SMSL PL200T Review (CD Transport)

[Roland68]

Yes, that is during playback. It’s not a very loud “noise”, to be clear, but you can hear the transport working as described, up close.
The center puck, btw., seems not to be 100% perfectly centered. Don’t know, whether that might additionally introduce some unwanted vibrations as well.

Neither of those is correct. If it isn't running smoothly, that would explain the noise—it has to readjust every few rotations.
I would replace it or return it.

 

[dvdr]

Neither of those is correct. If it isn't running smoothly, that would explain the noise—it has to readjust every few rotations.
I would replace it or return it.

Thanks, @Roland68 , I sent the unit back to Amazon (Germany) and then ordered a new one, which came today.
This one is even worse! Tested it with various CDs, even new, mint ones:

• TOC read times are between 10 and 20 seconds, with clearly audible search noises - the first PL200T I had to send back had been super fast with the same tested CDs, about 2 - 3 seconds TOC read times.
• During playback, there now are constant transport and search noises - the servo motor unit constantly and extensively searches to stay on track. The first unit "only" had made these search noises every few seconds with the very same CDs, which was bad enough.
• Transport noises were much louder as well than with the first unit. Even with the lid closed, they were much more prominent
• When I switched on the unit, I already saw the sign for the external clock in the display - does the PL200T activate that setting in the options automatically, once it detects the presence of an external clock? If I remember correctly, I had to activate this manually with the first unit, going through the setup options. This time, the setup was already set to all the options I was aiming for.

Now I am in a bit of a pickle: Amazon cannot EXCHANGE the units, they always go through a refund and buy again process. So I asked for a refund, again, which I got.
Should I try a third time, risking another defective unit and Amazon then putting me on a "ban him"-list?

 

[Roland68]

Thanks, @Roland68 , I sent the unit back to Amazon (Germany) and then ordered a new one, which came today.
This one is even worse! Tested it with various CDs, even new, mint ones:

• TOC read times are between 10 and 20 seconds, with clearly audible search noises - the first PL200T I had to send back had been super fast with the same tested CDs, about 2 - 3 seconds TOC read times.
• During playback, there now are constant transport and search noises - the servo motor unit constantly and extensively searches to stay on track. The first unit "only" had made these search noises every few seconds with the very same CDs, which was bad enough.
• Transport noises were much louder as well than with the first unit. Even with the lid closed, they were much more prominent
• When I switched on the unit, I already saw the sign for the external clock in the display - does the PL200T activate that setting in the options automatically, once it detects the presence of an external clock? If I remember correctly, I had to activate this manually with the first unit, going through the setup options. This time, the setup was already set to all the options I was aiming for.

Now I am in a bit of a pickle: Amazon cannot EXCHANGE the units, they always go through a refund and buy again process. So I asked for a refund, again, which I got.
Should I try a third time, risking another defective unit and Amazon then putting me on a "ban him"-list?

That really is rather strange.
I haven't read much about problems with the PL200T so far, but you can never rule out defects or DOA (Dead on Arrival) units. It sucks that it happened to you twice, though that’s neither rare nor unusual (misery loves company, as they say).
If the settings weren't at default, you might have received a returned unit that had been repackaged to look new but had actually been sent back previously for the same issue.
I’d actually love to get my hands on a drive like that to analyze it.

But really, your only option is to return the drive as defective.

 

[sailor2005]

Thanks, @Roland68 , I sent the unit back to Amazon (Germany) and then ordered a new one, which came today.
This one is even worse! Tested it with various CDs, even new, mint ones:

• TOC read times are between 10 and 20 seconds, with clearly audible search noises - the first PL200T I had to send back had been super fast with the same tested CDs, about 2 - 3 seconds TOC read times.
• During playback, there now are constant transport and search noises - the servo motor unit constantly and extensively searches to stay on track. The first unit "only" had made these search noises every few seconds with the very same CDs, which was bad enough.
• Transport noises were much louder as well than with the first unit. Even with the lid closed, they were much more prominent
• When I switched on the unit, I already saw the sign for the external clock in the display - does the PL200T activate that setting in the options automatically, once it detects the presence of an external clock? If I remember correctly, I had to activate this manually with the first unit, going through the setup options. This time, the setup was already set to all the options I was aiming for.

Now I am in a bit of a pickle: Amazon cannot EXCHANGE the units, they always go through a refund and buy again process. So I asked for a refund, again, which I got.
Should I try a third time, risking another defective unit and Amazon then putting me on a "ban him"-list?

