SMSL DO100 Review (Stereo DAC)

[morillon]

finally...
It seems to me that the multitone tests are the most interesting...32,100, etc.
complex signal...
(but s observed more than this measure .. can be the little problem for here)

a sinad has 104 112 or 118 on 1k or 10k...
seems to me especially easy to "classify"....reassures etc, but don't tell us much
;-)

 

[wacomme]

I was thinking of buying the D10b to pair with the A90 (or A90 Discrete). However, to keep costs down a bit, I'm now thinking of the DO100 + A30Pro. The problem with the D10b and the pass through balance inputs (to powered speaker) was that I wouldn't be able to control the volume with the volume knob on the A30Pro. But with the DO100, I presume I'd be able to control the volume via the DO100 volume knob for both HP and speakers. Is that correct? Computer - DO100 - A30Pro - HP or powered speakers (via balanced out on A30Pro). Essentially, with the DO100 I can bypass the need for the lack of a preamp on the A30Pro and keep knob volume control for both HP and powered speakers. Is my reasoning correct? If so, is there any reason to buy the A90 over the A30Pro (paired with the DO100)?

 

[Steamrolly]

I was thinking of buying the D10b to pair with the A90 (or A90 Discrete). However, to keep costs down a bit, I'm now thinking of the DO100 + A30Pro. The problem with the D10b and the pass through balance inputs (to powered speaker) was that I wouldn't be able to control the volume with the volume knob on the A30Pro. But with the DO100, I presume I'd be able to control the volume via the DO100 volume knob for both HP and speakers. Is that correct? Computer - DO100 - A30Pro - HP or powered speakers (via balanced out on A30Pro). Essentially, with the DO100 I can bypass the need for the lack of a preamp on the A30Pro and keep knob volume control for both HP and powered speakers. Is my reasoning correct? If so, is there any reason to buy the A90 over the A30Pro (paired with the DO100)?

I don't have experience with any head phone amplifiers however suggest that the DO100 would be an improvement over the D10b as it has the volume control, XLR balanced output (not TRS) and utilizes two DAC chips. Plus it also has coaxial and optical inputs however it doesn't have the pass through functionality (optical and coaxial output) of the D10b if you need that. You might want to consider the SMSL HO200 as an option to the A30Pro.

 

[wacomme]

I don't have experience with any head phone amplifiers however suggest that the DO100 would be an improvement over the D10b as it has the volume control, XLR balanced output (not TRS) and utilizes two DAC chips. Plus it also has coaxial and optical inputs however it doesn't have the pass through functionality (optical and coaxial output) of the D10b if you need that. You might want to consider the SMSL HO200 as an option to the A30Pro.

I don't see me having any need for optical or coaxial outputs in the D10b - inputs maybe, but not outputs. Why would the SMSL HO200 be a viable option to the A30Pro? If anything, the option is the A90 or maybe the to be released A90D. I suppose I should wait for the A90D to be released before buying anything. However, the DO100 seems to a no-brainer purchase for a DAC. The AMP? I still like the A30Pro - while it doesn't have the balanced output of the A90, the raw power is plenty unbalanced. The balanced inputs are wonderful to eliminate ground noise, and the pass through is fine paired with the DO100 since the dac has a preamp. Mostly likely I can set the amp at max volume and control HP and powered speakers via either the digital volume knob or remote on the DO100. I do wonder if the respective prior volume settings are remembered when switching back a forth from HP to speakers?

So, with the A30Pro, how much of an issue is the heat and whine?

 

[julbo]

Sweet review, pulled the trigger and ordered from Aoshida. Looks like a good wine pairing with my new Audiophonics HPA-S400 Purifi amp that is just about to land my front door after patiently waiting 2 months lead time
Will hook them up balanced differential of course, low gain setting on the Amp. Driving initially my first (mono for now) DIY speaker Directiva R1 with a variation on @TimVG 's passive XO

 

[Lupin]

XLR balanced output (not TRS)

Balanced out is balanced out, I don't say how balanced out using XLR is going to be better than balanced out using TRS besides perhaps the physical size of the connectors.

utilizes two DAC chips.

Read the reviews here on ASR like Musetec Audio (LKS Audio) MH-DA005 Review (DAC)
One should come to the conclusion quickly that the amount and type of DAC chip(s) used means absolutely nothing. The DAC with the best objective performance is still the single DAC chip based Topping D90SE.

 

[julbo]

That's minimum phase fast rolloff. About what you would expect in an audio interface where latency is considered critical, even if it only saves you 2/3 of a millisecond at 44.1 kHz.

That's the linear phase fast rolloff filter. Is this a rev 1 or rev 2 unit?

Much ado about filters in this thread. I consider "THD+N" caused by aliasing components in the extended (90 kHz) measurement bandwidth a measurement artifact, so the default filter is a perfectly fine choice in that regard... it only dips above 18 kHz which only impacts the measurement at the very end. It would not be my go-to filter for 44.1 kHz, I would agree with the linear fast rolloff job #6 (low in-band ripple, flat response out to 20 kHz, and real life audio signal components at 20-22.05 kHz tend to be near-nonexistent to begin with so who cares about a bit of aliasing generated in the 22.05-24.1 kHz range).

