Prince Valiant
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2019
- Messages
- 56
- Likes
- 66
Good to see the measurements streamlined for yet another simple DAC.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. 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 PS200 Budget DAC Review
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Arrived today from Amazon.it. Anyone could measure output impedance? I have connected to Topping PA-5 II and comparing it to my usual RME ADI-2 DAC FS (single ended outputs) seems heavy in the bass region. Probably brain bias or bad impedance matching?
Thanks
Thanks
Allow me to compensate as I already published elsewhere, and I guess it makes it easier to republish here.
J-Test as Amir does it (24bits/48kHz input, view 20Hz to 20kHz, linear frequency scale):
He would comment: Text book perfect, I guess
The internal clock is precise beyond requirements for audio, as I measured 1ppm.
For people missing the IMD sweeps, here are a few. First the IMD DIN and IMD AES-17 MD:
These are measurements from -60dBFS up to -2dBFS (not full scale else the two tones generate clipping). I think the IMD DIN shows what is known as "ESS IMD hump".
Next is the standard IMD SMPTE which is 60Hz and 7kHz tones (ratio 4:1). I added a "European" version of it, for fun, as I replaced the 60Hz by our 50Hz that we get from mains here:
The traces are nearly identical and they are very good.
Next is the Multitone for left and right channels, only to show the consistency with Amir's results (reassuring to know he did not get a particularly good/well selected device):
We have more than 21bits of distortion-free range (excellent).
The linearity is nailed too, the below shows 20bits:
The two traces (fundamental is blue and measured result is green) are split because at max output of the SMSL, I am at -2.34dBFS input of the Cosmos ADC that I use for the measurement. So we should find 2.34dB difference all the way from 0dBFS down to -120dBFS. And the graph shows that at -120dBFS, the deviation is only 0.24dB. So the PS200 is linear down to -120dBFS: excellent.
Below is the bandwidth at 48kHz (1 division = 0.1dB):
In addition, the two channels are perfectly matched, as you can see above (the traces overlay perfectly), which is again excellent.
And to finalize measurements, this is a view of the oversampling filter responses at 44.1kHz, 48kHz and 96kHz sampling rates (Linear frequency view up to 80kHz):
The attenuation is minimum -100dB which is good.
Overall this low cost DAC does a perfect job, I could not find any issue with it.
Ah, and I also reviewed it in the context of being used as an external DAC with a CD Player, which creates a very high-end solution for CD-A playback
Last edited:
This is how my system is set up. I have hard wired ethernet into a Sonos Connect and then optical out to a SMSL SU8 DAC and balanced out to a Buckeye Amp.
I play all my music using Tidal Connect, which is limited to 16/44.1, and it sounds fantastic. Amir states in his review of the Connect words to the effect that as long as you stay in the digital domain with 16/44.1 content, and resist the urge to play hi res, then you will get bit perfect 98db playback.
Sonos has a poor reputation amongst audiophiles, however, it has always been common knowledge that Sonos does not believe in the benefits of hi res. So if you are only streaming your content it will give you a high quality easy to use front end.
Review and Measurements of SONOS Connect Streamer
This is a review and detailed measurements of the SONOS Connect Audio/Multi-room streamer. It is on kind loan from a member and costs $349 on Amazon including Prime shipping. The Connect has the look of earlier SONOS products which is attractive: Functionality takes a backseat to looks...
www.audiosciencereview.com
Impedance matching isn't a thing in analogue audio connections.
Output impedance is typically low - say 50ohm up to a few hundred ohm.
Input impedance is typically high - 10K plus.
But it is possible for that to vary significantly without audible effects.
As you say - probably perceptive bias - unless you have some EQ set in the RME - or in your PC if you have separate settings per output.
That response seems really too bad, maybe something gone wrong with the method, archimago got a better result. Anyway yes, Tidal didn't change the old MQA that in other services were already presented in 44.1KHz 16bit and supposedly came from redbook quality masters. Hard to say why they didn't change, maybe too much work or simply this didn't worth if related to possible objectives or subjectives differences. It also vould be interesting to compare those files to their CD counterparts for real. For sure, Tidal in past lacked about some informations, while MQA lacks all informations.
I also have to say that anything related to MQA, it's not my problem, just it's no terrible as depicted nor so different in listening, except for Radio Paradise, that exclusively offers to Bluos owners, the normal and MQA streams and a little difference can be heard.
ICIETDIYEUR
Senior Member
@ stefanovesa:
You are not the only one (on the contrary) to 'feel' this difference, mainly at low frequencies.
ESS has a good grasp of its subject when it comes to DAC chips and they prove it to us every day with regard to the measurements carried out on the various sites like this one.
If you go 'intensely' through the various sites and forums, some people even go so far as to claim that it is a deliberate desire of ESS to have worked on this difference between the old ES90x8 chips and the latest ES90x9.
Of course, it must be a well-kept 'secret' to obtain such results on the differences perceived by listening.
Since we don't know how they do it, and therefore we don't know how to measure it, then, with our current knowledge and the resulting measurements, we sometimes observe that there are no differences.
The 'simplicity' is to find another 'explanation' by claiming that there is none...
... by saying that it can only be 'cognitive biases' or any explanations that are then more rational with our own knowledge certainly much more 'limited' than that of ESS on this subject.
This is only my opinion but it is also rational.
You are not the only one (on the contrary) to 'feel' this difference, mainly at low frequencies.
ESS has a good grasp of its subject when it comes to DAC chips and they prove it to us every day with regard to the measurements carried out on the various sites like this one.
If you go 'intensely' through the various sites and forums, some people even go so far as to claim that it is a deliberate desire of ESS to have worked on this difference between the old ES90x8 chips and the latest ES90x9.
