SMSL D300 Review (Balanced DAC)

[Orlandino]

I recently got my D300. I noticed some oddities in it...

1. I can not say how widespread this issue is, but on my item it seems there is no problem with instant changing of the sources.
2. The fixed RCA output level on D300 is 2.0 Vrms, while on many DACs/CD players it is 2.1-.2.2 Vrms. So you've noticed this nuance.

 

[aiken]

D300 sounds great

Tell me, do you judge the sound quality of this DAC through a PCM or DSD stream? It seemed to me that these two modes sound different. I'm using a plugin that converts PCM to DSD on my Foobar. Thus, the sound becomes more solid to my ear.

 

[aiken]

on my item it seems there is no problem with instant changing of the sources

Are you listening to PCM on the USB input? I assume that my bug is related to my listening to DSD mainly via USB.

 

[Orlandino]

Are you listening to PCM on the USB input? I assume that my bug is related to my listening to DSD mainly via USB.

Mainly it is PCM (USB from PC or CD player via coaxial), and noticed no problems. And also sometimes DSD via USB from foobar, as well.

 

[bogi]

Tell me, do you judge the sound quality of this DAC through a PCM or DSD stream? It seemed to me that these two modes sound different. I'm using a plugin that converts PCM to DSD on my Foobar. Thus, the sound becomes more solid to my ear.

On this forum everything sounds the same, so better to discuss that on some other forum ...

 

[Happyhammer]

normally i use only the USB input for streaming music, however , i just added an optical connection as well from a tv but when selecting opt input on d300 there is no audio unless:

1. i also start to play some streaming audio on usb as well (only hear the opt input) or
2. unplug the usb and only have the opt input connected.

anyone know how to correct this?

mcu is v1.11 and usb 1.30

 

[sbgk]

I recently got my D300. I noticed some oddities in it.

1. After switching from the USB input, there is no sound on the coaxial input. The sound appears after the device is completely turned off and on in the coaxial input mode.

2. The fixed volume level in DAC mode is much lower than that of my other DAC (SMSL Sanskrit 10 mk2). It is 10-15 percent lower. Therefore, it is difficult to arrange a comparative test between these two devices.

Firmware version 1.30. Are these oddities widespread, or are they only in my device?

I have only usb, coax and opt get a no signal message
firmware 1.0, won't go into update mode

have added a linear ps split into digital and analogue/d/a, extra filtering improves things quite a bit as does an external powered adum 3166 and ISOUSB211 device in series

 

[Happyhammer]

At one time I was given an instruction on how to get into update mode by shorting two pins inside box. Do it at your own risk

 

[despoiler]

Tell me, do you judge the sound quality of this DAC through a PCM or DSD stream? It seemed to me that these two modes sound different. I'm using a plugin that converts PCM to DSD on my Foobar. Thus, the sound becomes more solid to my ear.

PCM.

 

[@rayo]

The D300 sounds great, but is one of the buggiest DACs being sold. SMSL doesn't care about bugs or quality. They've long since run away from this thread.

I second that. I wish some other affordable and reputable brand wouldve released a dac with this Rohm chip. Hope the audiofluencers take note and send a strong message to the company.

 

[kian154]

At one time I was given an instruction on how to get into update mode by shorting two pins inside box. Do it at your own risk

This works for me.

Anyways, my unit also sounds crackling and does not to seem to produce any sound except USB.
Anyone a possible solve? Or is it for the trashbin

 

[Jimster480]

I second that. I wish some other affordable and reputable brand wouldve released a dac with this Rohm chip. Hope the audiofluencers take note and send a strong message to the company.

The chip itself is quite expensive; which I think is why it is not chosen for many designs. It costs more than a flagship DAC from the other companies by a good bit. I think the last time I checked; the DAC chip alone was around $80. The price is unfortunate as it looks like the performance is quite good.

 

[Roland68]

The chip itself is quite expensive; which I think is why it is not chosen for many designs. It costs more than a flagship DAC from the other companies by a good bit. I think the last time I checked; the DAC chip alone was around $80. The price is unfortunate as it looks like the performance is quite good.

The price is only so high for individual units and end users. When I look at semiconductors with our terms and conditions, the prices are roughly the same as those of other flagship DAC chips. The price for SMSL would certainly have been even cheaper.

Otherwise, SMSL wouldn't have released a D300 with a Rhom chip for around €/$400.

 

[Jimster480]

The price is only so high for individual units and end users. When I look at semiconductors with our terms and conditions, the prices are roughly the same as those of other flagship DAC chips. The price for SMSL would certainly have been even cheaper.

Otherwise, SMSL wouldn't have released a D300 with a Rhom chip for around €/$400.

ES9039SPRO

AK4499

9039EQM

CS43198

Based on the prices here on Mouser; the ROHM DAC is $20 more than the most expensive ESS DAC that you find in expensive high end DAC's.... the mid and lower range DAC's all use the Q2M versions (which are all under $20.... most under $10).

 

[Roland68]

View attachment 437373
ES9039SPRO
View attachment 437374
AK4499
View attachment 437375
9039EQM
View attachment 437376
CS43198
View attachment 437377

Based on the prices here on Mouser; the ROHM DAC is $20 more than the most expensive ESS DAC that you find in expensive high end DAC's.... the mid and lower range DAC's all use the Q2M versions (which are all under $20.... most under $10).

You didn't read my post correctly. End-user prices are irrelevant to manufacturers, and Mouser is a pharmacy. Such prices play no role in development and manufacturing.
We are manufacturers and have completely different terms, and the Rhom chip would be even cheaper for us than the ES9039 Pro series.
With these graduated prices, whether 100/250/1000, every buyer of a company would lie on his back laughing.
But manufacturers as large as the SMSL/Sabaj/Loxjie group or Topping usually buy directly from the manufacturer.

 

[Jimster480]

You didn't read my post correctly. End-user prices are irrelevant to manufacturers, and Mouser is a pharmacy. Such prices play no role in development and manufacturing.
We are manufacturers and have completely different terms, and the Rhom chip would be even cheaper for us than the ES9039 Pro series.
With these graduated prices, whether 100/250/1000, every buyer of a company would lie on his back laughing.
But manufacturers as large as the SMSL/Sabaj/Loxjie group or Topping usually buy directly from the manufacturer.

Sure any back channel deals can be made, but places like Mouser usually have prices quite similar to any other bulk rates available (as they also sell bulk and there are plenty of companies that buy from them).
It would make little sense though that ROHM chips are so expensive in the "end user" market but so cheap on other markets and then at the same time have no manufacturers using them.
I'd be glad if you can show me somewhere that the ROHM chips are indeed cheaper. If you are a manufacturer; then reach out and see what price they give you so that we can put this debate to rest.
To me it seems like this chip is just way more expensive than others; which goes along with why it isn't used in basically any designs.

I've been following it for years (and one of my friends bought a ROHM DAC portable) and while the performance is good; literally no companies use it and it only appears in $400+ products (with the SMSL Design being the cheapest one). At that price point it isn't competitive and I would say they would need to beat the price of the AK4499EX considering the performance offered.
My guess is that the mouser pricing isn't so far off reality (just like I have seen in other scenarios) and as such companies don't want to develop a new design when the chip isn't cheap. CS43198 has a million designs because the chips are cheap and quite performant.... so every day people are making new designs using this chip.