• Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

SMSL PL200T Review (CD Transport)

Rate this CD Transport

  • Terrible (*)

    Votes: 1 0.9%
  • Mediocre (**)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Good (***)

    Votes: 25 22.9%
  • Excellent (****)

    Votes: 83 76.1%

  • Total voters
    109

NTTY

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Reviewer
Joined
Apr 27, 2018
Messages
1,129
Likes
6,403
Location
Switzerland
Hello Everyone,

This is a review and details measurements of the SMSL PL200T CD Player and Transport.
It was kindly sent to me by Aoshidaudio.com.

SMSL PL200T_001.jpg



SMSL PL200T - Presentation

I already reviewed the SMSL PL200 which is nearly the same, having an internal DAC on top. This is the transport version called PL200T, that adds HDMI and AES/EBU digital outputs, as well as a word clock input for roughly $170 less.

SMSL PL200T_002.jpg


We also get a USB input, as you can see, so it can be used as a Digital-to-Digital Converter (DDC) from the USB to other digital outputs, in case you want to use an older DAC that does not offer a USB input, or for other purposes.

The other change is the partially transparent lid:

SMSL PL200T_005.jpg


The SMSL PL200T can still be operated without it, by pressing 2sec on the play button. I must admit this is better that the full aluminum one of the PL200, but it is prone to leave visible fingerprints.

Rest is the same as the PL200, the mechanism is equally fast and it is a little transport, pleasant to use.

SMSL talks about an improved clock too, and the PL200 was precise at -4.5ppm, we’ll see if this one does better.


User experience

In my recent reviews, I starter talking about the user experience, so I'll continue. But for this one, allow me to simply copy/paste from the PL200, since it is the same drive and same feedback I have:
  • It can play a CD with the top cover removed provided you press "Play" for 2 seconds.
  • It's fast at reading the TOC of my 40 tracks test CD (less that 2 seconds as per the above)
  • It will play on the side, which is funny
  • It's nice to see the disc rotating, really
  • Skipping a track is way faster than most modern players, I like it
  • FFW and REW are fast too
  • The buttons are a bit too narrow for my fingers, but they react well
  • The laser head is noisy when going from the last track to the first one
  • It is gapless playback compatible

SMSL PL200T - Measurements (Optical Out)

As a transport I only have the digital output to measure to verify it is "bit perfect". I did the same tests from the SMSL PL200, and no surprise this one performs flawlessly the same way.

This is my standard 999.91Hz test tone @0dBFS (without dither):

1761926659108.png


It is the same as the digital WAV source file that was burnt on the test CD.

Same with the good old 3DC test from Stereophile (undithered 997Hz sine at -90.31dBFS. With 16bits, the signal should appear (on a scope) as the 3DC levels of the smallest symmetrical sign magnitude digital signal):

SMSL PL200T_3DC.jpg


It is the expected square view that we want to see, with Gibbs Phenomenon showing itself. That means no modification of the digital signal.

One update that SMSL advertise is the precision of the clock which I can tell is probably the most stable one I measured so far. It is actually better that what I can measure with my standard test, showing no deviation. The test is based on a 19'997.00Hz test tone and I verify the replay, which is a very precise ultra-stable 19'997.00Hz. That means it is better than 1ppm.

1761927203368.png


And actually, this view is made from a 128k FFT length averaged 32 times. So if the clock would have a tiny deviation, it would generated windowing errors and prevent me from capturing the above. This test is performed leaving the clock of the Player free running, as opposed to forcing the resync option that I usually have to use to capture such beautiful traces.

Of course, jitter is absent:

1761927525951.png


In the end, my ultimate proof of "perfect" digital output is when I reuse the intersample overs test at 5512.50Hz, with a phase shift of 67.5°, like I did for the TASCAM CD-200 review. This signal generates an overshoot of +0.69dB and so if the signal would be modified before being sent, it would show either a reduction of amplitude or we'd see some sort of saturation/increase noise/distortion. So here we go:

1761926915898.png


No changes when compared with the WAV file, again.

So we get a perfect transport.


SMLS PL200T - USB-DDC Measurements

I briefly tested the USB Digital-to-Digital Converter (DDC) function, feeding if from my computer and using its Optical output that was feeding an SMSL D200. It had no issue to quickly lock with sampling rates from 44.1kHz to 192kHz (and all in between).

This is my standard 999.91Hz test tone @0dBFS feeding an SMSL D200 at a sampling rate of 192kHz:

1762078061196.png


These are the results I obtained directly feeding the D200, when I reviewed it. So that means you can trust the quality of the DDC.


SMLS PL200T - Testing the drive

What would be good measurements if the drive would not properly read a slightly scratched CD, or one that was created at the limits of the norm? The below tests reply to these questions.

Here are the results:

Test typeTechnical testResults
Variation of linear cutting velocityFrom 1.20m/s to 1.40m/sPass
Variation of track pitchFrom 1.5µm to 1.7µmPass
Combined variations of track pitch and velocityFrom 1.20m/s & 1.5µm to 1.40m/s & 1.7µmPass
HF detection (asymmetry pitch/flat ratio)Variation from 2% to 18%Pass
Dropouts resistanceFrom 0.05mm (0.038ms) to 4mm (3.080ms)2mm
Combined dropouts and smallest pitchFrom 1.5µm & 1mm to 1.5µm & 2.4mm1.5mm
Successive dropoutsFrom 2x0.1mm to 2x3mm2.4mm

The above are very good results, although not repeating the excellence of the OPPO BDP-95. They are actually exactly the same as the PL200, without surprise since they share the same drive.
As with the PL200 these results are unusual for that they vary, while usually I would see a 2mm resistance everywhere. I think this little drawdown is what it takes to be so fast for a modern player. In that area, the OPPO is nothing else but ashamed. Choose your camp.