As for the DO100, it appears they may have sacrificed a few dB of dynamic range to achieve the extraordinary linearity. Which is a valid approach, I guess.

Presumably the usual caveats for IEC Class I devices with unbalanced outputs apply. This is not the DAC for you if it needs to be floating.

I’d like to hope that the ESS OSF interpolation filter is not bypassed so I’d be able to use #6 w/o aliasing artifacts. Otherwise I’d just oversample the source to 96ksps given it’s a pc. I’m past 50 and trying to compensate

ESS DAC spec

 

[Bleib]

Just received mine. Guess I have something wrong with it because the sound through USB is very distorted, even though I have installed their USB driver.
Optical works fine, the remote is more responsive than Topping's.

To be continued..

 

[F1308]

In theory, Bluetooth 5.0 could support lossless 16/44.1 audio, since 5.0 has a maximum data rate of 2.0Mb/sec, while the 16/44.1 data rate is less than 1.5Mb/sec, but since the BT 5.0 maximum rate only occurs under perfect conditions, especially for distance, I'm not aware of any 16/44.1 lossless implementations at all. They all use a lossy codec. If you want lossless wireless you need 802.11 WiFi support.

Bluetooth Lossless, offering CD quality was announced around September 2021 by Qualcomm. Thereby my reasoning...

Qualcomm adds Bluetooth Lossless Audio Technology to Snapdragon Sound | Qualcomm

Qualcomm has added Bluetooth Lossless Audio Technology to its Snapdragon Sound platform to support high-quality, low-latency audio streaming over Bluetooth.

www.qualcomm.com

And it looks CME is working on another wireless technology with huge promises...

1.ultra low 5ms latency
2.lossless 24-bit/48kHz stereo
3.minimal interference
4.accessible pricing
5.made for prosumers & creators

iWA: Instant Wireless Audio by CME - Creative Music Engineering

Following the successful launch of WIDI, CME introduces the next step in ultra-low latency lossless wireless audio. Meet iWA!

www.cme-pro.com

Currently #517 supporters and waiting for 1000 as the minimum.
I am #95.
Join us, please !!!!

 

[blueone]

Bluetooth Lossless, offering CD quality was announced around September 2021 by Qualcomm. Thereby my reasoning...

Qualcomm adds Bluetooth Lossless Audio Technology to Snapdragon Sound | Qualcomm

Qualcomm has added Bluetooth Lossless Audio Technology to its Snapdragon Sound platform to support high-quality, low-latency audio streaming over Bluetooth.

www.qualcomm.com

And it looks CME is working on another wireless technology with huge promises...

1.ultra low 5ms latency
2.lossless 24-bit/48kHz stereo
3.minimal interference
4.accessible pricing
5.made for prosumers & creators

iWA: Instant Wireless Audio by CME - Creative Music Engineering

Following the successful launch of WIDI, CME introduces the next step in ultra-low latency lossless wireless audio. Meet iWA!

www.cme-pro.com

Currently #517 supporters and waiting for 1000 as the minimum.
I am #95.
Join us, please !!!!

I've read the QCOM press releases, and all I can say is that they're very carefully worded marketing-speak. Like this quote:

• Supports 44.1kHz, 16-bit CD lossless audio quality

WTF does that mean? It sounds like an audible equivalence statement, not a claim of lossless capability.

And QCOM is also claiming another level of AptX, called HD, and it supports hi-res:

Qualcomm® aptX™ HD | High Resolution Audio Technology

Discover how Qualcomm® aptX™ HD audio enables Bluetooth wireless devices to deliver high-resolution audio with no compromise on quality or sound distortion.

www.aptx.com

But there's another WTF in their material, as in this quote from "Salford University". Salford, really? Reads like Stanford if you're not careful:

“Indistinguishable from high resolution audio”​

“From the analysis of the results from the 24 participants that took part in the test it is concluded that participants were unable to consistently detect a difference between 96kHz/24bit audio and 48kHz/24bit aptX HD encoded and decoded audio”

- Salford University independent test results, 2015

I'm unable to consistently detect a difference between MP3-256 and CD or lossless hi-res, so what does that marketing speak prove? Nothing. I'm not yet convinced AptX is really supporting lossless 16/44.1 over Bluetooth.

 

[F1308]

I've read the QCOM press releases, and all I can say is that they're very carefully worded marketing-speak. Like this quote:


WTF does that mean? It sounds like an audible equivalence statement, not a claim of lossless capability.

And QCOM is also claiming another level of AptX, called HD, and it supports hi-res:

Qualcomm® aptX™ HD | High Resolution Audio Technology

Discover how Qualcomm® aptX™ HD audio enables Bluetooth wireless devices to deliver high-resolution audio with no compromise on quality or sound distortion.

www.aptx.com

But there's another WTF in their material, as in this quote from "Salford University". Salford, really? Reads like Stanford if you're not careful:



I'm unable to consistently detect a difference between MP3-256 and CD or lossless hi-res, so what does that marketing speak prove? Nothing. I'm not yet convinced AptX is really supporting lossless 16/44.1 over Bluetooth.

