SMSL DO100 Review (Stereo DAC)

[Prana Ferox]

There's something fishy with the filter. The manual doesn't say which filter is the default (although I'd assume the 'default' is #3 Apodizing.) If the default filter actually was -12db at 20khz, wouldn't that mess up some of the other testing, at least the multitone?

 

[Chr1]

I am interested to know if the display can show the volume, as per Topping's DACs?

 

[itz_all_about_the_music]

What an incredibly nice unit!

For anyone wondering about usability details here’s a nice walkthrough, starting around the 10 minute mark.

Appreciate the link. Does anyone else struggle to follow Z Reviews, well, reviews? Ishay okenspay ordway oftenyay oundssay ikelay alphabetyay oupsay ? Yet upon a second listen with Playback Speed @ half speed, well diggety-do, I "hoedoe hoedoo hoodoo" understand, sort of. "Hoe. It's a hoe, OK?" Huh?

 

[sarumbear]

Filter#4 doesn't look like it does anything much different to Filter#6, so why allow #4 and not mention #6? (Follows pretty much the same curve on the graph). In fact Filter #6 gets to -100dB sooner than Filter #4.

EDIT: Don't forget I'm talking about the SMSL DO100, so don't get confused by the E30 graph I put in there too.

EDIT #2: I think you meant to say Filters #1,2,3, as they cut to -100dB by just over 22kHz.

I read wrong. I should have said 1, 3 and 7. Red, brown & green plots. Sorry. I’ve edited my post.

 

[Robbo99999]

I read wrong. I should have said 1, 3 and 7. Sorry. I’ve edited my post.

Yes, it's hard to read the colours....I in fact read them wrong too, albeit in a different way to you, I got the brown mixed up with the dark violet! Yes, so in that sense filters #1, 3 & 7 all attenuate to -100dB by just over 22kHz (half sampling frequency), which would make #3 the best because it delays the roll off point further up the frequency range and is sharper?

(Whereas in the E30 DAC the fastest roll off filter is only at -100dB at 24kHz as opposed to 22kHz.)

 

[melvinjames]

I am interested to know if the display can show the volume, as per Topping's DACs?

No, it reverts back to the sample rate after volume adjustment.

 

[respice finem]

I can't think of much reason for "overzealous" filters, other than artificially improving the distortion figures.

That said, hardly anyone older than 40 will be able to hear much above 15 kHz, and there isn't much in terms of music either in those regions.

https://external-preview.redd.it/h-M9EjIW2B0J1EX2w0Wo4fTRwznpLHnFFVExS8wZNvE.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=dc828d679d3fdc1a1523644c0646b82cd1fd94ba

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Normal-threshold-of-hearing-according-to-ISO-DIS-7029-as-a-function-of-age-for_fig1_308098090

 

[Nango]

Stellar performance from our friends from SMSL as always, congratulations, but, wait .....there is not a single one security certificate on the device ....?? Omg!!!

 

[Garrincha]

Appreciate the link. Does anyone else struggle to follow Z Reviews, well, reviews? Ishay okenspay ordway oftenyay oundssay ikelay alphabetyay oupsay ? Yet upon a second listen with Playback Speed @ half speed, well diggety-do, I "hoedoe hoedoo hoodoo" understand, sort of. "Hoe. It's a hoe, OK?" Huh?

I really like this guy. For sure he is no alternative to ASR, but from the bunch of the YouTube reviewers I have seen, he seems to be one of the most honest ones (I recommend his review of the Holo dac, really amusing)

 

[DSJR]

Of course the numbers are 'incredibly good' because the entire top of the audible spectrum is chopped off, along with its harmonics.

Default filter 1 is circa -12dB down @ 20kHz according to your AP plots... Not sure when that became remotely HiFi. Like, not ever. Certainly not in the digital era, or the open reel era, or even the cassette era.

Filter 3 is clearly the one you should be using for tests.

