SMSL D1 - ROHM DAC for everyone

[Roland68]

Hi everyone, just joining this forum and this topic. I have a quick question regarding the D1, couldn't find this having been mentioned by searching the topic. Do we know which DSD filter setting SMSL used for the D1? As in, which of the settings shown in the following table taken from the ROHM chip data sheet:

View attachment 544916

I'm guessing "default" settings.

 

[WILDBILL01]

But the PO100 Pro and PO100 are pure DDCs without DAC functionality. What kind of DACs have you connected so far?

With the D1, you no longer need the PO100 Pro and PO100, as the D1 uses the same technology and circuitry.

I put the po100 pro in front of the D1 and it Cleaned Up.smearing that my laptop deck would provide and definitely opened up the sound stage. If you ask me, they're both incredible values, combined together to make a perfectly cheap RECLOCKed DAC on the CHEEP.

 

[kazuviking]

it Cleaned Up.smearing that my laptop deck would provide and definitely opened up the sound stage.

Dellulu cough Head-Fi is two blocks down.

 

[MWC]

At this point, our efforts should concentrate on looking for and selecting better produced music rather than trying to find the holy grail in gear (we already have it).

A couple of friends of mine 'de-master' modern music, often getting e.g. an SQ upgrade of DR13 from an original officially released DR6.
Many people find it hard to believe, but one can hear the difference.

 

[MWC]

This is an addendum to the operation status of the D1 I received.

I have simply replaced the SU-1 environment with the D1. It is connected to a PC via USB.

I try to turn the power button on and off, but there is no response. The power is always on.

There is no response when I press the input signal switch button.
The input indicator LED alternates between DSD/USB, DSD/OPT, and DSD/COAX, and there is no response when I press the input switch button. After it lights up several times, it switches to another input on its own.

The OPT input connector is loose and cannot be connected properly. It easily comes out.

When testing with the USB input, it suddenly switches to another input and playback stops.

I played PCM44.1kHz to PCM768kHz and DSD64 to DSD512 files randomly and continuously, and they played without any problems. I liked the sound quality, which I liked.
However, with DSD, there is a very slight pop noise when switching songs, but it is so small that it is not bothersome.
The above is the operating status of the D1 I purchased from the SMSL shop on Amazon Japan. I have concluded that the D1 I received is probably broken or has a problem with the firmware. If you are planning to purchase one, I recommend waiting for a while. Please make your decision based on reports from other people.

Strangely enough, a D1 sent by the company to a YouTuber friend in Italy a while ago is operating completely normally.

Try also using the USB power port.

 

[MWC]

So the D1 came and its working as it should. The uC connector is so lose that the stock cable just dangles inside but SPDIF is so god damn tight that i barely could unplug the cable. The power button does absolutely nothing. After installing the SMSL driver it only works if i use an OTG cable for some reason. When i connect external power nothing happens at all. ASIO doesn't work at all. As for the sound, the bass distortion is finally gone but now the treble is way more annoying. I had to lower to volume on the amp by 6dB to get the same loudness as the old dac.
MQA labelled as DSD LUL. The SU-1 got MELF resistors but this one doesn't considering both goes for the same price. The FW comes with Always ON as default and FW version is v55.15.
Here are some pcb pics, not the best quality.
EDIT: I dont know what happened. Had a brownout and now the secondary usb for power and the power button works all of a sudden. After trying out a few driver versions ASIO started working.
View attachment 457171View attachment 457172View attachment 457173View attachment 457174View attachment 457175View attachment 457176View attachment 457177
View attachment 457178

There is a newer Driver - https://www.smsl-audio.com/upload/portal/undefined/SMSLUSBAudioDriver.zip

 

[MWC]

I bought my D1 from Taobao directly. So far, no issue on Front panel or sound yet. QC looks good so far.

Also, you guys can see my unit revision. I have no idea is this the latest or............????

it is NOT the latest https://www.smsl-audio.com/upload/portal/undefined/SMSLUSBAudioDriver.zip

 

[MWC]

Oh hell no this guy did not just claim he has special hearing abilities because of his age. Listen, junior, I might not be able to hear over 11kHz, but try putting a 10kHz low pass filter on your music and unless it's an album of Mariah Carey breaking wine glasses with a dog whistle backup orchestra you won't notice a difference. Now go get your shinebox.

Do you really have to be so rude when attempting to get your opinions & beliefs across?

 

[MWC]

Do the touch buttons located on the left and right sides of the D1 front panel you received work properly?

They work on the one I have here.

