• 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
i do. and at this price range, i expect more useful features than 37$ DDC addition (cost of PO100 2024).
sound wise, i seriously doubt anyone could tell the difference between the PL200T and PL150 connected as transport
When two products have similar performances, remains the functionalities and look, among other considerations, to make a difference for the customer.
At least we don’t pay more to get less with this one.
 
I didn't think people ever cared much about CD Text. I've had some players that had the feature but never really deemed it necessary, because 99% of the time I know what song is playing without it.
Many labels did not, at least.

CD TEXT appeared at the end of the 90s, and if Sony and its subsidiaries adopted it, I don’t think the adoption became universal. So a LOT of CDs don’t have it.

I can’t recall if this was done under licensing agreements with Sony and Philips, but I remember some players being more expensive, yet only offering CD TEXT on top (eg Denon DCD-655 vs DCD-755AR). At least many budget CD Players avoided the design complexities and associated costs.

The use case was limited at the time (probably cool in cars, or with carousel CD Players), and since you can simply Shazam it today, besides indeed knowing what disc you put in the player, and provided you can see anything of the small display from a distance, my guess is that today’s use is close to 0.
 
Does somebody know how those MQA marks can be erased from the unit leaving no trace? Thank you in advance.
Hi Jimi,
You’ve made my day! In fact, I’m wondering:
  1. What’s the point of this mark on a CD transport? I’m not aware of any CD releases using this technology.
  2. I thought MQA was already bankrupt and gone - no need for their "technical tricks" in 2025, except maybe to collect a few last license fees.
 
sound wise, i seriously doubt anyone could tell the difference between the PL200T and PL150 connected as transport
The whole PL range outputs bit-perfect digital signals. If played through the same dac there would be no difference to detect.
 
The use case was limited at the time (probably cool in cars, or with carousel CD Players), and since you can simply Shazam it today, besides indeed knowing what disc you put in the player, and
the whole idea of popping in a CD into a player these days, is to disconnect from "modern day tech" (aka Shazam) , to my opinion.
 
The PL200T is a prime example of a product without a market.
When all Denon CD players provide CD transport function already by simply using the Optical out why would someone pay $500 for a unit that requires an external DAC?

Esoteric, silly features like MQA unfolding in a CD player actually detract from the main function and illustrates the design concept was flawed from the start. This niche product won't offer an audible difference from traditional CD player designs. If the design team had included SCAD compatible hardware that would have made much more sense than MQA support.
In my opinion, this is a product worth avoiding.
 
Hi Jimi,
You’ve made my day! In fact, I’m wondering:
  1. What’s the point of this mark on a CD transport? I’m not aware of any CD releases using this technology.
  2. I thought MQA was already bankrupt and gone - no need for their "technical tricks" in 2025, except maybe to collect a few last license fees.
MQA is planning a comeback under it's new owners.
 
MQA is planning a comeback under it's new owners.
But this has nothing to do with the existing MQA technology, which is useless in this context.

Hi Jimi,
You’ve made my day! In fact, I’m wondering:
  1. What’s the point of this mark on a CD transport? I’m not aware of any CD releases using this technology.
  2. I thought MQA was already bankrupt and gone - no need for their "technical tricks" in 2025, except maybe to collect a few last license fees.
There are already CDs with MQA, but not that many.

Unfortunately, SMSL is deliberately flogging the dead horse of MQA, even with new devices, suggesting added value to customers.
In my personal opinion, this is very unprofessional behavior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EJ3
the whole idea of popping in a CD into a player these days, is to disconnect from "modern day tech" (aka Shazam) , to my opinion.
Fair enough, in which case reading the CD booklet would be an excellent additional source of information too. Well, that is what I do.
 
But this has nothing to do with the existing MQA technology, which is useless in this context.


There are already CDs with MQA, but not that many.

Unfortunately, SMSL is deliberately flogging the dead horse of MQA, even with new devices, suggesting added value to customers.
In my personal opinion, this is very unprofessional behavior.
If I can find a way to remove the symbol, it will be removed.
Ever since Meridian came out with it & whoever bought it to try to make money off it's remains, my opinion of them is that they are, at best HORRID people.
It is unfortunate that they have managed to dupe the Chinese about that it is a plus to have it.
I did buy this because of it's exemplary performance.
It is possible that something else has the same exemplary performance without the MQA.
But if so, I have missed it.
Which would be a shame, because I certainly would have bought it instead of something wher even 1/10 of a cent (USD) goes to anyone involved in MQA.
 
