SMSL PL100 Review (CD Player)

[Tell]

PL150 looks nicer
View attachment 471728
View attachment 471729

Wow this looks MUCH nicer than the toylike PL100! Too bad it also costs more for that better design and a remote (and "better sound" apparently).

 

[Bleib]

Wow this looks MUCH nicer than the toylike PL100! Too bad it also costs more for that better design and a remote (and "better sound" apparently).

Both have remote controls. It's about 40 USD more..150 is quite a bit wider. 100 is more desktop size.
Both are likely transparent, maybe the new one is improved when it comes to jitter, the DAC is still CS but not the same chip.
Headphone output is on the front on the 150 which makes a lot more sense

 

[TurtlePaul]

Both are likely transparent, maybe the new one is improved when it comes to jitter, the DAC is still CS but not the same chip.

Both use CS431xx chips. That is the problem. You can see the bands around the fundamental in the multi-tone test which leads me to believe these both have the DRE problem. This problem has been shown to not be audibly transparent. I hope the reviewer starts to add an IMD vs. level sweep to future reviews.

 

[Vini darko]

Thanks for the review. Had one of these for a couple of months now. It's been very good as a transport in my main system. Also occasional trips to the garden on battery power with headphones. The remote works good , drive is quiet in use (a couple of discs are noisy for some reason , unbalaced manufacture?). Overall very happy with it.

 

[DavidM1]

I would say that updating the firmware to 1.1 was a major pain in the ass tho..

Firmware update? Nothing on the SMSL site.

 

[VientoB]

PL150 looks nicer
View attachment 471728
View attachment 471729

That does look good. Any differences internally?

 

[Bleib]

Firmware update? Nothing on the SMSL site.

SMSL are poor at updating their website. The 1.1 for this DAC was found in the PL100 topic... I upgraded after som help from a forum member

 

[NTTY]

SMSL are poor at updating their website. The 1.1 for this DAC was found in the PL100 topic... I upgraded after som help from a forum member

if you have a link to that thread, I can give it a try. I guess you had to burn a CD with the firmware, right?

 

[Berwhale]

if you have a link to that h’thread, I can give it a try.

Firmware discussion starts from here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...l100-cd-player-£110.59679/page-8#post-2255348

 

[Berwhale]

Now i'm wondering if I should have bought the PL150! However, the PL150 is a bit wider and may not fit on my rack (the gap between the pillars is 205mm and the PL150 205mm wide).

 

[Robin L]

Thanks for the review. Had one of these for a couple of months now. It's been very good as a transport in my main system. Also occasional trips to the garden on battery power with headphones. The remote works good , drive is quiet in use (a couple of discs are noisy for some reason , unbalaced manufacture?). Overall very happy with it.

I've run across a couple of CDs that make low-level scraping sounds while playing. I chalk that up to the disc being manufactured just a little out of tolerance.

I'm very impressed by this player's measurements as a transport, though I wonder if that level of performance goes beyond anything we can hear.

 

[NTTY]

Firmware discussion starts from here: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/smsl-vmv-pl100-cd-player-£110.59679/page-8#post-2255348

Thanks, I did like you recommended. I log here for potential future use:

First, verify if you have V1.1 already installed:

Connect the SMSL PL100 to power source and check that v1.1 shows on the screen at startup (see picture below).

Else you can go for the SMSL PL100 Firmware update:

1. Extract the zip SMSL_PL100_Firmware_Update.Zip
2. Run ispV2.4, it starts
3. Set IAP and 115200 at the top right
4. Go to "File->Open" and load IAP_PL100_1v1_b250219.hex (it takes up to 30sec, Code Size and ChekcSum will be updated)
5. Held in the stop button as you connect the SMSL PL100 to your computer, using a USB cable, screen of the SMSL stays off
6. Go to "Options->connect" in ispV2.4, connection is established between the PC and the PL100
7. Push the button "Start Program", wait for 30 seconds or so (progress bar at the bottom) until the log screen shows "Program Successful"
8. You can disconnect in IAP and disconnect the SMLS from the computer
9. Connect the SMSL PL100 to power source again and check that v1.1 shows on the screen

Now, that did not change anything to the problems I spotted. Maybe mine already had V1.1 (I did not check first, stupid me )

EDIT: Firmware update and procedure attached. Please note the below:
>Unzip and read the Reame.txt first
>This update procedure is NOT from SMSL
>Understand that you run it under your own supervision and responsibility
>No support will be provided on this procedure
>Should it negatively impact your device, we reject responsibility
>If you are not comfortable with the provided instructions, please don't go for this update

 

[Michou]

Why?
I would say that updating the firmware to 1.1 was a major pain in the ass tho..

