SMSL VMV D3 Review (R2R DAC)

[gvl]

Ouch! What horrible thing for $3500. Totally NUTS!

I beg to differ. It is nuts but not horrible.

 

[Gradius]

I beg to differ. It is nuts but not horrible.

Horrible in SQ. Specially @ $3500.

 

[Red@]

This DAC is bad because it is not a "true NOS" R2R DAC..
It's true, just check on Head-Fi. True NOS R2R DACs are the pinnacle of D/A conversion according to the members there, one can not even begin to hope to hear all the microdetails and airy instruments without a true NOS R2R DAC..

Lol

 

[gvl]

Horrible in SQ.

I didn’t see any listening impressions posted. Everything shows it will play CD material as good as any other higher ranked DAC. Hires maybe not.

FWIW, a Denon DVD-5000 I once had used a similar DAC configuration and sounded very nice, and the D3 likely measures better. The price is a non-starter, yes.

 

[pickyAudiophile]

The good thing is that it's finally proven that SMSL does not tune or tweak their products to make them look great on ASR's test stand first and foremost.
Maybe it's just a kind of test balloon to see how far they can go with pricing without offering additional services like 5 year warranty with a worldwide 48 hour home replacement policy plus unconditional 30 day money-back guarantee after purchase.

With some more products in that $3.5k range I think they'd be prepared to open up a full-loaded flagship store on 5th Ave. It's essentially their first boutique product ever since starting business.

 

[charleski]

Would you expect any manufacturer or retailer of luxury goods to come on any forum and explicitly state they are exploiting a section of their customer base? What world do you live in?

Yeah, it's a difficult thing to ask. I think we have to accept that these companies are fundamentally in business to make money. When fashion-victims are clearly willing to spend over-the-odds for obsolete and inferior technology, it must be very hard to leave that money lying on the table, especially when you can come up with something that's 'good enough anyway' for most purposes.

I think the real counter is that people like Holo and Denafrips have shown that it is possible to make expensive R2R DACs that measure well.

 

[pickyAudiophile]

...it must be very hard to leave that money lying on the table.

Well said, sir!

May take a while until there'll be a response from SMSL in here. We must consider that Chinese New Year holiday is about to begin shortly.
There might be other reasons, too, but I am not gonna receive one more warning, so I keep my mouth shut.

 

[Spocko]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the SMSL VMV D3 R2R DAC. It was kindly sent to me by a member and costs US $3,499.
View attachment 181641

Being part of the "high-end" VMV division, it comes in the milled enclosure and separate power supply section of that design path. As such, it is quite heavy and more elegant than SMSL's standard line.

The back side is what we expect with exception of allowance for external clock:
View attachment 181642

The XLR connectors felt nicer than normal. The remote is metal and it too feels higher quality. Alas, it comes with no battery and manual incorrectly states that it takes 2 AA batteries. It does not. It requires a button battery but it doesn't say which. I tried a random one I had but it would not power up. Fortunately it is compatible with other SMSL remotes which is what I used to change settings.

As indicated, the design is based on Burr-Brown PCM1704U-J now-obsolete DAC chip (two per channel). The datasheet says the "K" grade is the highest performance at 0.0008% THD+N. Not sure what the -J version is supposed to do.

SMSL VMV V3 Measurements
I focused my measurements exclusively on XLR output. Here is our dashboard:
View attachment 181643

Good news is that unit meets specification of 0.001% THD+N. Bad news is that this translates into 98 dB of SINAD which is very much non-competitive today:
View attachment 181644

You can buy over 150 DACs I have tested with better performance than D3! A spray of distortion is responsible for this. Fortunately their levels are below 100 dB so if you are playing 16 bit audio, it is likely transparent to that.

Dynamic range is disappointing as well:

View attachment 181645

But again, good enough for 16 bit audio.

Multitone with its lower overall level shows better performance:
View attachment 181646

Intermodulation test relative to level though shows non-linearities courtesy of that imprecise R2R implementation:

View attachment 181647

The curve needs to be noise dominated, i.e. sloping down. It does that but distortion is getting so high as to overwhelm noise, resulting the jagged line. Indeed its best performance is what I show in the dashboard. Actual performance is worse than a $9 dongle at lower digital inputs. As you see, I tested both 8X and 4X oversampling modes but results were the same.