Thank you very much for the review.

If possible, it'd be nice to also see a photo of the remote for these devices. SMSL mentions that a remote is included, but there's no photos of it on the website! For me, it factors heavily in the user experience, so it's nice to see what it looks like.
Here you go:

SMSL PL200T_006.jpg
 
If I can find a way to remove the symbol, it will be removed.
Ever since Meridian came out with it & whoever bought it to try to make money off it's remains, my opinion of them is that they are, at best HORRID people.
It is unfortunate that they have managed to dupe the Chinese about that it is a plus to have it.
I did buy this because of it's exemplary performance.
It is possible that something else has the same exemplary performance without the MQA.
But if so, I have missed it.
Which would be a shame, because I certainly would have bought it instead of something wher even 1/10 of a cent (USD) goes to anyone involved in MQA.
It depends of how that now bankrupted company was selling these licenses. Maybe SMSL bought rights to display the MQA symbol on all there devices for 3 or 5 years, and so they try to leverage it.
 
It depends of how that now bankrupted company was selling these licenses. Maybe SMSL bought rights to display the MQA symbol on all there devices for 3 or 5 years, and so they try to leverage it.
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.
 
Last edited:
When all Denon CD players provide CD transport function already by simply using the Optical out why would someone pay $500 for a unit that requires an external DAC?
Probably because they already have an external DAC and prefer something else about the SMSL such as its size, colour, coax out, loading steps or visible CD spin.

I agree, an actual CD player could give exactly the same audio.

I wouldn’t buy the 200T but I understand the appeal because my DAC and its remote are the centre of my system. It accepts digital inputs from either streamer (optical), CD (coax), iPad via usb or, when I’m teaching, iPhone via Bluetooth. It has trs/xlr to send a balanced signal to power amps and also has headphone out that I hardly ever use. There are no RCA interconnects at all and each device is about the size of my handprint.

I think this sort of setup is becoming more common and it is where there is a market for the PL200T.
 
Last edited:
It depends of how that now bankrupted company was selling these licenses. Maybe SMSL bought rights to display the MQA symbol on all there devices for 3 or 5 years, and so they try to leverage it.
From Stereophile in Jun 2025:

Munich 2025

Lenbrook Breathes Life into MQA—and Teases a New Streaming Service​

Jason Victor SerinusJun 02, 2025

STRP_0625_MUNICH_MQAthumbnail_2%20%284%29%20copy.jpg

As someone who has repeatedly reaped the sonic benefits of MQA, I found the MQA Labs press release tantalizing. "MQA Labs Debuts FOQUS ADC Design with First Ever Demonstration, Showcases Full Technology Suite," it declared, then continued, "Highlights will include a first listen to audio captured with a FOQUS ADC chip, showcasing the enhanced clarity made possible by a reimagined decimation process." The press release promised further surprises, including "a walk-through of our new and upcoming studio plug-ins, offering creators powerful tools for managing impulse response and noise shaping," and "a showcase of QRONO d2a, our playback solution that delivers unmatched transparency and time performance across all audio formats."


The company claims that these technologies improve sound quality from creation through playback, all in pursuit of "digital audio with an analogue soul."


MQA Labs was acquired by Toronto-based Lenbrook in the fall of 2023. Lenbrook is the same company that brings us NAD, PSB, and Bluesound. As for MQA, the technology turned 10 years old during this year's High End Munich; it was introduced at the show in 2015.


I was unable to attend a full presentation, so I engaged in before and after-session discussion with Mike Jbara, Lenbrook Media Group's VP and general manager, and Pål Bråtelund, a Lenbrook consultant. Here’s what I learned:


First, many MQA Labs technologies are now embedded in plug-ins for studio workstations. Sound engineers can apply MQA dithering and time correction to their master before it goes to the record label. The Lenbrook Media Group, which is responsible for both BluOS and MQA, believes that these plug-ins give engineers the ability to resolve alltiming issues in their recordings. Jbara said, "Engineers can now convey an analog sense of timing and space without the need to record at 192kHz or DXD sampling rates."


