• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

SMSL D200 DAC Review

Rate this DAC

  • Terrible (*)

    Votes: 1 4.0%
  • Mediocre (**)

    Votes: 1 4.0%
  • Good (***)

    Votes: 5 20.0%
  • Excellent (****)

    Votes: 18 72.0%

  • Total voters
    25

NTTY

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Reviewer
Joined
Apr 27, 2018
Messages
1,048
Likes
5,424
Location
Switzerland
Hello Everyone,

This is a review and details measurements of the SMSL D200 DAC.
It was kindly sent to me by Aoshidaudio.com

SMSL D200_001.jpg


SMSL D200 DAC - Presentation

This is a nice looking device with only one knob on the front. It reads PCM (up to 768kHz) and DSD (up to 11MHz or 22MHz depending on DoP or DSD direct).
It features a ROHM BD34352EKV DAC that offers two interesting options, implemented in this SMSL D200:
  • A classic Oversampling Filter selection : Sharp, Slow or None
  • A much less classic oversampling rate selection for the Delta-Sigma modulator : 16x or 32x
As for the rest of the technical description and features, I invite you to read to go to the SMSL site.

The specs are the below:

1757686325493.png


On the back we get:
  • XLR and RCA out
  • USB in
  • SPDIF (Coax and optical) in
  • Clock input too, for external synchronisation
  • Bluetooth for LDAC (24bit/96kHz), APTX/HD,SBC,AAC

SMSL D200_002.jpg


Note that the analog outputs offer two settings:
  • Preamp volume control, with output up to 5.2Vrms (XLR) or 2.5Vrms (RCA) at 0dBFS.
  • Fixed output (no volume control), with output of 4Vrmr (XLR) or 2Vrm (RCA) at 0dBFS.
Ok, time has come for measurements


SMSL D200 - Measurements (USB in - XLR Out)

As opposed to CD Players that I like to review, I'm not used to measure these high resolutions DACs. So I'll follow the lead of @amirm, as he did recently for the Fosi Q6, and will try to concur to his way of measuring, so you get pretty much the same information.

All measurements performed with an E1DA Cosmos ADCiso (grade O) set to mono mode (SNR >129dBA), and the Cosmos Scaler (100kohms from unbalanced input).

I did not succeed to completely get rid of some power supply related leakage, but it stayed very low (<-135dBr).
I upgraded to latest firmware but I did not see any differences in performances before and after.

The D200 outputs a high 5Vrms from the balanced output at 2 times less from RCA. The channel imbalance is a very low 0.01dB, which is very good.

This is the XLR output (Variable output -2dB) with 1kHz @0dBFS (so that is 4Vrms output):

1759333307765.png


Similar to the AP of @amirm, this is from 24bits/44.1kHz sampling rate, with 32k FFT and 4 averages (I can't do 3).

The two channels are shown but only one is evaluated in the dashboard, the other one has a THD+N of -115.7dB, so that's the same. It's a little better than the specs (-114dB) and the same as what SMSL exhibits on their website with couple of views from an Audio Precision.

By the way, this is a view of the same but with RCA outputs, since SMSL shows them too:

1757687701590.png


I measured precisely the same performances as them, which is good news. Also, due to the negligible variation between RCA and XLR, I'll continue this review from XLR outputs only.
These performances, on SINAD perspective, would put this DAC in the middle of the "Excellent" raking of @amirm.

[BEGIN EDIT]
@Rja4000 suggested I increased the gain at the input of the Cosmos Scaler in fear I'd bit hitting the noise floor of the Cosmos ADC, when measuring the DR. And indeed I got 2dB better DR when doing so.

So, on the Dynamic Range side, I got the below:

1759509228131.png


This is from 997Hz test tone with a CCIR weighting curve, as the AES now mandates. So, we get a DR of 119dB. This is very good. For the sake of comparison with measurements performed with the old A-weighted curve, I get 123.6dB, which nearly exactly what SMSL reports with 123.4dB.

[END EDIT]

Anyways for me who's used to measure CD players, that's crazy good, since this is 20dB better than CDA :)

Next is the bandwidth (48kHz sampling rate):

SMSL D200 - BW.jpg


These two measurements concur with the published specs of the Rohm BD34352EKV DAC. No surprise here.