The last D/A converter you reviewed had the best filter response you've ever measured (the Chord) and yet this thing is getting top marks with arguably one of the worst default filters I've ever seen. Go figure. Where is the consistency?


Hardly. The default filter response (you used for testing) is poor and you know it.

Ummm - the basic spectrum analyser on Foobar tends to show not much is over 15khz on analogue recorded album transfers and commercial vinyl cuts would have little over 17kHz from the tape machine anyway due to wear (Decca used to wind the 15kHz test tones up on their Studers until they ran out of adjustment, only then sending the playback machines for head-lapping/replacement). Even modern squeaky-clean digital recodings only get the 20kHz strip moving a little.

As I crudely understand it, the 'beat or whatever harmonics' of very high frequency sounds (cymbals and so on) would be captured by the mic even if the recording medium didn't get the fundamentals... Mind you, Filter 3 'looks' best here for 16/44 use I think.

 

[HansHolland]

I like these kind of graphs:

From the manual of my RME ADI-2 DAC FS with AK4490.

It would be even better if a second graph showed it till around -130 dB.

Can we get this kind of graphs also here in ASR?

 

[sarumbear]

I can't think of much reason for "overzealous" filters, other than artificially improving the distortion figures.

That said, hardly anyone older than 40 will be able to hear much above 15 kHz, and there isn't much in terms of music either in those regions.

Isn’t that subjective?

 

[RHO]

I can't think of much reason for "overzealous" filters, other than artificially improving the distortion figures.

That said, hardly anyone older than 40 will be able to hear much above 15 kHz, and there isn't much in terms of music either in those regions.

https://external-preview.redd.it/h-M9EjIW2B0J1EX2w0Wo4fTRwznpLHnFFVExS8wZNvE.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=dc828d679d3fdc1a1523644c0646b82cd1fd94ba

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Normal-threshold-of-hearing-according-to-ISO-DIS-7029-as-a-function-of-age-for_fig1_308098090

I don't care too much how much I (me personally) would be able to hear the difference in filters. I care more about consistency in testing method for the sake of fair comparison between products.

 

[Balle Clorin]

Very good measurements is not the only factor for solid engineering IMHO. How does the device react to turning on/off, switches to different types of input 44.1 -> 48 kHz, 16 -> 24, DSD, PCM etc. without any pops are also signs of good engineering. It is even more important with streaming audio as big as it is nowadays, either from an ISP or locally.

That is exactly what I need to know before putting it between my streamer and Poweramp, it could be this or E50... but the DAC need to be free fromm any pop or click , I do not want to blow up my speakers

 

[dtaylo1066]

A bit over $200 now gets one stellar performance, balanced out and a remote. I would have never imagined such a thing 20 years ago. Hi-fi and TVs are two consumer items that get better and cheaper with each iteration.

 

[norcalscott]

I really like what SMSL are doing these days - having high quality, internal power supplies is a major plus in my opinion compared to other competitors.

 

[RedCometZero]

I've been using the equivalent of Filter 6 (Fast Linear) on my SU-9n, where it similarly cuts at 24kHz instead of 22.05kHz. At 44.1kHz sampling, like most of my music, shouldn't that dramatically worsen performance by letting a lot of out of band noise through the filter?

 

[tomli747]

I have just ordered a DO100, now I'm curious how their headphone amp HO100 performs.

 

[respice finem]

I don't care too much how much I (me personally) would be able to hear the difference in filters. I care more about consistency in testing method for the sake of fair comparison between products.

Certainly, it's better to have more data than less, and it probably would not be too much hassle.
Last but not least, it would show how much distortion "improvement" they can achieve.

One possible "side effect": some manufacturers might then be tempted to "play smart" and have just one filter - the "wrong" one.
Not only car manufacturers know how to "optimize" for testing...

 

[respice finem]

Isn’t that subjective?

Yes it is. We are people, not analyzers. What's objective about it is general treble hearing loss with age.