Lenbrook's MQA team also announced a new ESS ADC chip, which Peter Craven, Al Wood, and Bob Stuart helped create. Jbara says that the chip bypasses timing issues caused by traditional decimation filters. The chip will make its debut in Lenbrook's forthcoming NAD M33 V2 BluOS streaming DAC/amplifier.


Also coming in the near future, though with no confirmed launch date, is a new streaming service serving up MQA-encoded music. Several major labels are expected to sign on, and the plan is for the new streaming service to be available via several platforms, including Roon. This is welcome news for those who were dismayed when Tidal dropped MQA streaming.


For more on FOQUS technology, MQA studio plug-ins, and QRONO d2a playback, see mqalabs.com

From EJ3: So Lenbrook bought it and they are trying to bring it back to life instead of doing the right thing and letting it die off.

MORE from:

The Rise and Fall and Maybe Rise Again of MQA​

Written by: Geoffrey Morrison Created: 01 November 2023

The (maybe) rise

It was more than a little surprising when, at the end of September, Lenbrook acquired some of MQA’s assets, which consisted mainly of intellectual property and business relationships with MQA licensees. Lenbrook is well known for its engineering prowess, so bringing on something as controversial as MQA seemed extremely out of character.

Lenbrook hasn’t announced what it plans to do with MQA, but we can make a few guesses about the short term. One, the company has been using MQA in some of its products, so perhaps this is an attempt to use the technology for “free” in its products while making a little money from fees to other licensees. It may also see something in the underlying technology for use in its wireless products. There are lots of patents and tech involved behind the scenes that we never see on the consumer side. It’s also possible this purchase had nothing to do with the MQA codec at all. MQA Limited was working on MQair, also called SCL6, a codec that works over Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. Perhaps that alone was something Lenbrook wanted to use or to help fast-track something else it’s working on.

MQA


For now, we don’t know. It’s entirely possible Lenbrook will use the tech they want and let the MQA name disappear, since among certain audiophiles, MQA is tainted goods. Perhaps it will remain a line-item on fact sheets like DTS, generating a modicum of income for Lenbrook among the circles of audiophile companies that do think it’s worthwhile.

I find the story of MQA fascinating, from its storied pedigree, to its inglorious demise, to its unexpected rescue. I wouldn’t call it a redemption arc, at least not yet, but who knows where this wild story (for high-end audio anyway) will go next?

. . . Geoffrey Morrison
[email protected]
 
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.
About 600 CD's before MQA went down.

But Lenbrook has the Defibrillator on it...
 
The company claims that these technologies improve sound quality from creation through playback, all in pursuit of "digital audio with an analogue soul."
Oh no :eek:

Jbara said, "Engineers can now convey an analog sense of timing and space without the need to record at 192kHz or DXD sampling rates."
Oh no no no :facepalm:
 

Thank you @NTTY for your work!

I see that you have the entire stack designed for the most stable clock in the 200 series by SMSL.
I found in the D200 thread that you compared its clock with PL200:
I made a protocol error for the "pitch error" test above. I fixed it and measured both the D200 and the PL200 (as a DAC):
  • D200 at 90'000Hz -> 89'999.96Hz = +0.44ppm
  • D200 at 300'000Hz -> 299'999.88 = +0.40ppm
  • PL200 at 90'000Hz -> 90'000.40Hz = -4.44pm
  • PL200 at 300'000Hz -> 300'001.32 = -4.40ppm
The D200 has a 10 times more precise clock that the PL200, and the PL200 confirmed what I measured from my test CD (19'997Hz -> 19'997.09Hz = -4.5ppm).

So that means I found a way to measure down to 0.03ppm clock precision.
As you have already measured, the PL200T is superior in terms of clock precision (the SMSL PL200 was at -4.5ppm, while this one is significantly below 1ppm).

I understand that G1 is 'only' of a Phase-Locked Loops (PLL) source with +/3 ppb accuracy that synchronises the clocks built in D200 and PL200T. A nice explanation of the PLL is presented below:

So, to the point. It is evident that D200 and PL200T already have well-implemented clocks, and the question is whether G1 brings any measurable improvement in this area.
Could you please compare the clocks of PL200T and D200 with and without G1?

Thanks in advance for the effort :)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom