SMSL VMV D3 Review (R2R DAC)

[digicidal]

I can just imagine how "buttery" the sound must be! However, all I'll do is imagine it - because I'd rather listen to my more transparent (and far cheaper) SU-9.

I'm actually glad (in some ways) to see SMSL producing this. I'd much rather the deep, gullible pockets of audiophiles go to funding companies that also engineer very competent and relatively inexpensive gear. Far better than just further enriching total scam artists, where all those empty profit margins are just blown on more influencer bribery marketing fluff.

 

[MarkWinston]

With such unconvincing measurements, will this be audibly different to lets say the 'sota' d90se?

 

[charleski]

I expect an official from SMSL to intervene soon and give us kind of explanans.

There are a reasonable number of people with a lot of excess money who have decided that R2R is fashionable and are prepared to pay over the odds for it. In such a situation it's entirely rational to make an expensive DAC that satisfies the dictates of fashion and brings in lots of money through its high margin. I can't fault SMSL for doing that, given that they also make several more reasonably-priced DACs that perform a lot better. It's simple market segmentation: rich people can pay more, so make sure they do so. You can call it 'progressive taxation' if you want to avoid the 'S'-word .

And let's be honest, the state of D-A conversion has so far outstripped the fidelity of our hearing that I very much doubt I'd be able to tell the difference between this and a truly SOTA DAC in controlled conditions.

 

[Walter]

"Not terrible" incarnate.

I would agree in an absolute sense, but since we get to use whatever criteria we personally want when voting, I include value. At any over over $300, this gets a headless panther from me--and at $3500, it was an easy decision.

 

[antcollinet]

I would agree in an absolute sense, but since we get to use whatever criteria we personally want when voting, I include value. At any over over $300, this gets a headless panther from me--and at $3500, it was an easy decision.

Same here. If Dac costing more than 99% of other dacs doesn't make it into the top 10% of performance it is headless.

 

[Jimbob54]

Let's assume for a moment that some listeners with some tracks in some systems could detect a difference between this and (say) SMSLs technically best DS offering in proper tests. Let's even assume for a minute that it is preferred.

Still does not justify the ludicrous price tag and hype that no doubt will accompany this.

 

[aj625]

There are a reasonable number of people with a lot of excess money who have decided that R2R is fashionable and are prepared to pay over the odds for it. In such a situation it's entirely rational to make an expensive DAC that satisfies the dictates of fashion and brings in lots of money through its high margin. I can't fault SMSL for doing that, given that they also make several more reasonably-priced DACs that perform a lot better. It's simple market segmentation: rich people can pay more, so make sure they do so. You can call it 'progressive taxation' if you want to avoid the 'S'-word .

And let's be honest, the state of D-A conversion has so far outstripped the fidelity of our hearing that I very much doubt I'd be able to tell the difference between this and a truly SOTA DAC in controlled conditions.

but people are saying just opposite. as per schiit their "less is more" has poorer measurements as compared to "more is less" and sounds better. so by that logic better measurements should sound progressively poorer, leave alone better.

 

[Lambda]

But again, good enough for 16 bit audio.

And R2R.
Don't see how it deserves a headless Panter. "CD-Quality" is supposedly good enough.....
This is like Buying an mechanical watch and complaining its not as accurate as the digital one.

No the interesting part would be is it relay R2R or is it PWM,PDM and oversampling.

Can we Please have a impulse step Response and Phase response?

 

[aj625]

And R2R.
Don't see how it deserves a headless Panter. "CD-Quality" is supposedly good enough.....
This is like Buying an mechanical watch and complaining its not as accurate as the digital one.

No the interesting part would be is it relay R2R or is it PWM,PDM and oversampling.

Can we Please have a impulse step Response and Phase response?

its because of high price despite so poor linearity and cheaper competition.

 

[Lambda]

its because of high price despite so poor linearity and cheaper competition.

Price not = value.
To stay with the watch analogy. A swiss hand made mechanical watch out of gold Costs more then then the plastic digital Quarz watch.
They both work absolute fine.
But now your telling me casio f91 is the best because its low pice and looses a view seconds less per jear?!

this DAC
It is by no means a bad product it works just fine. more then Good enough for CD.
If price is imported for you this might not be the product for you.

but if you want a budget watch why are you looking at a mechanical analog one

 

[respice finem]

I guess the desire to create something unique strikes again... And quality assurance (regarding the manual)...

If I try to imagine the internal aftermath of this test @SMSL, it looks like this:

https://i.imgflip.com/1cql9e.jpg

 

[JSmith]

But now your telling me casio f91 is the best because its low pice and looses a view seconds less per jear?!

Performance wise, it's main function, yes... you stated so yourself. However, you keep shifting the goalposts to suit your narrative as well, attempting to use this poor watch analogy.

analog one

I don't see how this relates to any DAC... at all.

Hey, if you want to pay more for the performance of a $500 DAC... maybe you would prefer this;

Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC and Streamer Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Mola Mola Tambaqui USB DAC and Ethernet streamer. It is on kind loan from a member which is quite special when you consider it costing US $11,500 (£8,999). As it should be the Tambaqui weights a lot relative to its size with generous use of...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Performs better, heavy build quality and double the price! How does that fit into your world?


JSmith

 

[KxDx]

SMSL built this for a specific clientele. I guess if it helps fund the technically superior (and significantly cheaper) offerings, more power to them.

 

[muslhead]

Price = value.
To stay with the watch analogy. A swiss hand made mechanical watch out of gold Costs more then then the plastic digital Quarz watch.
They both work absolute fine.
But now your telling me casio f91 is the best because its low pice and looses a view seconds less per jear?!

this DAC
It is by no means a bad product it works just fine. more then Good enough for CD.
If price is imported for you this might not be the product for you.

but if you want a budget watch why are you looking at a mechanical analog one

Price does not = value. Sorry

 

[Koeitje]

I don't think its a headless panther, because nothing is really broken. Its just surround receiver performance for too much money.

 

[Geert]

Yes it is rather odd... almost every other type of tech, people want the newest, the best performing etc. I find it quite strange that this goes out the window for some when buying audio products when the goal is performance

People think R2R has less processing going on, so it should sound more analog. Expectation bias at work.

 

[YSC]

I’d give it a fine rating, transparent enough for 16 bits where very likely we won’t ever detect any difference beyond that, great built quality and the price is paid for the nostalgia fun part

Just like we sort after air cooled Porsche despite a remotely modern civic type R is easier to drive, faster and more comfortable. Enough performance with memories of good old days can make life a lot happier.

As long as it didn’t take spec like some gd company it’s fine for me

 

[renaudrenaud]

I can see customers and companies providing their needs. Customers don't care measurements. Yes SMSL, you have to sell the products they want.

 

[aj625]

People think R2R has less processing going on, so it should sound more analog. Expectation bias at work.

but it is also oversampling 8x, so how less processing ?

 

[aj625]

People think R2R has less processing going on, so it should sound more analog. Expectation bias at work.

moreover you are dependent upon os work done by the chip which you can't defeat like in some other r2r dacs. so there is no "less processing" but rather poor processing. most ds dacs do 16x or even 64x os. even if you can't defeat it, you still can os externally with good software to maximum supported sample rate. the final stage os done within the ds dac say 16x ( done by external software os ) to 64x (done by ds dac inside ) may be less critical and you still get all the advantage of better os done by software.