From what I can measure, the IMD performance is good:

SMSL D200 - IMD_SMPTE_OS1.jpg


And the jitter test is nailed:

1759336124704.png


I forgot the Multitone test (48kHz sampling rate):

SMSL PS200 - MT.jpg


Despite that spike at 150Hz (an interaction from mains (50Hz)), we have 20bits or more of distortion free range.

EDIT: The below is from the WAV file that @amirm shared some time ago, and is the multitone test from the Audio Precision (192kHz sampling rate). So that helps to compare with the other reviews here. Same results, basically:

1759335559349.png


For compatibility with Stereophile measurements, here is the 50 Hz spectra under 640 ohm load (not 600, sorry, I can't), Linear Frequency Scale:

1759338658963.png


This is good but we have a little more low level random noise with low frequencies tones, as we've seen especially with the Multitone test. This is nevertheless very good.

Oh yes, and the THD+N ratio vs level:

SMSL D200 - 1THD+NvsFreq_90kHz_SC3_R_02.jpg


This is an excellent result, really. We see a some distortion at low and high frequencies but the THD+N ranges from -111dBr to -102dBr meaning a very low level of ultrasonic noise (since distorsion and noise are accounted for up to 90kHz in that test).

And here comes the interesting par of being able to change the oversampling factor of the delta-sigma modulator. Maybe you wonder what is "Sound Color #3" I put on the graph. Well, that was how SMLS named the different settings of the ΔΣ Modulator (from Sound Color #1 to #4) in their original firmware. After I updated the firmware, the different setup are aligned with the doc of the Rohm DAC, and the SOUND COLOR shows the below:
  • LOW OSR + HPC ON
  • LOW OSR + HPC OFF
  • HIGH OSR + HPC ON
  • LOW OSR + HPC OFF
Let me decipher all of that:
  • OSR stands for OversSampling Rate, and my guess is LOW is for 16x and HIGH is for 32x oversampling rate of the ΔΣ Modulator.
  • HPC stands for High Precision Calculation, and this is related to the mathematical precision of the computation, draining more current when in HIGH mode.
You can find all of that explained in the datasheet of the Rohm BD34352EKV DAC, and they refer to it as "Sound Settings".

Let me further describe what that is. Look at the block diagram of the DAC:

BD34352EKV.jpg


You can see the oversampling filter, that can be set to sharp or slow, and that is the one adding more samples in between original samples, and performing the anti-imaging function, by filtering everything above Fs/2.
Next, there is the Delta-Sigma modulator that reduces the bit-depth to the one required for the final conversion. This is done again with an oversampling of a set order (generally 4, or more). To reduce the PCM stream from 24 bits, to 4 or 5 bits (I don't know here) required by the Delta-Sigma converter, there's a need to keep safe the original SNR. Since we loose roughly 6dB every bit we drop, it is necessary to compensate that loss by a combination of oversampling and noise shaping. These two mechanisms together allow the engineers to reject the quantization noise (when reducing the bit depth) far away in frequency.

And voilà, the idea of Rohm, offered to us to play with in the SMSL D200, is to reject even further the quantization noise of the noise shaper. Of course, this require more computing power, and has some drawbacks too, as I've seen and will show you.

The below shows a 1kHz sine @0dBFS played either with LOW or HIGH oversampling of the ΔΣ Modulator:

SMSL D200 - 1kHz @0dBFS - OSRs.jpg


This linear frequency scale view goes up to 80kHz. You can see the advantage of the low ultrasonic noise with a higher oversampling rate. The green trace is with the ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate set at LOW. You can appreciate the building of the noise that is rejected here in this mode, by the noise shaper.

This is the reason why the THD+N vs freq measurement was so good despite me including all noise up to 90kHz, like @amirm usually do. But with the ΔΣ Modulator oversampling set to low, I assure you the performance would have been much lower, because of all the noise rejected from 35kHz by the noise shaper.

Ok, you thought this is a little too complex? So let me add a bit more :p Have a look at the very interesting and busy graph below, based on white noise long time averaging:

SMSL D200 - OSFilters.jpg


This is an even wider view, up to 300kHz. I played with the FIR Oversampling Filter (Sharp and Low) and the ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate too.

