Review and Measurements of Topping D50 DAC

[chairephon]

Thanks. But atm there is no review and measurement from amir for the Sonica. I don't want to buy a pig in a poke. That the Sonica has the same audio section as the UDP-205 is still not confirmed.

 

[chairephon]

Sorry for hijacking this thread. My last question – I promise: Which one would you take the reviewed and measured SMSL V1 or the not reviewed and measured Sonica?

 

[amirm]

Which one would you take the reviewed and measured SMSL V1 or the not reviewed and measured Sonica?

Having been burnt so many times otherwise, I always go by measured than unmeasured.

 

[gorg]

Having been burnt so many times otherwise, I always go by measured than unmeasured.

I always go by measured WELL without design flaws than unmeasured.

 

[amirm]

I always go by measured WELL without design flaws than unmeasured.

Well, a third choice was not given.

 

[chairephon]

So I would be well advised not to go with the Sonica but take the SMSL V1 (balanced), right?

 

[amirm]

If those are your only choices, then yes.

Otherwise, look at RME ADI-2 DAC. It is a bit cheaper than SMSL and has parametric EQ which would be quite useful.

 

[gvl]

If those are your only choices, then yes.

Otherwise, look at RME ADI-2 DAC. It is a bit cheaper than SMSL and has parametric EQ which would be quite useful.

Likely will keep resale value better too.

 

[dougw03]

Hi Amir,

First off, thank you very much for doing your thorough reviews. I purchased a DAC from a company called Firestone Audio about 5 years ago and have had minor issues over the years with USB cracks/pops (usually resolved with a quick disconnect-connect). Anyhow, I am finally ready to upgrade and was wondering if you could share your thoughts on whether the D50 would offer a noticeable improvement over my current DAC. Here is a link to the current USB DAC http://fires-audio.eu/index.php?item=spitfire-hd&action=article&group_id=4&aid=38&lang=en

I am using the DAC with this 2.1 studio monitor/subwoofer setup:

https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=605999
https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=605800

Appreciate any feedback you have on my current setup

 

[chairephon]

If those are your only choices, then yes.

Otherwise, look at RME ADI-2 DAC. It is a bit cheaper than SMSL and has parametric EQ which would be quite useful.

I want a neutral and transparent dac. I don't want a dac that changes the sound. So for me there is really no need for a parametric EQ. Looking at SINAD I think the SMSL beats the RME. That's true, right?

Likely will keep resale value better too.

That's true but for me that's not a decisive point.

 

[chairephon]

Maybe this will be the showstopper. I've emailed the oppo support asking if they can confirm that the audio/dac section of the Sonica and the UDP-205 are the same. Here comes the answer:

These two products are nearly identical because the analog audio stage and torodial power supply on the Sonica DAC are based on the UDP-205. The benefit of the UDP-205 is that it can support more file formats and physical disc media formats. But raw DAC performance will be identical between the two.

 

[chairephon]

Here some measurements of the Sonica. Maybe Amir can tell us about it whether they are good (on the same level like the UDP-205) or not.

 

[PorchSong]

Here some measurements of the Sonica. Maybe Amir can tell us about it whether they are good (on the same level like the UDP-205) or not.

Isn't this the Topping D50 thread? Please stay on topic or start another for General DACs or Sonica.

 

[chairephon]

Isn't this the Topping D50 thread? Please stay on topic or start another for General DACs or Sonica.

You are right, Sir! My apologies. Even if I believe your statement is more papist than the Pope. I will start another thread.

 

[Thomas savage]

You are right, Sir! My apologies. Even if I believe your statement is more papist than the Pope. I will start another thread.

That’s you told !

Does this mean I can retire ...

 

[PorchSong]

You are right, Sir! My apologies. Even if I believe your statement is more papist than the Pope. I will start another thread.

Ha! I really wasn't meaning to be papist . But, this thread has been hijacked a lot in its 60 pages. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy reading and learning about other DACs, it's just that other people come on this thread looking for D50 info and are getting confused, etc. Reading 60 pages can be onerous especially when it continually goes off topic. So, I was not trying to be offensive--I've just seen this thread spin off for a page or two with nothing to do with the D50 is all. But let me know if you start another thread as I would like to follow and learn.

 

[chairephon]

Ha! I really wasn't meaning to be papist . But, this thread has been hijacked a lot in its 60 pages. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy reading and learning about other DACs, it just hat other people come on this thread looking for D50 info and are getting confused, etc. Reading 60 pages can be onerous especially when it continually goes off topic. So, I was not being offensive--I've just seen this thread spin off for a page or two with nothing to do about the D50 is all.

You are absolutely right. No doubts. Sorry for my hijacking.

 

[rikm]

...an fyi for any other linux users, the current mainline kernel [4.18.xx] has a bunch of additions for USB audio devices, as well as a sort of catch-all for the XMOS chip...the Singxer DDC is now listed for instance, and one of my more obscure devices was caught by the generic case...so that's all good there

Unfortunately the D50 did not make the explicit device list and because Topping shows a unique ID for it's implementation of the chip, the generic XMOS case did not catch it...so while DOP still works without issue, a patch to quirks.c is still required for native DSD

===
generic case entry:
case 0x20b1: /* XMOS based devices */

D50 USB id:
152a:8750 Thesycon Systemsoftware & Consulting GmbH

 

[yue]

...an fyi for any other linux users, the current mainline kernel [4.18.xx] has a bunch of additions for USB audio devices, as well as a sort of catch-all for the XMOS chip...the Singxer DDC is now listed for instance, and one of my more obscure devices was caught by the generic case...so that's all good there

Unfortunately the D50 did not make the explicit device list and because Topping shows a unique ID for it's implementation of the chip, the generic XMOS case did not catch it...so while DOP still works without issue, a patch to quirks.c is still required for native DSD

===
generic case entry:
case 0x20b1: /* XMOS based devices */

D50 USB id:
152a:8750 Thesycon Systemsoftware & Consulting GmbH

I think I fixed that. it will be available in the next release. see

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/c...10a73a8#diff-d612132741334e301818d179e3667f40

 

[snip3r77]

Just wondering, what would be a good headamp combo with this DAC?