am correct - updated m300se is completly broken (unless used with F1 filter).

If I am wrong, please somebody, clarify...

 

[Roland68]

SMSL is one of those manufacturers who aren't getting any smarter either.

1. Instead of rewarding the first-time buyers of this device and providing them with the update, alienate them. This will certainly encourage the fact that SMSL will have more first-time buyers of future devices. Definitely an unimportant topic for SMSL.

2. For many current buyers who want to buy "on site", the question will arise again, do I get the current device or the "old" version?
Exactly the problem there was for a long time (over half a year) with the SU-9.
Definitely also promotes the sale of these devices and of course does not create any uncertainty among buyers.

 

[Emulator II]

because of this:

but they're phasing out the original so it just means the new price is this

its underpriced anyway

or wait for 11/11



btw. has anyone worked out how to see the firmware revisioon?

Since nobody hears the differences between the filters anyway, I've been wondering for a while why this is even offered as a feature. Instead of bothering with such gimmicks, the manufacturers should rather take care of improving the operation or the user interface, for example.

 

[TonyJZX]

I am wondering why they even released the "old" model in the first place? we assume that these two models are physically the same, its just firmware

for a such a product couldnt they just delay it a few months while they got the firmware down

one way to look at it is that early adopters ended up with a 'rare' pre-release model

 

[Roland68]

I am wondering why they even released the "old" model in the first place? we assume that these two models are physically the same, its just firmware

for a such a product couldnt they just delay it a few months while they got the firmware down

one way to look at it is that early adopters ended up with a 'rare' pre-release model

In any case, it is much cheaper for SMSL than testing it, which is time-consuming and tedious, and developing it to the end.
It's not the first time SMSL has done this.
It saves you such a big chunk of development cost and testing. If you're lucky it works, if not the further costs are still small.
Customers have always been the cheapest beta testers because they also pay the manufacturer for the tests.

 

[KaeliKoo]

I've been using this device for a few weeks now. I haven't noticed the mentioned microclicks so far. What I did notice, however, is the lack of clicks and pops when changing the sample rate and turning the device on and off. Unfortunately, this was always different with the DACs from iFi, Topping and Schiit that I had used before, something that really bothered me. The M300 SE behaves completely inconspicuously, very pleasantly. I use the device in preamp mode by remote control, the wiring is via XLR. The DAC is fed via USB or Toslink and powered by an additional SMPS from Allo. I haven't tried the headphone outputs yet.
For the asking price, I think it's a real bargain given the build quality and decent features. I'm looking forward to the measurement results too.

Edit: One thing that actually bothers me a bit is the volume control, more precisely how it's displayed. Surprisingly, you can get along quite well with the only 40 levels, since a logarithmic curve was probably stored here and the control in the lower volume range is relatively sensitive. It's a pity that, as is so often the case, the value is only displayed when the volume is changed. In addition, the font size is so small that you cannot see anything from a distance of 3m. Here I would like an option that allows the volume to be displayed permanently while using the entire display, similar to the Gustard H16, for example:

View attachment 301482

Yes, agree on the display shortcomings. Really like the sound of the DAC, but show the volume instead of the input selected as default. Vol is displayed for 1 second when changed which is ridiculous. The remote is good, but some of the fonts are for microscope-only reading. Better display features would be great, but for $105 I'm not complaining, or not very much....the collector's edition. My SMSL Sanskrit 10 the volume display is the default and wish M300 display was more like that.

 

[ronkdar]

Have you seen updated m300se marketing picture with PCM filters? Do you see what I see? 40-60 db changes in level under 20 khz and after that - flat frequency response? WTF?

Looks like all the filters (without F1) are seriously wrong. The also do NOT look like filters from CS43131 datasheet (pages 143 - 152).
If I am correct - updated m300se is completly broken (unless used with F1 filter).

If I am wrong, please somebody, clarify...

Those filters, except FL1, look horrific to me as well. I have the original model, so I cannot change the filter. I sincerely hope it is using something like FL1. Of course, FL1 and FL5 are the same color on that image. Hopefully FL5 is the one that bounces under 20k, not FL1.

I hear no "microclicking." Funny that the only person complaining about it does not own one.

I use it in preamp mode. M300SE -> XLR -> Active sub -> XLR -> Active monitors. For whatever reason I always seem to run into ground hum in my home, so finding a "single volume knob" solution with XLR at this price was pretty amazing.

The volume knob sucks. Too few clicks per rotation, so making large volume changes is tedious. I tend to use the remote instead.

 

[rostek6]

Since nobody hears the differences between the filters anyway, I've been wondering for a while why this is even offered as a feature. Instead of bothering with such gimmicks, the manufacturers should rather take care of improving the operation or the user interface, for example.

Hardly noone hears difference - if filters have very mild frequency response changes. I mean 0,5 db small rollover from 0 to 20 khz.

But here ( on smsl picture) you have sharp and very big (even to 60db !!!) frequency response changes in audible territory. Such difference should be easy to hear - unless somebody does not hear anything at all.

 

[Leonm771]

I hear no "microclicking." Funny that the only person complaining about it does not own one.

No , I have M300SE and I can hear the microclicking during test.

 

[Emulator II]

Hardly noone hears difference - if filters have very mild frequency response changes. I mean 0,5 db small rollover from 0 to 20 khz.

But here ( on smsl picture) you have sharp and very big (even to 60db !!!) frequency response changes in audible territory. Such difference should be easy to hear - unless somebody does not hear anything at all.

Yep. I was referring to the usual filter curves shown in the measurements on this site with changes in the frequency range mainly beyond 20kHz. The curves shown in the promo material for the M300 SE look...strange, to say the least. Such deviations in the frequency response in the audible range are of course - audible.

 

[rostek6]

No , I have M300SE and

No , I have M300SE and I can hear the microclicking during test.

Do you have an updated or "old" version?

 

[Leonm771]

Do you have an updated or "old" version?

idk about the version
bought in june

 

[Emulator II]

I can identify the microclicks at -23.4dBFS .
M300SE stopped for a sec.

No , I have M300SE and I can hear the microclicking during test.

As I wrote before, I can't detect any microclicks on my device. So I'm just a little surprised. To clarify, you were listening to the original file from that russian site on your M300 SE and at -23.4dBFS volume (how did you set that on your DAC?) you could hear the microclicks? And then your DAC stopped for a second and then continued playing? Thanks for a brief explanation.

 

[audiofun]

Hardly noone hears difference - if filters have very mild frequency response changes. I mean 0,5 db small rollover from 0 to 20 khz.

But here ( on smsl picture) you have sharp and very big (even to 60db !!!) frequency response changes in audible territory. Such difference should be easy to hear - unless somebody does not hear anything at all.

I asked the manufacturer to remeasure and repost the graph. it should be fixed now.

 

[mrmeng430]

Sorry I'm not technical, but would a firmware upgrade give my previous version of this device the filter ability?