With that view, you can appreciate that:
  • The slow filter (LOW) is fully active at only 44kHz and exhibits ringing, ie it filters less of the aliases of the conversion
  • The sharp filter (SHARP) is fully active ad 24kHz and filters way better the aliases.
  • The effect of decreasing the oversampling rate of the ΔΣ Modulator generates noise being built as soon as 35kHz and going up to -60dB at 165kHz.
The dark blue trace is the SHARP FIR and the HIGH ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate, and I like it :)

Note that there is a "NO FILTER" option, but there's a problem with this mode, at least with my early device. I saw a significant decrease of level and high distortion. There's probably something wrong, but at least I saw it indeed does not filter at all, plenty of unwanted aliases are created out of the audio band, meaning it mimics a Non Oversampling DAC (which is bad, don't use that), but since there's still a ΔΣ Modulator that must oversample, I see the effect of that oversampling but I can't understand it. So as long as I'm not 100% sure of what I measure, I'll refrain to publish, but anyways don't go NOS mode with a DAC, please pretty please.


SMSL D200 - Measurements (SPDIF in - XLR Out)

I briefly checked the quality of the SPDIF optical input (16bits only), to find excellent performances. But I saw additional low level random noise at the foot of the fundamental, when feeding it with 16bits stream from a CD Player. It shows better itself when performing a jitter test (16bits/44.1kHz):

1757694679632.png


This would have been a perfect trace without the little random noise at the foot of the main tone. It is negligible below -120dBr, though.

EDIT: I just did the same test from a Pioneer PD-D9 and the result id better:

1762014989831.png


The noise is almost at the foot of the fundamental. I don't why it was higher with the SMSL PL150, but I'll check that when time allows (I suspect a problem with the Coax cable I used with the SMSL).

And that being said, this is a very high precision DAC anyways.

Best proof is one of my favorite measurement that Stereophile was often using as a proof of low noise DAC. It is from an undithered 997Hz sine at -90.31dBFS. With 16bits, the signal should appear (on a scope) as the 3DC levels of the smallest symmetrical sign magnitude digital signal


1757694476200.png


Without surprise, this is one of the best trace I've seen, nearly 0 noise comes in the way, it is very close to the digital data.
Theoretically we should get a square at this lowest level of the PCM 16bits format, and we don't because of the limited bandwidth (Gibbs phenomenon). The ringing tells us that the reconstruction filter is symmetrical.

By the way, since I'm here, at fixed output level, that is 4Vrms XLR (-2dB compared to max possible), let's see how this DAC resists my usual intersamples over test:

Intersample-overs tests
Bandwidth of the THD+N measurements is 20Hz - 96kHz
5512.5 Hz sine,
Peak = +0.69dBFS
7350 Hz sine,
Peak = +1.25dBFS
11025 Hz sine,
Peak = +3.0dBFS
D200 from PL150 (CD player)-68.5dB-56.9dB-39.1dB
SMSL PL150-52.1dB-30.8dB-19.2dB

Well, we get some headroom but not much. Surprisingly, if I go to "preamp mode" and lower the volume by a lot more (eg -6db) I don't get more headroom.


I will test with 24bits data stream in the future to verify if I see the same issue with low level random noise at high levels.


Conclusions

Sorry, I know it's a lot of information to digest, it was for me too and it's not finished!

But from what I gathered so far, I think this DAC is a high performing one, and the possibility to play with a selection of FIR filters and ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate is cool, even if I can't hear a difference.

And for those of you worried about a noise shaper generating too much noise, too close from the audio band... well, you have a winner here! @Scytales if you read me ;)

The little random noise I've seen from a CD Player, as a source, is of no concern.

I hope you enjoyed the review and have a nice weekend!
 
Last edited:
Hello, thanks for the very informative post, but I wanted to know more about the FFT filter. What is its length in this DAC, and possibly about the mathematical support of this DAC. Butterworth, Chebyshev, or someone else. I have experience with the Cool Edit pro program, and as far as I understand, the length of the FFT is crucial for the correct restoration of the envelope and sound quality. Correct me if necessary. Thank you very much.
 
Nice review !
Thanks

I only gave it a "good" rating (even though, objectively, it is flawless):
It is 50% more expensive than the Topping D50 III, which far surpasses it in every way.

Please note that the IMD plot with REW cannot be compared to Amir's AP IMD, as AudioPrecision uses a wide(r) band filter, which gives more weight to noise.
In addition, the dynamic range in Amir's measurements is weighted by CCIR-2k.
Amir's figures would therefore be lower for both by a few points.


Would you add 32 tones measurements, by any chance ?

(The tone Amir is using is generated by the AudioPrecision software, but you may get the demo version and generate it yourself. Make sure to match his definition and to use a multiple of 48kHz - the 44.1kHz version will be different and therefore comparison less meaningfull)
 
Last edited:
Nice review !
Thanks

I only gave it a "good" rating (even though, objectively, it is flawless):
It is 50% more expensive than the Topping D50 III, which far surpasses it in every way.
Thanks for the feedback!
Please note that the IMD plot with REW cannot be compared to Amir's AP IMD, as AudioPrecision uses a wide(r) band filter, which gives more weight to noise.
Hmmm, I can adjust to the same if I know the LPF cutover.
In addition, the dynamic range in Amir's measurements is weighted by CCIR-2k.
Amir's figures would therefore be lower for both by a few points.
Interesting, thanks, I guessed so. And I think I can create a cal file with that curve for that measurement. I’ll give it a try (later).
Would you add 32 tones measurements, by any chance ?
Yes I did it and forgot to post. I’ll do so when I’m back home.
(The tone Amir is using is generated by the AudioPrecision software, but you may get the demo version and generate it yourself.
Make sure to match his definition and to use a multiple of 48kHz - the 44.1kHz version will be different and therefore comparison less meaningfull)
I used the one of REW (1/10 decade), but I need to check if I did it at 48kHz or 44.1kHz. I did a Multitone TD+N vs level too, to check if I’d see a similar hump to the Cirrus Logic and no, but I did not publish it.
 
I used the one of REW
Amir published some time ago a link to the file he uses.
Note that it may be used with any multiple of 48kHz sampling frequency.

This file is much better than the others flying around, IMO:
First it has a first tone at 14Hz - which may show some artifacts at very low audible frequencies

Then each tone is exactly in the middle of an FFT bin, making it much easier to extract side information like noise separately from distortion components.
You may even use rectangle ("no window") FFT window, which gives more accurate level measurement ... if the frequencies are not shifting too much.

Also, it's highly optimized (by tuning phase of each tone) to improve crest factor: the overall level is therefore higher, making it a harder challenge for the hardware under test.

Finally, if everybody is using the same test signal, comparison is more relevant.

 
Last edited:
Hello Everyone,

This is a review and details measurements of the SMSL D200 DAC.
It was kindly sent to me by Aoshidaudio.com

View attachment 475835

SMSL D200 DAC - Presentation

This is a nice looking device with only one knob on the front. It reads PCM (up to 768kHz) and DSD (up to 11MHz or 22MHz depending on DoP or DSD direct).
It features a ROHM BD34352EKV DAC that offers two interesting options, implemented in this SMSL D200:
  • A classic Oversampling Filter selection : Sharp, Slow or None
  • A much less classic oversampling rate selection for the Delta-Sigma modulator : 16x or 32x
As for the rest of the technical description and features, I invite you to read to go to the SMSL site.

The specs are the below:

View attachment 475842

On the back we get:
  • XLR and RCA out
  • USB in
  • SPDIF (Coax and optical) in
  • Clock input too, for external synchronisation
  • Bluetooth for LDAC (24bit/96kHz), APTX/HD,SBC,AAC

View attachment 475838

Note that the analog outputs offer two settings:
  • Preamp volume control, with output up to 5.2Vrms (XLR) or 2.5Vrms (RCA) at 0dBFS.
  • Fixed output (no volume control), with output of 4Vrmr (XLR) or 2Vrm (RCA) at 0dBFS.
Ok, time has come for measurements


SMSL D200 - Measurements (USB in - XLR Out)

As opposed to CD Players that I like to review, I'm not used to measure these high resolutions DACs. So I'll follow the lead of @amirm, as he did recently for the Fosi Q6, and will try to concur to his way of measuring, so you get pretty much the same information.

All measurements performed with an E1DA Cosmos ADCiso (grade O) set to mono mode (SNR >129dBA), and the Cosmos Scaler (100kohms from unbalanced input).