I have a few questions regarding your situation with this transport and the fact it happened twice. Different degrees but the same problem.
I assume you were using a external clock, at least you hinted about it. Were you using one? Which one? Was it set for 44k or 10Mhz on the transport?
Did you try the transport without the clock? And if so, did it have the same problem? Could you discard the clock as the source of the problem?
Were you using USB as power source? Did you try to use the transport as a DDC to check if there were another anomalies?
Did you try to contact SMSL? Did you check the firmware version? There is a new one.

I've had this transport since it started being sold. No problems at all. When I contacted SMSL for a question regarding MQA decoding, they answered in about a day and they even sent me a newer firmware for my issue.

 

[dvdr]

@sailor2005 Thanks for your questions, here are my answers:

All units were only powered via mains. First runs were always straight out of the box with no external clock and default configuration (of course, I crosschecked the settings for proper configuration).

I used several CDs, some from a new, pristine Deutsche Grammophon box set I just got, various standard ones from my collection, some extra high quality ones, all without scratches or other problems.

So I can first of all rule out the clock as the culprit. It‘s a Mutec Ref 10 Nano, which of course later on was used properly terminated, using 75 ohm Mogami cables. The Mutec also serves as a clock for my Gustard R30 DAC, my LAN switch and my SotM Roon bridge as well, btw.

Trying out the clock input, nothing changed as for the laser servo noises. TOC read times etc. were exactly the same as before on both units.

I also had tried the USB input with the first unit, which worked flawlessly via SOTM‘s Roon bridge and the I2S connection to my DAC, both with PCM and DSD.

I did a firmware update on the first unit with no changes as to it‘s laser servo behavior.

The second unit seemed to have already been configured for use with a 10MHz clock and 75 Ohm termination (first unit had a „straight internal / default“ configuration out of the box), so I also reset it to default. Still it had the more severe, constant servo noises I described in my above post. Because of that, I did not see any reason to perform a firmware upgrade, thinking a mechanical issue or a defocused laser might not be corrected by that.

I now am giving it a third try, but this time I ordered the PL200T from a different (of course official) dealer in the hope, that he might have a different batch in stock. Maybe I was just unlucky - I accept, that problems can happen and I had no problems whatsoever in returns/refund.

Let me make a final, but important remark. I never want to use a forum to talk bad about a brand or producer. I just want to seek help from people already having experiences with a certain gear. That’s also the reason, why I did some thorough testing, a firmware update and stick to the facts in describing the results of my tests in my post.
That’s also, why I’m glad, that you have asked specific questions to rule out possible errors via my side.

Of course, I contacted SMSL and am waiting for their answer - I am sure, they produce high class gear. Not having found any negative comments or apparent problems about their gear during my research for a solution speaks volumes about the quality of their products, imho.

 

[sailor2005]

@sailor2005 Thanks for your questions, here are my answers:

All units were only powered via mains. First runs were always straight out of the box with no external clock and default configuration (of course, I crosschecked the settings for proper configuration).

I used several CDs, some from a new, pristine Deutsche Grammophon box set I just got, various standard ones from my collection, some extra high quality ones, all without scratches or other problems.

So I can first of all rule out the clock as the culprit. It‘s a Mutec Ref 10 Nano, which of course later on was used properly terminated, using 75 ohm Mogami cables. The Mutec also serves as a clock for my Gustard R30 DAC, my LAN switch and my SotM Roon bridge as well, btw.

Trying out the clock input, nothing changed as for the laser servo noises. TOC read times etc. were exactly the same as before on both units.

I also had tried the USB input with the first unit, which worked flawlessly via SOTM‘s Roon bridge and the I2S connection to my DAC, both with PCM and DSD.

I did a firmware update on the first unit with no changes as to it‘s laser servo behavior.

The second unit seemed to have already been configured for use with a 10MHz clock and 75 Ohm termination (first unit had a „straight internal / default“ configuration out of the box), so I also reset it to default. Still it had the more severe, constant servo noises I described in my above post. Because of that, I did not see any reason to perform a firmware upgrade, thinking a mechanical issue or a defocused laser might not be corrected by that.

I now am giving it a third try, but this time I ordered the PL200T from a different (of course official) dealer in the hope, that he might have a different batch in stock. Maybe I was just unlucky - I accept, that problems can happen and I had no problems whatsoever in returns/refund.

Let me make a final, but important remark. I never want to use a forum to talk bad about a brand or producer. I just want to seek help from people already having experiences with a certain gear. That’s also the reason, why I did some thorough testing, a firmware update and stick to the facts in describing the results of my tests in my post.
That’s also, why I’m glad, that you have asked specific questions to rule out possible errors via my side.