 

[MWC]

A DAC has one, and only one job, and that is to accurately convert the digital representation of music from the source into an analog representation of that music. Well measuring DACS do that with inaudible levels of noise and distortion, and with flat frequency response in the audible band.

(Note, this is inaudible for all humans - not just those "over 45").

In other words the analogue output is (audibly) a perfect representation of the digitally encoded music. Any defects are below the level any human ear can detect.

If two DACS both achieve this (and well measuring DACS do, including those we are discussing here) then the analog signal from both must be identical within audible limits. By definition, they must sound the same.

Yet on the other hand we know that our hearing is subject to perceptive bias (call it cognitive bias, or expectation bias if you like). What we hear is impacted by what we know, what we believe, how we feel, our life experiences, what we see etc etc. No-one is immune to this if they are human - it is how we are built. In fact we would be unable to function if our senses were not filtered by our unconscious brain. Everyone is subject to this, it happens at the unconscious level, and it is not possible to avoid it - even when we are aware it is happening.

So when we see someone state that they hear differences between DACs where the engineering, science and measurements all tell us that is impossible or vanishingly unlikely - do we just take the statement at face value - or do we attribute it to the fact that the listener is being fooled by his (humanities) very fallible auditory system?



Plus what @JSmith said - please comply with the terms you agreed to when you signed up. There is a convenient example by yours truly in the OP at.

Notification about “External YouTube Video Link Dropping”

Forum Wide Notification: NOTE: The updated version of this policy is posted in the site Terms and Rules See the above before posting any comments or reporting. ====== below is maintained for reference ====== We are strongly discouraging random YouTube and similar “Video links” being posted...

www.audiosciencereview.com

This seems to be a very valid point of view, but may I suggest it cuts both ways? One may be fooled by one's human perception bias & belief systems etc., to only believe that audible differences in SQ of DACs is impossible. Not that I suggest the science is mistaken, just that arguments about perception bias etc, are applicable in every case / point of view, & that one's belief in science is still a belief. Is it possible that there may be more to human life experience & perception than science can yet accurately measure?

 

[RandomEar]

This seems to be a very valid point of view, but may I suggest it cuts both ways? One may be fooled by one's human perception bias & belief systems etc., to only believe that audible differences in SQ of DACs is impossible.

But that's not the same thing at all? You can believe or be convinced of DACs sounding different or not. The facts and established science does not care about your or my opinion or bias. Cognitive bias is real, has been objectively proven to exist and to influence human perception. That necessitates the requirement of strict controls if you want to get valid results from any test method involving human senses. And pretty much none of the listeners reporting subjective "testing" results do implement the necessary controls, making their results useless for any fact-based discussion.

Not that I suggest the science is mistaken, just that arguments about perception bias etc, are applicable in every case / point of view, & that one's belief in science is still a belief. Is it possible that there may be more to human life experience & perception than science can yet accurately measure?

Again: Not relevant, because the way the critized people are testing is proven to be invalid. So it does not matter what our bias is concerning this topic or if measurements capture everything or not. If people claiming to hear differences want to be taken seriously, it is on them to start testing correctly and/or to present any other valid evidence for their point of view. They know that the way they test is inadequate. If they continue to test that way, that's not really our mistake, is it?

Also, this discussion is getting off-topic again and technically belongs in this thread.

 

[antcollinet]

One may be fooled by one's human perception bias & belief systems etc., to only believe that audible differences in SQ of DACs is impossible.

One may be - though I am far from convinced that perceptive bias can work in such a way as to cancel out real audible differences that an individual’s personal hearing is otherwise capable of detecting, such that they don't hear it - I've certainly seen no evidence that it can.

But as pointed out by @RandomEar. This is irrelevant in any case.

We are talking about situations where the known science of human hearing tells us that the difference between two devices is too small to be heard by human hearing. In this case, it doesn't matter what I (or anyone else) "believes" about audibility. It doesn't matter if someone has a bias to not hear something that cannot be heard by anyone - even if such a thing were possible.

For situations where someone is convinced - counter to the scientific evidence - that there is an audible difference. It is up to them to prove it with a properly controlled blind test.

 

[MWC]

But that's not the same thing at all? You can believe or be convinced of DACs sounding different or not. The facts and established science does not care about your or my opinion or bias. Cognitive bias is real, has been objectively proven to exist and to influence human perception. That necessitates the requirement of strict controls if you want to get valid results from any test method involving human senses. And pretty much none of the listeners reporting subjective "testing" results do implement the necessary controls, making their results useless for any fact-based discussion.


Again: Not relevant, because the way the critized people are testing is proven to be invalid. So it does not matter what our bias is concerning this topic or if measurements capture everything or not. If people claiming to hear differences want to be taken seriously, it is on them to start testing correctly and/or to present any other valid evidence for their point of view. They know that the way they test is inadequate. If they continue to test that way, that's not really our mistake, is it?

Also, this discussion is getting off-topic again and technically belongs in this thread.

Dismissing a point of view as "...not relevant,..." is as scientific as declaring a DAC to sound smooth with detailed flutterbies in the optics. Please use your own arguments against yourself in a genuine 'scientific' manner.

 

[RandomEar]

Dismissing a point of view as "...not relevant,..." is as scientific as declaring a DAC to sound smooth with detailed flutterbies in the optics. Please use your own arguments against yourself in a genuine 'scientific' manner.

So logic is irrelevant now? OK, I guess

 

[MWC]

So logic is irrelevant now? OK, I guess

No one has yet mentioned logic. But surely logic would say that methods of support, reasoning, calculations, measurements etc., for a 'scientific' point of view need to equally apply to the opposing 'subjective' point of view? Is it logical to take a stance against subjectivism by using subjective reasoning?

 

[RandomEar]

No one has yet mentioned logic. But surely logic would say that methods of support, reasons, calculations, measurements etc., supporting a 'scientific' point of view need to equally apply to the opposing 'subjective' point of view?

I think you didn't quite follow my arguments, so I'll try to rephrase:

There is one group testing audio devices objectively and relying on measurements. They have opinions and biases, but they have also established certain facts. The facts are true regardless of any group affiliation, opinion or bias.

There is another group which tests audio devices subjectively. They rely on their senses alone. They equally have opinions and biases. They specifically believe that they can hear things which can't be measured, but have no objective proof for this belief. It is also an established fact that the subjective group does tests in a biased way and that the bias taints all their results. This has been explained to them, but they either deny or ignore the problem. This results in them not having any "untainted" evidence to support their position, although it would be easy for them to correct that flaw. They specifically choose not to do that due to their beliefs, not due to facts or objective evidence.

You're now saying that maybe science doesn't know everything and that we all have biases and so on. That may even be true, but it is irrelevant to this discussion or at least to my argument: The facts are true for everybody. We know for a fact that one group tests wrong and therefore receives results which have the same validity as a coin flip. Their results might even occasionally align with reality, but their flawed methodology means that they can never be sure of that. There is no bias in this judgment, it is simply a fact.

The argument that we should listen to both groups and be open for their opinions in establishing "the truth" is a logical fallacy because we already know that the opinions of one group are formed based on incorrect results and beliefs without any proof and that they do not even recognize that flaw. You cannot equate the opinions of these two groups.

 

[MWC]

You say "You cannot equate the opinions of these two groups."
This is IMHO 'true' & might even be scientifically & objectively proved so.
I tire of this debate, it is ultimately pointless.
There are the 2 camps you've identified & '...."never the twain shall meet."
My belief is that it is very difficult, maybe impossible to tell a difference in DACs.
Another person's belief may be otherwise, they may experience hearing a difference, whether there is one objectively or not.
Their life experience & perception is as 'true' to them as yours is to you & mine is to me.
Let's respect each & every one, encouraging all to be nice to one another.

 

[MWC]

I think you didn't quite follow my arguments, so I'll try to rephrase:

Nor you mine, but never mind, life is too short.

 

[ICIETDIYEUR]

Hi

'skitron' on diyAudio said:

"...The problem lies where people turn a good and useful tool for discovery into a 'religion of dogma'.
Of course the tool (science) when properly used is refined as discoveries are made, reinforcing the tool via a positive feedback loop of information.

Meanwhile the dogma of science hijacked into 'religion' becomes more and more rigid as the dogma is revealed as errant and the adherents endlessly double down.
This phenomenon is usually observed in people who are not scientists, don't really understand the nature of science, but do like to parrot a lot..."

and also

"...The best reproduction system in the world completely sucks compared to the original performance it is attempting to reproduce, and your argument is "it takes specialized instruments to tell us which piece of equipment sucks worse, because we sure as heck can't hear the difference".

As Spock would say: "fascinating". LOL !..."

Have a nice day

 

[JDub]

I'd be confident in a blind test I could pick between the SMSL and my current CD player running though same amp and speakers. I couldn't say which was which without hearing close A/B comparisons. Understanding more about sound reproduction from some fine postings on this site, the ability to detect will be due to influences outside of the DACs... such as small differences in sound pressure level or distortion. I'm not overly concerned as to why.
I appreciate its tiring for the more learned here to read through postings from noobs hearing differences. I replied here more to reaffirm I'm very happy with my purchase.
Loving the chats on this site BTW.