I did not succeed to completely get rid of some power supply related leakage, but it stayed very low (-135dBr).
I upgraded to latest firmware but I did not see any differences in perfomances before and after.

The channel imbalance is a very low 0.01dB, which is good.

This is the XLR output (Fixed output) with 1kHz @0dBFS (so that is 4Vrms output):

View attachment 475847

Similar to the AP of @amirm, this is from 24bits/44.1kHz sampling rate, with 32k FFT and 4 averages (I can't do 3).

The two channels are shown but only one is evaluated in the dashboard, the other one has a THD+N of -115.7dB, so that's the same. It's a little better than the specs (-114dB) and the same as what SMSL exhibits on their website with couple of views from an Audio Precision.

By the way, this is a view of the same but with RCA outputs, since SMSL shows them too:

View attachment 475851

I measured precisely the same performances as them, which is good news. Also, due to the negligible variation between RCA and XLR, I'll continue this review from XLR outputs only.
These performances, on SINAD perspective, would put this DAC in the middle of the "Excellent" raking of @amirm.

[BEGIN EDIT]
@Rja4000 suggested I increased the gain at the input of the Cosmos Scaler in fear I'd bit hitting the noise floor of the Cosmos ADC, when measuring the DR. And indeed I got 2dB better DR when doing so.

I don't have a dynamic range calculator, so it's manual on my side, but as per the AES, from a -60dBFS test tone:

View attachment 476165

That gives me 120.5dB of dynamic range (calculated SNR of 60.5dB, at -60dBFS, so 60.5+60=120.5dB), unweighted. SMSL shows 123dB from the AP, so that could be because they used an A-weighted curve, in which case I get 122.8dB. With a CCIR-2k compensating curve that I created, I see 114dB. The later one might need to be challenged, and I plan to do so comparing with results from @amirm from other devices.
[END EDIT]

Anyways that's crazy good for me who's used to measure CD players. This is indeed 20dB than the best theorical achievable with 16bits, ie 10 times lower noise and distortion, performances from another galaxy, as far as I'm concerned :)




Next is the bandwidth (48kHz sampling rate):

View attachment 475858

These two measurements concur with the published specs of the Rohm BD34352EKV DAC. No surprise here.

From what I can measure, the IMD performance is good:

View attachment 475859

And the jitter test is nailed:

View attachment 475860

I forgot the Multitone test (48kHz sampling rate):

View attachment 476015

Despite that spike at 150Hz (probably an interaction from my mains (50Hz)), we have 20bits or more of distortion free range.

Oh yes, and the THD+N ratio vs level:

View attachment 475861

This is an excellent result, really. We see a some distortion at low and high frequencies but the THD+N ranges from -111dBr to -102dBr meaning a very low level of ultrasonic noise (since distorsion and noise are accounted for up to 90kHz in that test).

And here comes the interesting par of being able to change the oversampling factor of the delta-sigma modulator. Maybe you wonder what is "Sound Color #3" I put on the graph. Well, that was how SMLS named the different settings of the ΔΣ Modulator (from Sound Color #1 to #4) in their original firmware. After I updated the firmware, the different setup are aligned with the doc of the Rohm DAC, and the SOUND COLOR shows the below:
  • LOW OSR + HPC ON
  • LOW OSR + HPC OFF
  • HIGH OSR + HPC ON
  • LOW OSR + HPC OFF
Let me decipher all of that:
  • OSR stands for OversSampling Rate, and my guess is LOW is for 16x and HIGH is for 32x oversampling rate of the ΔΣ Modulator.
  • HPC stands for High Precision Calculation, and this is related to the mathematical precision of the computation, draining more current when in HIGH mode.
You can find all of that explained in the datasheet of the Rohm BD34352EKV DAC, and they refer to it as "Sound Settings".

Let me further describe what that is. Look at the block diagram of the DAC:

View attachment 475867

You can see the oversampling filter, that can be set to sharp or slow, and that is the one adding more samples in between original samples, and performing the anti-imaging function, by filtering everything above Fs/2.
Next, there is the Delta-Sigma modulator that reduces the bit-depth to the one required for the final conversion. This is done again with an oversampling of a set order (generally 4, or more). To reduce the PCM stream from 24 bits, to 4 or 5 bits (I don't know here) required by the Delta-Sigma converter, there's a need to keep safe the original SNR. Since we loose roughly 6dB every bit we drop, it is necessary to compensate that loss by a combination of oversampling and noise shaping. These two mechanisms together allow the engineers to reject the quantization noise (when reducing the bit depth) far away in frequency.

And voilà, the idea of Rohm, offered to us to play with in the SMSL D200, is to reject even further the quantization noise of the noise shaper. Of course, this require more computing power, and has some drawbacks too, as I've seen and will show you.

The below shows a 1kHz sine @0dBFS played either with LOW or HIGH oversampling of the ΔΣ Modulator:

View attachment 475868

This linear frequency scale view goes up to 80kHz. You can see the advantage of the low ultrasonic noise with a higher oversampling rate. The green trace is with the ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate set at LOW. You can appreciate the building of the noise that is rejected here in this mode, by the noise shaper.

This is the reason why the THD+N vs freq measurement was so good despite me including all noise up to 90kHz, like @amirm usually do. But with the ΔΣ Modulator oversampling set to low, I assure you the performance would have been much lower, because of all the noise rejected from 35kHz by the noise shaper.

Ok, you thought this is a little too complex? So let me add a bit more :p Have a look at the very interesting and busy graph below, based on white noise long time averaging:

View attachment 475869

This is an even wider view, up to 300kHz. I played with the FIR Oversampling Filter (Sharp and Low) and the ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate too.

With that view, you can appreciate that:
  • The slow filter (LOW) is fully active at only 44kHz and exhibits ringing, ie it filters less of the aliases of the conversion
  • The sharp filter (SHARP) is fully active ad 24kHz and filters way better the aliases.
  • The effect of decreasing the oversampling rate of the ΔΣ Modulator generates noise being built as soon as 35kHz and going up to -60dB at 165kHz.
The dark blue trace is the SHARP FIR and the HIGH ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate, and I like it :)

Note that there is a "NO FILTER" option, but there's a problem with this mode, at least with my early device. I saw a significant decrease of level and high distortion. There's probably something wrong, but at least I saw it indeed does not filter at all, plenty of unwanted aliases are created out of the audio band, meaning it mimics a Non Oversampling DAC (which is bad, don't use that), but since there's still a ΔΣ Modulator that must oversample, I see the effect of that oversampling but I can't understand it. So as long as I'm not 100% sure of what I measure, I'll refrain to publish, but anyways don't go NOS mode with a DAC, please pretty please.


SMSL D200 - Measurements (SPDIF in - XLR Out)

I briefly checked the quality of the SPDIF optical input (16bits only), to find excellent performances. But I saw additional low level random noise at the foot of the fundamental, when feeding it with 16bits stream from a CD Player. It shows better itself when performing a jitter test (16bits/44.1kHz):

View attachment 475873

This would have been a perfect trace without the little random noise at the foot of the main tone. It is negligible below -120dBr, though.

And that being said, this is a very high precision DAC anyways.

Best proof is one of my favorite measurement that Stereophile was often using as a proof of low noise DAC. It is from an undithered 997Hz sine at -90.31dBFS. With 16bits, the signal should appear (on a scope) as the 3DC levels of the smallest symmetrical sign magnitude digital signal


View attachment 475871

Without surprise, this is one of the best trace I've seen, nearly 0 noise comes in the way, it is very close to the digital data.
Theoretically we should get a square at this lowest level of the PCM 16bits format, and we don't because of the limited bandwidth (Gibbs phenomenon). The ringing tells us that the reconstruction filter is symmetrical.

By the way, since I'm here, at fixed output level, that is 4Vrms XLR (-2dB compared to max possible), let's see how this DAC resists my usual intersamples over test:

Intersample-overs tests
Bandwidth of the THD+N measurements is 20Hz - 96kHz
5512.5 Hz sine,
Peak = +0.69dBFS
7350 Hz sine,
Peak = +1.25dBFS
11025 Hz sine,
Peak = +3.0dBFS
D200 from PL150 (CD player)-68.5dB-56.9dB-39.1dB
SMSL PL150-52.1dB-30.8dB-19.2dB

Well, we get some headroom but not much. Surprisingly, if I go to "preamp mode" and lower the volume by a lot more (eg -6db) I don't get more headroom.


I will test with 24bits data stream in the future to verify if I see the same issue with low level random noise at high levels.


Conclusions

Sorry, I know it's a lot of information to digest, it was for me too and it's not finished!

But from what I gathered so far, I think this DAC is a high performing one, and the possibility to play with a selection of FIR filters and ΔΣ Modulator oversampling rate is cool, even if I can't hear a difference.

And for those of you worried about a noise shaper generating too much noise, too close from the audio band... well, you have a winner here! @Scytales if you read me ;)

The little random noise I've seen from a CD Player, as a source, is of no concern.

I hope you enjoyed the review and have a nice weekend!
Glad you were able to test it so quickly, and as always, a great review.
Would you also have the chance to test the D1 Rohm DAC?

I only gave it a "good" rating (even though, objectively, it is flawless):
It is 50% more expensive than the Topping D50 III, which far surpasses it in every way.

With the D50 III, I've always been bothered by the TRS connectors for balanced audio and the light weight that it offers compared to the cables. PEQ only on the USB input is an additional dealbreaker for me.
I only see a €100 difference in price on Amazon, but the price of the D200 could also go down.
 
Excellent work! To be promoted on the homepage. It is nice that people are able to conduct tests of this quality in Europe. It would be great if someone could do it for the speakers, especially for many brands present in the European market but not or little in the American market. Possibly consider that the donations made to the ASR could help a European tester. The main testing should not depend on Amir, at the risk of exhausting him. These are just a few personal ideas, like that...
 
As Rja4000 said: "...It is 50% more expensive than the Topping D50 III, which far surpasses it in every way..."

and what's more, at this price, you don't have the remote control ! o_O

In addition, the term 'audiophile' is written in the product description :D

Too bad TOPPING didn't release a D50 IV with integrated PSU and something other than the 'JOYSTICK' for the controls instead of putting the DX5 II on the market with all its 'hassles'... :confused:


The simplest thing would have been to put the D50 III PCB inside the DX5 II case and its beautiful display :cool:
 
Last edited:
yes - well done.

what I miss is a price indication within the first sentence (as Amir use to do). It helps for context and to rate the measurement results.
 
Yes but without the battery :p

Sans titre.jpg
 
Disassembly and internal view of the board. English subtitles available.
 
Last edited:
Hi Everyone,

First, thanks to Amir for having promoted the review!

This week, I wondered about the clock input of the D200, and was thinking of some tests to perform:

SMSL D200_004.jpg


Besides the jitter test that the D200 mastered, I usually test the pitch error when reviewing a CD player. For that, I use a 19'997Hz sine tone and compare the output and compute the clock deviation from that. For instance 19'996.92Hz seen at the output means a max precision of 4ppm, which would be very good.

So thinking about that test in the context of DAC, I thought I could go further, for instance using a 90kHz test tone and verify the deviation at the output. And that would maybe allow me to test the clock's precision, especially if we think about using an external one, especially the one of SMLS.

The below measurements were done after waiting roughly 20min, for the device to have reached a stable temperature.
The D200's internal clock is very precise. This is the test tone at 90kHz, and the D200 outputs a very precise 89'999.96Hz, meaning a low 0.44ppm deviation:

1759678587368.png


For the record, I did the same test at 300kHz and got 299'999.88Hz, ie 0.40ppm deviation. I think it is necessary to average 32 times, especially at higher frequencies, at it averages the calculated sine output too. Also, 4M FFT seems to be better to use at 300kHz.

The DAC of the PL200 confirmed a clock deviation of -4.40ppm that I saw when measuring it as a CD Player (-4.5ppm). The result is of course more precise with this higher frequency test tone

If you have other ideas how test the precision of a xtal, I'm interested!

PS: bonus photo of the D200 and PL200:

SMSL D200_003.jpg
 
Last edited:
Hi Everyone,

First, thanks to Amir for having promoted the review!

This week, I wondered about the clock input of the D200, and was thinking of some tests to perform:

View attachment 480460

Besides the jitter test that the D200 mastered, I usually test the pitch error when reviewing a CD player. For that, I use a 19'997Hz sine tone and compare the output and compute the clock deviation from that. For instance 19'996.92Hz seen at the output means a max precision of 4ppm, which would be very good.