Then we are to wait for CME...

Join, please.

 

[Steamrolly]

Just received mine. Guess I have something wrong with it because the sound through USB is very distorted, even though I have installed their USB driver.
Optical works fine, the remote is more responsive than Topping's.

To be continued..

One thing you could try is to make sure that your DAC is set to USB 2.0 and not USB 1.1. See page 16 of the user manual.

 

[Bleib]

One thing you could try is to make sure that your DAC is set to USB 2.0 and not USB 1.1. See page 16 of the user manual.

It is, it's easy to switch between the settings. I've never used 1.1. I'm gonna try a few more cables over the weekend and if I can't get it to work then it's time to contact the company for a replacement

 

[wacomme]

Does anyone know if the DO100 outputs both SE and balanced simultaneously?

 

[Lupin]

Hi, I’am a newby on this forum so I run a risk of being too sincere instead of just following the rituals of what appears to be a measurement orgy fanclub. I’ve been an audio equipment fan and musicophile all my life but never considered measurements to be a sole element in judgment weather a piece of audio gear can honestly portray tone, texture, layering or musical organistion. On the contrary, I usually found audio equipment that was made solely to measure well lacking any skill in making any sense of the music and particulary lacking in dynamics and spatial and tonal cues but they did dissect and overanalyze music in unlistenable mess: to mind comes Benchmark DAC - horribly overrated pro gear. So please explain to me do you, before giving out any recommendations, actually evaluate gear also with your ears or do you just enjoy measuring stuff that is supposed to be listened to and not just measured. I have a huntch that certain chi- fi brands simply make gear for the measurements sake yet probably sound like Benchmark, horrible. Sorry for being blunt but simply have hard time understanding the purpose of this forum.

BR, Andrej

This is a review thread and not the place for it.

Music is nothing more than an electric signal, nothing magical or mystical about it. Electric signals can be measured. So do please enlighten us what you think you can hear what can't be measured and how to measure it. Making subjective claims and expecting the objective side to supply the proof to your claims is the opposite world.

 

[DMill]

 

[RHO]

This is a review thread and not the place for it.

Music is nothing more than an electric signal, nothing magical or mystic about it. Electric signals can be measured. So do please enlighten us what you think you can hear what can't be measured and how to measure it. Making subjective claims and expecting the objective side to supply the proof to your claims is the opposite world.

Maybe we should just stop feeding these trolls.

 

[cheapmessiah]

Hi, I’am a newby on this forum so I run a risk of being too sincere instead of just following the rituals of what appears to be a measurement orgy fanclub. I’ve been an audio equipment fan and musicophile all my life but never considered measurements to be a sole element in judgment weather a piece of audio gear can honestly portray tone, texture, layering or musical organistion. On the contrary, I usually found audio equipment that was made solely to measure well lacking any skill in making any sense of the music and particulary lacking in dynamics and spatial and tonal cues but they did dissect and overanalyze music in unlistenable mess: to mind comes Benchmark DAC - horribly overrated pro gear. So please explain to me do you, before giving out any recommendations, actually evaluate gear also with your ears or do you just enjoy measuring stuff that is supposed to be listened to and not just measured. I have a huntch that certain chi- fi brands simply make gear for the measurements sake yet probably sound like Benchmark, horrible. Sorry for being blunt but simply have hard time understanding the purpose of this forum.

BR, Andrej

As consumers, measurements are our most valuable tool to judge if a manufacturers claim of a certain characteristic has any basis, use, or if its even real. Thats as universal as it gets.

Well measuring gear tends to have little to no influence in the music while it undergoes the process of taking said music from the media its contained at to the transducers that will convert it to sound. If you dont like what a well measuring amp or dac are giving you what you actually dont like its either the recording, or your tranducer equipment.

 

[Lupin]

You clearly know nothing about reviewing you haven’t done any LISTENING, you just measure what you think is best spec for your ears. It doesn’t work that way. Harman has done all the measuring that was ever needed to be done, and they dont swear by linear frequency response curve because they know human ear couldn’ t care less what equipment measures if it cant make sense of input, because it is the timiing cues or duration of silences between notes and duration of these notes, shape of tone and micro and macrodynamics of sound pressure that make music. None of that can be measured by your analyzers. you are all highly naive and think to understand but it is not about understanding it is about experiencing/ actually listening. Enjoy your fatiguing or dull “well measured” jumble of signals because for all that splendid measurement to take place all signal variations that need to come across from input to output in chi-fi gear and constitutes musical structure was eliminated and that is why music from that gear sounds bland like a food served at a mess hall (all the same with same taste) and nothing like real food /music.
And by the way proof is all around you, Do you think most sought after audio equipment measured well, it made music in the brain, that is where it all happens: i.e. LS 3/5a, Magnepan’s, Naim amps, Klipschhorn, Audio note, and many more legendary audio gear.

Goodbye troll

 

[BlackTalon]

Well dang, my whole outlook is now changed. Thanks!