Of course, I contacted SMSL and am waiting for their answer - I am sure, they produce high class gear. Not having found any negative comments or apparent problems about their gear during my research for a solution speaks volumes about the quality of their products, imho.

I never intended to imply you were badmouthing a manufacturer. If you have a bad experience, in your case 2, feel free to badmouth everywhere. I would!! In any case, the unit I got was from the SMSL online store.
And I asked the questions because you did not mention the specifics in you first post. Good luck with your third attempt.

 

[dvdr]

I never intended to imply you were badmouthing a manufacturer. If you have a bad experience, in your case 2, feel free to badmouth everywhere. I would!! In any case, the unit I got was from the SMSL online store.
And I asked the questions because you did not mention the specifics in you first post. Good luck with your third attempt.

My apologies if my answer came across this way!!! I did not assume in any way, that you were implying anything. I just wanted to give a most detailed answer - that’s why I said I was thankful that you asked some very specific questions.
Thanks for wishing me luck with my third attempt!

 

[antcollinet]

I now am giving it a third try

Good luck - hopefully third time lucky

 

[M.C. Logan]

But this behavior from SMSL seems very questionable to me.
Officially, Tidal hasn't offered MQA files for a year and a half, although some can still be found here and there.
Not many MQA files were sold, and even fewer CDs (my research once turned up a few hundred different MQA CDs, but I could be wrong).
Meanwhile, newer users in the forum are frequently asking about MQA again, seemingly unaware that it's long since been discontinued.

SMSL is advertising a technology that is now obsolete and practically unusable, quite apart from its usefulness.

Unless you have a stack of mqa CDs of course. Which some people, somewhere, almost certainly do. Horses for courses, added features which don't get in the way only broaden a market, e.g. I have exactly zero use for 12v triggers, HDMI ARC on a stereo amp, aes/ebu digital inputs, an inbuilt phono stage on an amp, an FM tuner on anything, WiFi on a streamer or amp, etc., but other people do.

 

[Roland68]

Unless you have a stack of mqa CDs of course. Which some people, somewhere, almost certainly do. Horses for courses, added features which don't get in the way only broaden a market, e.g. I have exactly zero use for 12v triggers, HDMI ARC on a stereo amp, aes/ebu digital inputs, an inbuilt phono stage on an amp, an FM tuner on anything, WiFi on a streamer or amp, etc., but other people do.

You’ve misunderstood me there.
Personally, I now consider the integration of MQA to be highly dubious. MQA faded away because it eventually became clear that it was nothing but hot air—all hype and no substance.
A group of us—engineers, sound technicians, musicians, and so on—once tried to determine whether MQA offered any actual benefits. We couldn't even manage to source comparable material with and without MQA, until we realized that this wasn't actually intended to be possible. A studio we were friendly with eventually created the necessary material for us from the same master—albeit unofficially.
In blind tests, it was absolutely impossible to detect any advantage to MQA. The MQA versions were either on par with the originals or inferior.
I haven't seen results from any reputable reviewer that indicated otherwise in blind tests.
After all, there are reasons why all the high-res labels, streaming platforms, and studios have emphatically distanced themselves from MQA.

 

[Bleib]

MQA support is often part of the DAC, it would be a bit silly to not implement it even though it's a dead format

 

[M.C. Logan]

You’ve misunderstood me there.
Personally, I now consider the integration of MQA to be highly dubious. MQA faded away because it eventually became clear that it was nothing but hot air—all hype and no substance.
A group of us—engineers, sound technicians, musicians, and so on—once tried to determine whether MQA offered any actual benefits. We couldn't even manage to source comparable material with and without MQA, until we realized that this wasn't actually intended to be possible. A studio we were friendly with eventually created the necessary material for us from the same master—albeit unofficially.
In blind tests, it was absolutely impossible to detect any advantage to MQA. The MQA versions were either on par with the originals or inferior.
I haven't seen results from any reputable reviewer that indicated otherwise in blind tests.
After all, there are reasons why all the high-res labels, streaming platforms, and studios have emphatically distanced themselves from MQA.

There are reasons, but financial ones, not opinions on the worth of the technology. Let's be honest, the vast majority of people can't tell between Redbook and any higher sampling rates or bit depths, you need either very good ears, very good transducers or both. I always felt the best part of mqa was proof of provenance.

 

[mirek3814]

I’ve just had a brief experience with this device. It’s attractive and handy – those are its only merits. The sound quality is very average. I compared it with a Cambridge CD transport a Pioneer DV-444 DVD player and Myrad Z110. In every case, the SMSL performed the worst. The sound was flat and plastic. I tested the SPDIF and AES outputs. I also connected a Mutec MC-3+ as a external clock and reclocker. It didn’t make much of a difference.