Out of curiosity, do you happen to know what the 1.1 firmware actually brings to the table? I’m wondering whether it introduces any meaningful improvements—like bug fixes, stability tweaks, or performance optimizations—or if it’s just minor under-the-hood changes. Would be good to know if it’s worth the hassle of upgrading or better to stick with the current version. Best,

 

[Bleib]

Out of curiosity, do you happen to know what the 1.1 firmware actually brings to the table? I’m wondering whether it introduces any meaningful improvements—like bug fixes, stability tweaks, or performance optimizations—or if it’s just minor under-the-hood changes. Would be good to know if it’s worth the hassle of upgrading or better to stick with the current version. Best,

No, no idea. I didn't notice any difference either.
Not only are they bad at uploading their own firmwares on their own website, they tend to not write firmware changes either.
In many cases the firmware apps with SMSL have only been Chinese only, and it's not possible to copy the text to an online translator making it a difficult process.
RAW MDA1 DAC was easy though

Now i'm wondering if I should have bought the PL150! However, the PL150 is a bit wider and may not fit on my rack (the gap between the pillars is 205mm and the PL150 205mm wide).

If you had purchased PL150 you could have placed the DAC in the middle and the cd-player on the top

 

[jkim]

This is a great review as always.

It is unfortunate to see quite a few devices with a DAC component these days, whether it is a pure DAC, DAC/HP combo, DAP, streamer, or CD player, keep adopting the Cirrus Logic CS431xx chip without modifying the chip's default DRE-related parameter settings. The reason for choosing CS431xx is obvious: high performance (when measured with a conventional measurement package) at low cost.

As discussed in my review (and its thread), the audibility of DRE-induced distortion artifacts depends on some factors. Although easily masked by audio content, it is most noticeable when audio consists of somewhat complex low-frequency signals with not much high-frequency content. Another factor is the input signal level. CS431xx in a CD player is a less audible application because the signal is not digitally lowered like DAC/HP amp combo devices. Still, it can be borderline audible. I believe a good test signal in a test CD is @danadam's C Major chord in just intonation (see here). Spectrogram analyses will be ideal, but regular FFT analyses can also be used (although there's an exception; see Part II of my review). Capturing responses in FFTs to the C Major chord at -16, -20, and -30 dBFS (not peak levels but RMS levels like in REW signal generator) will be adequate to show DRE artifacts in most devices employing CS431xx.

 

[NTTY]

I hope the reviewer starts to add an IMD vs. level sweep to future reviews.

I don’t know how to do that with REW and the CD player acting as the generator, since I can’t sync them.

 

[TurtlePaul]

This is a great review as always.

It is unfortunate to see most devices with a DAC component these days, whether it is a pure DAC, DAC/HP combo, DAP, streamer, or CD player, keep adopting the Cirrus Logic CS431xx chip without modifying the chip's default DRE-related parameter settings. The reason for choosing CS431xx is obvious: high performance (when measured with a conventional measurement package) at low cost.

FYI, the PL100 was released in 2024. So I suspect that the timing was well before DRE problems were discovered.

Outside of a few brands (Benchmark, Topping, RME are exceptions), I think that most brands do the default circuit routing and firmware and sign off on the design if they get a >100 dB SINAD dashboard.

 

[TurtlePaul]

I don’t know how to do that with REW and the CD player acting as the generator, since I can’t sync them.

jkim was also able to demonstrate by running multitone at various volume levels, so maybe that is a possible solution.

 

[NTTY]

jkim was also able to demonstrate by running multitone at various volume levels, so maybe that is a possible solution.

Yes it would be. It seems a Multitone at -20dB reveals the issue. I could easily include that.

 

[Jcrow]

I was interested in this one, but the design of the thing really put me off. If SMSL had just made it a silver face plate it, I think it would've been a no brainer. Looks like a cheapo product from 2005 as is. Hard to argue with the value of the thing, I suppose.