SMSL M500 DAC and HP Amp Review

[Tinle142]

I have some experience to share during using M500. Currently, I am very stable in using all music formats, from 44.1khz to DSD 256. I first updated the USB firmware to 1.08, running it all week long. Use Jriver Media Center and adjust USB DAC ASIO, uncheck DSD bitstream in DoP format. Use XLR to output excellent quality RCA, than playing RCA to RCA port.

 

[Tinle142]

Audio device selects USB DAC [ASIO], Device Settings ...unchecks the: DSD bit stream in DoP format, Settings - Bitstreaming: Yes (DSD), Volume - Volume mode: Disable volume. Completing this section, playing DSD 256 very well, no problem tripping. The M500 offers great value for money and sound. The m500 plays very well and is stable on the Jriver Media Center, via USB 2.0 connection. Offer

 

[Laserjock]

I have some experience to share during using M500. Currently, I am very stable in using all music formats, from 44.1khz to DSD 256. I first updated the USB firmware to 1.08, running it all week long. Use Jriver Media Center and adjust USB DAC ASIO, uncheck DSD bitstream in DoP format. Use XLR to output excellent quality RCA, than playing RCA to RCA port.

Don’t Love Me At Break Time

 

[aurum]

No measurements here, please don't shoot me. Have had the M500 for a week now, and tried it in various configurations. The TL;DR version is: Sounds best in the following config: FLAC/ Qobuz -> Roon (ROCK) -> Node2i (Ethernet) -> Coax -> M500 -> Amp. Every configuration where one of the upstream elements is changed sounds slightly worse in my (and my 10 yo daughters) opinion. So here goes:

1. FLAC/ Qobuz vs Tidal (MQA) - Tidal MQA can only be played via a USB connection on the M500. Initially, my Roon Core was on a QNAP NAS, and I just couldn't get MQA to work via USB. Roon recognized it as an MQA enabled DAC, but no MQA album played. This was only an issue with MQA files, not with others, probably due to an issue with drivers. Luckily, I had an old Chromebox lying around which I was using earlier as a Roon Optimized Core Kit (ROCK). When I revived that and connected the DAC to it, MQA files started playing. Now I had the option of comparing Tidal MQA with Qobuz high-res.

Consistently, and I mean consistently, when my daughter and I would play the same song in 3 ways (blind to the other person) - Tidal MQA (USB), Qobuz High-res (USB), and Qobuz High-res (Coaxial via Node 2i) - the Tidal MQA would always rate at the bottom. It was much closer between the other two (sometimes indistinguishable). Qobuz via USB, on a rare occasion would trump the coax via Node 2i, which usually came out on top. This was not what I expected (or why I bought the M500). If you had asked me at the outset for my predictions, I would have said Tidal (MQA) > Qobuz (USB) > Qobuz (via Node 2i). Its only now that I am reading up more to understand why the outcome is the exact opposite. Obviously this is subjective, but I know what I like, and my daughter definitely knows what she likes .

2. Roon on QNAP NAS vs Chromebox (ROCK) - Beware! Roon on the QNAP NAS is useless if you want to use the M500 for Tidal MQA. I was lucky that I had the Chromebox lying around. However, now that Qobuz high-res seems to be a better sounding outcome, it doesnt matter.

3. Direct USB vs Node 2i (Coaxial) - This one is strange to me. The difference is really, really small (if there is one). However, on 5 of the 6 songs we compared, the coaxial sounded slightly better than the USB. Is the Ethernet transport making the difference?

4. Coax vs Optical - Again, very small difference (nearly indistinguishable?), but we got the feeling that Coax sounded slightly better.

The Apodizing filter was on during all the above tests. Overall, the difference between Tidal vs Qobuz was more apparent than the differences between transport modes (USB, coax, optical).

 

[Shoaibexpert]

I have some experience to share during using M500. Currently, I am very stable in using all music formats, from 44.1khz to DSD 256. I first updated the USB firmware to 1.08, running it all week long. Use Jriver Media Center and adjust USB DAC ASIO, uncheck DSD bitstream in DoP format. Use XLR to output excellent quality RCA, than playing RCA to RCA port.

Ah! the AuCharm cable...starange looking XLRs though! Glad youre having a good time with the M500. Is Jriver good for streaming...

 

[Shoaibexpert]

This was only an issue with MQA files, not with others,

Tidal MQA would always rate at the bottom. It was much closer between the other two (sometimes indistinguishable).

Apodizing filter was on during all the above tests

Thanks for the comment. So, with reference to above observations, firstly playing MQA via M500 disables the Filters (Apodizing in your case) - this obviously is only applicable to the USB mode. The remaining 2 sources would then sound indistinguishable as you've observed. It may just be that you guys like the Apodizing filter effect like me and that may downgrade Tidal MQA rendering in your perception.

difference between Tidal vs Qobuz was more apparent

Yup, that too! You were comparing 2 different services with 3 different sources...there's bound to be noticeable variations.