The DACs I tested this unit with were the DCS Bartok and the Audio Note 1 mk 2. I absolutely cannot recommend this unit.

 

[Jimi Floyd]

I’ve just had a brief experience with this device. It’s attractive and handy – those are its only merits. The sound quality is very average. I compared it with a Cambridge CD transport a Pioneer DV-444 DVD player and Myrad Z110. In every case, the SMSL performed the worst. The sound was flat and plastic. I tested the SPDIF and AES outputs. I also connected a Mutec MC-3+ as a external clock and reclocker. It didn’t make much of a difference.

The DACs I tested this unit with were the DCS Bartok and the Audio Note 1 mk 2. I absolutely cannot recommend this unit.

 

[Roland68]

I’ve just had a brief experience with this device. It’s attractive and handy – those are its only merits. The sound quality is very average. I compared it with a Cambridge CD transport a Pioneer DV-444 DVD player and Myrad Z110. In every case, the SMSL performed the worst. The sound was flat and plastic. I tested the SPDIF and AES outputs. I also connected a Mutec MC-3+ as a external clock and reclocker. It didn’t make much of a difference.

The DACs I tested this unit with were the DCS Bartok and the Audio Note 1 mk 2. I absolutely cannot recommend this unit.

You really ought to try some genuine blind tests—not ones where visual cues influence the outcome.
We compared the PL200T in a true blind test against the Cambridge Audio CXC, two high-end Esoteric transports, the current Teac transport, the Tascam CD200, a high-end Wadia transport, a C.E.C. unit, and two other devices in the four- and five-figure price range.
We also hosted audiophile guests on several occasions who swore up and down that they could easily distinguish the sonic differences between CD transports (in fact, they brought some of the listed devices themselves).
It’s utter nonsense. As long as the devices are functioning correctly, it is impossible to tell them apart in a blind test.
Those audiophile guests came up with all sorts of excuses for why they couldn't hear a difference during the blind test. We even repeated the test with two of them at their own homes using their own systems—with identical results.

 

[ivayvr]

I’ve just had a brief experience with this device. It’s attractive and handy – those are its only merits. The sound quality is very average. I compared it with a Cambridge CD transport a Pioneer DV-444 DVD player and Myrad Z110. In every case, the SMSL performed the worst. The sound was flat and plastic. I tested the SPDIF and AES outputs. I also connected a Mutec MC-3+ as a external clock and reclocker. It didn’t make much of a difference.

The DACs I tested this unit with were the DCS Bartok and the Audio Note 1 mk 2. I absolutely cannot recommend this unit.

I would hesitate to recommend any of the DACs you mentioned above.
You can achieve identical sound quality at the fraction of their prices.

 

[DavidM1]

Those audiophile guests came up with all sorts of excuses for why they couldn't hear a difference during the blind test. We even repeated the test with two of them at their own homes using their own systems—with identical results.

This reminds me of running a blind test as an undergrad decades ago, except in the opposite direction. The subjects had to taste wine samples and express a preference where “price” of each sample was the only information. All but one identified real differences and had strong opinions they resisted changing. However, for each subject the samples had been poured from the same bottle. My apologies if I’ve mentioned this experience before on this forum but posts come along that remind me of it so clearly.

 

[Roland68]

This reminds me of running a blind test as an undergrad decades ago, except in the opposite direction. The subjects had to taste wine samples and express a preference where “price” of each sample was the only information. All but one identified real differences and had strong opinions they resisted changing. However, for each subject the samples had been poured from the same bottle. My apologies if I’ve mentioned this experience before on this forum but posts come along that remind me of it so clearly.

We once developed a device (a photography station) for a company that regularly held wine competitions.
They would have several hundred wines tasted and rated under strictly blind conditions, then award prizes to the winners.
It came as no surprise to me to learn that so-called wine experts avoid these events like the plague.
There are likely reasons for that.

 

[EJ3]

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?

My big reason for purchase. A removable, semi transparent lid. The only thing better is a fully transparent lid.
I'm not prone to loosing parts that are not attached, my animals know better than to bother my gear (they don't like being squirted with water from a squirt gun while me yelling "Hey, stop that", for some reason) and my kid is 37 now. But even when he was a little kid, he new not to touch things that were not specifically his without permission. (That might have something to do with squirt guns and yelling: "Hey, stop that". too {and then gently but firmly explaining why).

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.

For all the benefits it has, I fully disagree with your stance.

 

[DavidM1]

For all the benefits it has, I fully disagree with your stance.

There is a lot of charm to having a device that measures so well. However, for transports I too lean towards lower prices.