So thinking about that test in the context of DAC, I thought I could go further, for instance using a 90kHz test tone and verify the deviation at the output. And that would maybe allow me to test the clock precision, especially if we think about using an external one, especially the one of SMLS.

Problem is that the D200's internal clock is already of a higher precision than what I can measure! This is the test tone at 90lHz, and the D200 outputs a very precise 90'000.00Hz:

View attachment 480463

Even at 300'000Hz, it outputs a precise 300'000.00Hz , and that means the precision of the D200's clock is better than 0.03ppm, which would be the max I can measure this way :cool:

If you have other ideas, I'm interested!

PS: bonus photo of the D200 and PL200:

View attachment 480462
SMSL released the G1 10 MHz clock in the same series as many other manufacturers. Naturally, it costs over €500. A lower price would make the clock too inaccurate, and the promised soundstage wouldn't open up ;) :facepalm:.

We conducted tests with several of these clocks and corresponding DACs, including the inexpensive version from Aliexpress and an extremely accurate one from the industrial/research sector.
We couldn't hear any difference, even compared to the already very accurate DAC clocks, which is why we stopped testing very early.
If you absolutely want a 10 MHz clock, you can build a high-quality clock with a low-noise power supply and case from the Aliexpress board for around €100, or around €150 with a heater and PID controller.

10 MHZ square & sine wave clock aliexpress
Bildschirmfoto 2025-10-04 um 14.06.18.png


Bildschirmfoto 2025-10-04 um 14.08.24.png
Bildschirmfoto 2025-10-04 um 14.09.34.png
 
The clock input was one of the interesting features of this dac. Do not have one. Expected it was not a function that was beneficial just plugged into a dac.
Without needing to synch multiple units it has no to little impact. But still want a D200.
Thank you for all the testing on the D200!
 
I made a protocol error for the "pitch error" test above. I fixed it and measured both the D200 and the PL200 (as a DAC):
  • D200 at 90'000Hz -> 89'999.96Hz = +0.44ppm
  • D200 at 300'000Hz -> 299'999.88 = +0.40ppm
  • PL200 at 90'000Hz -> 90'000.40Hz = -4.44pm
  • PL200 at 300'000Hz -> 300'001.32 = -4.40ppm
The D200 has a 10 times more precise clock that the PL200, and the PL200 confirmed what I measured from my test CD (19'997Hz -> 19'997.09Hz = -4.5ppm).

So that means I found a way to measure down to 0.03ppm clock precision.
 
The clock input was one of the interesting features of this dac. Do not have one. Expected it was not a function that was beneficial just plugged into a dac.
Without needing to synch multiple units it has no to little impact. But still want a D200.
Thank you for all the testing on the D200!
That's an interesting comment.

The PL200 has the same clock deviation from its digital output (-4.5ppm) when playing a CD, meaning that no matter the clock precision of the DAC to process that digital stream, the imprecision of the clock of the CD player will transition to the DAC. And so, I see the same -4.5ppm deviation when sending the digital output of the PL200 to the D200 and checking the pitch error at the analog output of the D200.

There might be multiple clocks in a player and/or DACs, some dedicated to the digital outputs.
I can see that with the PL200, when used as a bridge (PL200 USB input -> PL200 optical output -> D200 optical input), I get -3.56ppm deviation, with 192kHz sampling rate.

So indeed, syncing the two devices with a unique high precision clock would probably improve that, provided that the clock is better than the worst of the two devices it will synchronize.
 
Last edited:
I made a protocol error for the "pitch error" test above. I fixed it and measured both the D200 and the PL200 (as a DAC):
  • D200 at 90'000Hz -> 89'999.96Hz = +0.44ppm
  • D200 at 300'000Hz -> 299'999.88 = +0.40ppm
  • PL200 at 90'000Hz -> 90'000.40Hz = -4.44pm
  • PL200 at 300'000Hz -> 300'001.32 = -4.40ppm
The D200 has a 10 times more precise clock that the PL200, and the PL200 confirmed what I measured from my test CD (19'997Hz -> 19'997.09Hz = -4.5ppm).

So that means I found a way to measure down to 0.03ppm clock precision.

What do you use as reference clock to get this high resolution?
 
Back
Top Bottom