Of course, it must be a well-kept 'secret' to obtain such results on the differences perceived by listening.
Since we don't know how they do it, and therefore we don't know how to measure it, then, with our current knowledge and the resulting measurements, we sometimes observe that there are no differences.
The 'simplicity' is to find another 'explanation' by claiming that there is none...
... by saying that it can only be 'cognitive biases' or any explanations that are then more rational with our own knowledge certainly much more 'limited' than that of ESS on this subject.
This is only my opinion but it is also rational.
Did you match the levels?
ICIETDIYEUR
Senior Member
Hi JIW
Don't take it the wrong way but as far as listening is concerned (since a DAC is used to reproduce sound as a basic function, normally), I think we should stop vehemently 'unsheathing' the transition to mandatory measurements...
Let me explain:
an 'ordinary' person, that is to say someone who is going to buy a new DAC and will compare it within the framework of these usual conditions of use and who will express a difference when listening, will not systematize (him) the need to understand why (or even how) but say what he has heard and at worst ask if this is a normal operation of the device, whether or not he likes what he has heard.
We can then 'guide' him or tell him if his new one is used correctly and explain how to do it.
The measures can come later, if he expresses the need.
Moreover, Amir is already doing it and just read his reviews
Don't take it the wrong way but as far as listening is concerned (since a DAC is used to reproduce sound as a basic function, normally), I think we should stop vehemently 'unsheathing' the transition to mandatory measurements...
Let me explain:
an 'ordinary' person, that is to say someone who is going to buy a new DAC and will compare it within the framework of these usual conditions of use and who will express a difference when listening, will not systematize (him) the need to understand why (or even how) but say what he has heard and at worst ask if this is a normal operation of the device, whether or not he likes what he has heard.
We can then 'guide' him or tell him if his new one is used correctly and explain how to do it.
The measures can come later, if he expresses the need.
Moreover, Amir is already doing it and just read his reviews
Where did I request any measurements? How did I not try to ascertain correct use and proper comparison?Hi JIW
Don't take it the wrong way but as far as listening is concerned (since a DAC is used to reproduce sound as a basic function, normally), I think we should stop vehemently 'unsheathing' the transition to mandatory measurements...
Let me explain:
an 'ordinary' person, that is to say someone who is going to buy a new DAC and will compare it within the framework of these usual conditions of use and who will express a difference when listening, will not systematize (him) the need to understand why (or even how) but say what he has heard and at worst ask if this is a normal operation of the device, whether or not he likes what he has heard.
We can then 'guide' him or tell him if his new one is used correctly and explain how to do it.
The measures can come later, if he expresses the need.
Moreover, Amir is already doing it and just read his reviews
Likely level differences can be determined from volume settings if the device's output levels are known. The RME does not have the usual output levels and has to configured a certain way to output the usual 2 V RMS. Also, the PS200's output is 2.21 V RMS almost 1 dB above 2 V RMS. To match that, the RME has to be set to +13 dBu output level or AutoRef with volume set to -4 dB or -4 dBr. For the PS200 output is 20*log10((2.211+2.208)/2) = 6.8859 dBV. For the RME at the mentioned settings, output is 13 + 10*log10(0.6) - 4 = 6.7815 dBV. This is of course expecting the devices operating as specified and measured.
Yeah, that is a 2 dB difference and could explain it.
Audionaut
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2025
- Messages
- 309
- Likes
- 1,055
A best bang for the Buck DAC
It's nice that for so little money you don't have to worry about converting digital signals to an analog output device.
I've noticed a few MQA haters on this forum. I don't understand why they can't just see it as an extra feature that you can use, but don't have to.
It's nice that for so little money you don't have to worry about converting digital signals to an analog output device.
I've noticed a few MQA haters on this forum. I don't understand why they can't just see it as an extra feature that you can use, but don't have to.
i think a 9039 dac that is pretty fully featured is like the fosi zd3?
i think there's some pretty well regarded dacs like the SMSL M300 for like $125?
and so i feel like SMSL can do better for $90 than this slapped together plastic case
the old C100 was just an SU1 with a remote for $100?
it depends on how much of a plastic case you can take
like i have some cheapo network gear like switches with the same case style
they arent that great if you accidently damage the case
you cant damage an SU1 but this one?
i think there's some pretty well regarded dacs like the SMSL M300 for like $125?
and so i feel like SMSL can do better for $90 than this slapped together plastic case
the old C100 was just an SU1 with a remote for $100?
it depends on how much of a plastic case you can take
like i have some cheapo network gear like switches with the same case style
they arent that great if you accidently damage the case
you cant damage an SU1 but this one?
An update. I have level matched P200 and RME ADI-2 DAC FS. But perhaps more important: I reset JRiver player for Mac, unflagging "integer mode" for P200 (I doubt that it supports it because in MacOS MIDI app I see "custom" for audio format instead of real numbers when integer mode is on) and I've power cycled also Intona USB Isolator that is part of the USB chain with both DACs. Now subjectively the DACS are virtually not discernable. The artifacts in the bass region are gone. Probably the player was not bit perfect the first time I listen to.
Voted great. Problem is that since I discovered ASR, I realize how much big money I've wasted, mainly in NAIM gear... 
Because the owners of the MQA righs are charging money for its use (making gear more expensive) when it offers zero audible benefit. Just another rip off of the consumer..
SorenTyson
Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2023
- Messages
- 64
- Likes
- 106
Same here , just not on NAIM.Voted great. Problem is that since I discovered ASR, I realize how much big money I've wasted, mainly in NAIM gear...
Similar threads
- Poll