SMSL PL200T - Conclusion

This is a very nice transport and the price saved for not having an internal DAC might satisfy more of you, compared to the PL200.

The PL200T did the same as the PL200, per my digital measurements, and did better on the clock precision (the SMSL PL200 was at -4.5ppm, while this one is way below 1ppm). Their respective drives are the same and I measured the same mechanical resistance to faulty CDs, which means they are consistent and that is good news too.

My intention was to check the clock input, using an external one, but the internal one being so good, I need to find a refined way to test it, if I can!

Important note: I don’t think it outputs the pre-emphasis flag in SPDIF outputs, but I need to run complementary tests to confirm.

I hope you enjoyed this short review.

Happy Halloween!

PS: If you want me to test other features, feel free to ask since it will stay on the test bench for the weekend ;)
 
Last edited:
That clock oscillator is spooky good. I want one in my cd player. I'm a little confused when you say, you leave the clock running, I'm assuming there would be zero deviation for a complete cd.
 
So, from the perspective of pure CD digital output alone, is the premium of the PL200T compared to the PL150 justified?
My question too. Doesn't seem any different for most uses. I've been thinking of picking up a PL150 for my office.
 
My question too. Doesn't seem any different for most uses. I've been thinking of picking up a PL150 for my office.
Of course, for a top-of-the-line CD player, the PL200T is still quite affordable; I used to often see pure CD players priced between $1000 and $2500.
 
Do you suspect/expect coax, AES, and I2S to perform the same?

Very much appreciate the review! I think I’m going to get this one.
 
Last edited:
I love its style, especially the vintage looking tape-player-like buttons, really cool. Chinese hifi getting more sexy everyday.
Edit: 550€. Ouch. Wasn't expecting that kind of price.
 
Last edited:
I love its style, especially the vintage looking tape-player-like buttons, really cool. Chinese hifi getting more sexy everyday.
Edit: 550€. Ouch. Wasn't expecting that kind of price.
The PL100 and PL150 are MUCH cheaper. Fewer digital options but they have solid DACs and analog out.
 
One update that SMSL advertise is the precision of the clock which I can tell is probably the most stable one I measured so far. It is actually better that what I can measure with my standard test, showing no deviation. The test is based on a 19'997.00Hz test tone and I verify the replay, which is a very precise ultra-stable 19'997.00Hz. That means it is better than 1ppm.
how did you measure that it was this accurate? If you digitally go to your tester its obvious it will be exact as that device will label it as 44100.0000 sample rate..
 
That clock oscillator is spooky good. I want one in my cd player. I'm a little confused when you say, you leave the clock running, I'm assuming there would be zero deviation for a complete cd.
Lets await the answer on my post on this. I expect it needs to be redone
 
The PL100 and PL150 are MUCH cheaper. Fewer digital options but they have solid DACs and analog out.

I am inclined to agree. About 6 months ago I managed (several months wait) to pick up a PL100, just for transport.

So now I'm seeking PL150. Just because. I have no need for all the extra bits.

edit - and now I read from the PL150 review - "Similar to the PL100, the traces are the same. Long story short: This is a "perfect" transport."

Cool. A PL150 is now ordered.
 
Last edited:
So, from the perspective of pure CD digital output alone, is the premium of the PL200T compared to the PL150 justified?
You only get a more precise clock but the one of the PL150 was already more than enough, and you get better resistance to successive dropouts, that is all.
 
A lid. It has a lid. A removable lid.

What imbecile designed that? Some buffoon who likes cookie jars? Was he blue? One-handed, leaves crumbs everywhere?
 
how did you measure that it was this accurate? If you digitally go to your tester its obvious it will be exact as that device will label it as 44100.0000 sample rate..
From analog outputs, I measure with a test tone of 19'997.00Hz, and that is a pitch error test inspired from the CBS CD1 test CD. I process the result as shown in the below table:

1761996044478.png


From digital output I would have to use an external DAC that I know to be better than 1ppm, and look at what at the resulting pitch error transitioning via the SPDIF.

But with interface I use, I can let it run free from optical input sync and I see the live variances from the source. So, with the test tone at 19'997.00Hz, I should always get this:

1761996284062.png


But when the clock of the source is less precise than 1ppm, then I see that type of deviation:

1761996342285.png


It also generates windowing errors, as you can see.

The SMLS PL200T offers a clock better than 1ppm because it constantly outputs 19'997.00Hz, even if I average long term.
 
Last edited:
From analog outputs, I measure like this (with a test tone of 19'997.00Hz, pitch error test inspired from the CBS CD1 test CD):
View attachment 487077

From digital output I would have to use an external DAC that I know to be better than 1ppm and look at what at the resulting pitch error transitioning via the SPDIF.

But with the interface I use, I can let it run free and I see the live variances from the source. So, with the test tone at 19'997.00Hz, I should always get this:

View attachment 487078

But when the clock of the source is less precise than 1ppm, then I see that type of deviation:

View attachment 487081

It also generates windowing errors, as you can see.

The SMLS PL200T offers a clock better than 1ppm because it constantly output 19'997.00Hz, even if I average long term.
Nice, so your sampling clock is also more accurate than 1ppm then
 
That's still a lot of money for a CD transport you know. Selling via a dealer with their margin added on top, the price is pushing a grand very hard!
That price already includes dealer margins, platform fees, etc. The player is sold worldwide through a dealer network.
Depending on the country, it might be offered at a lower price, for example, due to the absence of or lower sales tax.
 
Back
Top Bottom