Years ago at this point, SMSL added DOP support via version 1.11. The English SMSL specs page shows DOP as being supported over OPT/COAX. Someone pointed out that the Chinese language site does not show this. I have an HDMI de-embedder and I cannot get DOP working from either optical or coax. I've tried two different DOP board de-embedder devices and neither work. If I send DSD out of my player the de-embedder output does show on the DAC as 176.4 khz PCM sample rate. This is correct for a DOP64 payload. However all I hear is very light static and intermittent beeps. Given this I believe the de-embedder to be working. I'm pretty positive the D300 supports DOP over USB only. Unless someone else has shown it to work. It's a shame SMSL abandons their product support in favor of pumping out new devices. The D300 sounds amazing, but the bugs are far too many.
im not using Mine anymore. It’s collecting dust and I’m just using it as backup if ever necessary. Same like my SMSL SP400.
Definitely regret the Purchase of SMSL equipment. And happy I stayed away from Topping.
But most users aren't willing to pay for outstanding development, high quality, and service.
For years, manufacturers who offered excellently developed and functioning devices with good quality and service have been attacked because the devices were 3-5 times more expensive than the now common devices in the price range up to around €1,000.
Most people only pay attention to measurements and price, and if a device is expensive, then it's immediately a bad manufacturer demanding too much money from them.
But good development, beta tests, long-term tests, stress and aging tests, sustainable and, if possible, thoroughly tested programming with all functional tests and simulations, prototypes in various stages of development, listening sessions with new users, etc., cost an enormous amount of time and money, which has to come from somewhere.
Or is someone here working on their company's project for 1-3 years without pay to keep costs down and living off the bread and butter? I'll hire you immediately.
Because these are precisely the high costs that must be added to and paid for such a device. And since more expensive devices are sold in much smaller quantities, these costs must also be added to a much smaller number, which makes such devices exorbitantly expensive.
Is it surprising that such manufacturers have withdrawn from the market, or are now only building very expensive devices for a small fan base?
One of the DACs in my system is a Cambridge Audio DACMAGIC 1 developed by John Westlake, and it has been running flawlessly for over 30 years. Defective devices are an absolute exception and the device is sometimes equipped with components of such high quality that replacements of this quality are not even available today.
Have you ever noticed that new devices from most Chinese manufacturers often appear just 2-3 months after the introduction of a new DAC chip?
How can the high-quality development and testing I described above take place in such a short period of time? Quite simply, it's completely omitted!
Buyers are the beta testers, and firmware updates that remain buggy are only released if too many customers return the device; otherwise, it would be unnecessary.
Just live with the world created by the majority of buyers who relied on buying the cheapest devices with excellent performance.