Not saying the M500 or Tidal is a perfect combo but most of this, as you've already said is subjective. Btw if you haven't...do update the SW for M500...

 

[Tinle142]

I often use Jriver to play CD RIP or Hi-res, DSD files, on my laptop. Great sound quality!

 

[Tinle142]

Yes, Auchram USB. The brand of DNM signal wire used to make XLR to RCA is great, or much better than RCA to RCA.

 

[dieselmilk]

No measurements here, please don't shoot me. Have had the M500 for a week now, and tried it in various configurations. The TL;DR version is: Sounds best in the following config: FLAC/ Qobuz -> Roon (ROCK) -> Node2i (Ethernet) -> Coax -> M500 -> Amp. Every configuration where one of the upstream elements is changed sounds slightly worse in my (and my 10 yo daughters) opinion. So here goes:

1. FLAC/ Qobuz vs Tidal (MQA) - Tidal MQA can only be played via a USB connection on the M500. Initially, my Roon Core was on a QNAP NAS, and I just couldn't get MQA to work via USB. Roon recognized it as an MQA enabled DAC, but no MQA album played. This was only an issue with MQA files, not with others, probably due to an issue with drivers. Luckily, I had an old Chromebox lying around which I was using earlier as a Roon Optimized Core Kit (ROCK). When I revived that and connected the DAC to it, MQA files started playing. Now I had the option of comparing Tidal MQA with Qobuz high-res.

Consistently, and I mean consistently, when my daughter and I would play the same song in 3 ways (blind to the other person) - Tidal MQA (USB), Qobuz High-res (USB), and Qobuz High-res (Coaxial via Node 2i) - the Tidal MQA would always rate at the bottom. It was much closer between the other two (sometimes indistinguishable). Qobuz via USB, on a rare occasion would trump the coax via Node 2i, which usually came out on top. This was not what I expected (or why I bought the M500). If you had asked me at the outset for my predictions, I would have said Tidal (MQA) > Qobuz (USB) > Qobuz (via Node 2i). Its only now that I am reading up more to understand why the outcome is the exact opposite. Obviously this is subjective, but I know what I like, and my daughter definitely knows what she likes .

2. Roon on QNAP NAS vs Chromebox (ROCK) - Beware! Roon on the QNAP NAS is useless if you want to use the M500 for Tidal MQA. I was lucky that I had the Chromebox lying around. However, now that Qobuz high-res seems to be a better sounding outcome, it doesnt matter.

3. Direct USB vs Node 2i (Coaxial) - This one is strange to me. The difference is really, really small (if there is one). However, on 5 of the 6 songs we compared, the coaxial sounded slightly better than the USB. Is the Ethernet transport making the difference?

4. Coax vs Optical - Again, very small difference (nearly indistinguishable?), but we got the feeling that Coax sounded slightly better.

The Apodizing filter was on during all the above tests. Overall, the difference between Tidal vs Qobuz was more apparent than the differences between transport modes (USB, coax, optical).

lol

 

[aurum]

Thanks for the comment. So, with reference to above observations, firstly playing MQA via M500 disables the Filters (Apodizing in your case) - this obviously is only applicable to the USB mode. The remaining 2 sources would then sound indistinguishable as you've observed. It may just be that you guys like the Apodizing filter effect like me and that may downgrade Tidal MQA rendering in your perception.


Yup, that too! You were comparing 2 different services with 3 different sources...there's bound to be noticeable variations.

Not saying the M500 or Tidal is a perfect combo but most of this, as you've already said is subjective. Btw if you haven't...do update the SW for M500...

You make an interesting point here. What's missing in this comparison is what Tidal would sound like if passed through the Apodizing filter. We didn't do that because we assumed that MQA would be superior. In Roon, let me configure the M500 as having no MQA support and then see how it sounds.

My USB firmware is already updated to 1.08, if thats what you meant.

 

[osasglo]

Hi guys! I just noticed things sound better when I use an optical connection from my PC to the M500 instead of a usb cable. I have the M500 hooked up to an Archel 2.5 Pro thats driving my HD 800s, anyone have a similar experience and know why thats the case? Its disappointing cause MQA can't be decoded via the optical connection.

 

[Shoaibexpert]

Hi guys! I just noticed things sound better when I use an optical connection from my PC to the M500 instead of a usb cable. I have the M500 hooked up to an Archel 2.5 Pro thats driving my HD 800s, anyone have a similar experience and know why thats the case? Its disappointing cause MQA can't be decoded via the optical connection.

What specific change over the USB do you observe? Ive got my M500 connected via USB and Chromecast Audio via Optical...I felt optical is sounding thinner...cleaner (maybe, I know very subjective) but at the same time sounding less fuller when compared to USB. Plus, one loses out on the EQing...

 

[osasglo]

What specific change over the USB do you observe? Ive got my M500 connected via USB and Chromecast Audio via Optical...I felt optical is sounding thinner...cleaner (maybe, I know very subjective) but at the same time sounding less fuller when compared to USB. Plus, one loses out on the EQing...

With my experience, with optical its actually fuller are more refined. I use Tidal and enable exclusive mode, its makes things louder, with Tidal exclusive mode usb acutally sounds louder but optical is just richer. I really hear the difference now that I switched to optical even in games, I hear everything now.

 

[Veri]

Use XLR to output excellent quality RCA, than playing RCA to RCA port.

That doesn't make any sense. Going XLR to RCA drops half the output voltage, uses only one of two signal pins, worst case even shorts 1 pin. Now guess what the wiring inside the DAC does to go single ended from balanced? wired over 1 pin ..... same thing

Some people really think they're re-inventing the wheel XLR to RCA is rather pointless. RCA to XLR can sometimes have slight benefit in noise in pseudo-balanced configuration.

 

[BDWoody]

...I felt optical is sounding thinner...cleaner (maybe, I know very subjective) but at the same time sounding less fuller when compared to USB.

With my experience, with optical its actually fuller are more refined.

And this is what happens with no listening controls...

 

[Satori]

New member of ASR and new owner of the SMSL M500. First, thanks amirm for all of your effort with your review and testing. Reading through this thread definitely pushed me towards purchasing the M500.

I use the M500 as a DAC only for a 2.1 setup. My equipment is a Parasound P5 preamp and Parasound A23 Amp. In the past I used the built in DAC on the P5.

I'm currently using the XLR outputs from the M500 to the P5 preamp. My question is about the volume level on the M500. I've read through the entire thread and I've seen some reference to volume level 34 on the M500 as an ideal setting with XLR output- but with my setup, it seems far too loud. I've had the P5/A23 combo for several years so I'm very familiar with the gain/volume. I've currently got the M500 volume set at 25 which seems to best match the gain/volume of my previous setup.

My question is am I losing any sound quality by setting the volume lower than suggest on the M500? - or does it not matter where I have the M500 volume set when using it as a DAC only?

Input from any member is appreciated. Thank you!

 

[Jimbob54]

New member of ASR and new owner of the SMSL M500. First, thanks amirm for all of your effort with your review and testing. Reading through this thread definitely pushed me towards purchasing the M500.

I use the M500 as a DAC only for a 2.1 setup. My equipment is a Parasound P5 preamp and Parasound A23 Amp. In the past I used the built in DAC on the P5.

I'm currently using the XLR outputs from the M500 to the P5 preamp. My question is about the volume level on the M500. I've read through the entire thread and I've seen some reference to volume level 34 on the M500 as an ideal setting with XLR output- but with my setup, it seems far too loud. I've had the P5/A23 combo for several years so I'm very familiar with the gain/volume. I've currently got the M500 volume set at 25 which seems to best match the gain/volume of my previous setup.

My question is am I losing any sound quality by setting the volume lower than suggest on the M500? - or does it not matter where I have the M500 volume set when using it as a DAC only?

Input from any member is appreciated. Thank you!

Believe 34 volume on xlr outputs refers to the level at which its outputting 4 volts. Don't believe this was suggested as being the "optimum" setting. Are you happy with the sound at 25? If so, thats the best for you with other equipment! I find 30 to 34 via XLR is where I set it for use across my range of headphone amps.

If I recall, the digital volume on the DAC is claimed to not lose any fidelity but members with a proper understanding of this might say you're truncating the bits. Again, if you're happy with the sound at 25 and any higher loses you the headroom flexibility on preamp, why worry?

 

[dieselmilk]

New member of ASR and new owner of the SMSL M500. First, thanks amirm for all of your effort with your review and testing. Reading through this thread definitely pushed me towards purchasing the M500.

I use the M500 as a DAC only for a 2.1 setup. My equipment is a Parasound P5 preamp and Parasound A23 Amp. In the past I used the built in DAC on the P5.

I'm currently using the XLR outputs from the M500 to the P5 preamp. My question is about the volume level on the M500. I've read through the entire thread and I've seen some reference to volume level 34 on the M500 as an ideal setting with XLR output- but with my setup, it seems far too loud. I've had the P5/A23 combo for several years so I'm very familiar with the gain/volume. I've currently got the M500 volume set at 25 which seems to best match the gain/volume of my previous setup.

My question is am I losing any sound quality by setting the volume lower than suggest on the M500? - or does it not matter where I have the M500 volume set when using it as a DAC only?

Input from any member is appreciated. Thank you!

I run mine rca into a preamp and leave it at 30. I never like to run anything at max and this sounds nice to me. Doubtful I could tell between 25 and 30, it's just the number that felt good to stick with. I could be a psychopath and set it at 29 but that would bug the hell out of me.

 

[osasglo]

And this is what happens with no listening controls...

Can someone please investigate this issue with some listening controls

 

[BDWoody]

Can someone please investigate this issue with some listening controls

That would be your job...

Get a friend and set up a double blind test. It will tell you everything you need to know.