Here is the response variations for the two oversampling modes:

View attachment 181648

Jitter performance is very good showing good clock handling:

View attachment 181649

Linearity is not so good:
View attachment 181650

THD+N vs frequency using 90 kHz bandwidth was surprisingly good, given the previous results:
View attachment 181651

Conclusions
There is no getting around the simple message that you are paying a ton more, but getting far less fidelity. What this fascination is with older DAC technology, I never know. Bur-Brown (TI) would still be making these DAC chips if they had merit. But they don't. We have learned to use signal processing to upsample audio to higher rates as to not need 24 bit R2R anymore as used here. Getting a few bits accurate is far easier and that is why newer DACs perform so much better.

Until the folklore around R2R DACs and anything unconventional goes away, I guess I can't blame SMSL for chasing that market. They are taking a similar path to another confused American audio manufacturer doing the same. Hopefully reason prevails in the future and resources are not wasted to produce dirty water to sell at 30 times the price of clean water....

I can't recommend the SMSL VMV D3 DAC. I know, a shocker!

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Good lord, hopefully the member who paid $3,500 for this thing immediately turns around and returns it.

 

[Spocko]

Never said its a product for ME.
Of cause a R2R DAC is harder to make, way more expensive, and performs worse.
This shuld be clear to anyone knowing anything about DAC hardware design.

So the Analogy with an analog mechanical watch is in my mind ok.
Of cause its harder, costs more and performance won’t be as good. but dose this stop everyone from making analog mechanical watches? No
And no on in there right mind would compare a analog mechanical watch to digital quartz one based on accuracy alone.


If you don’t like the watch comparison look at cars.
People have lots of Preferences.
Turbocharger, compressor, naturally aspirated.
dual overhead cam vs. push rod.

Even if the Goal is easy an well defined like "go as fast as possible"
they compare them selves in there Classes.

The basics of Bonneville Speed Week engine classes - Hagerty Media

We’ll get you caught up on the most important land engine classes and lingo before Speed Week 2020 begins on August 8.

www.hagerty.com

Your right. this is what i meant to say!
forget the "not" some how... going to edit it


People don’t try to climb the Everest without Oxigen because they think its easier faster or cheaper..

The same way a manufacture is not limiting themselves from using modern of the shelf integrated DACs. because they think its cheaper or better. but because they can.

~100dB SINAD with R2R is a very impressive and respectable Engendering achievement.
Of cause it costs significantly more in Development and Part. compered to a Fully integrated IC solution.

But having an low price or price per "SINAD" was obviously never there priority/ goal with a product like this.

But here's the thing, if people want the music to sound different (less accurate? more distortion? different preference EQ curve?), it's far cheaper and way better to just add DIRAC or some similar EQ software into the digital signal path and do even MORE, like room correction, bass management, etc. Mechanical watches with their complications are an exercise in craftsmanship that's visible, tangible and thus greatly appreciated.

What level of effort or craftsmanship was put into a custom R2R DAC that measures horribly? How do we know it wasn't a first attempt by a 6th grader?

 

[gvl]

Good lord, hopefully the member who paid $3,500 for this thing immediately turns around and returns it.

On what ground? The DAC performs as advertised.

 

[AudioTodd]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the SMSL VMV D3 R2R DAC. It was kindly sent to me by a member and costs US $3,499.
View attachment 181641

Being part of the "high-end" VMV division, it comes in the milled enclosure and separate power supply section of that design path. As such, it is quite heavy and more elegant than SMSL's standard line.

The back side is what we expect with exception of allowance for external clock:
View attachment 181642

The XLR connectors felt nicer than normal. The remote is metal and it too feels higher quality. Alas, it comes with no battery and manual incorrectly states that it takes 2 AA batteries. It does not. It requires a button battery but it doesn't say which. I tried a random one I had but it would not power up. Fortunately it is compatible with other SMSL remotes which is what I used to change settings.

As indicated, the design is based on Burr-Brown PCM1704U-J now-obsolete DAC chip (two per channel). The datasheet says the "K" grade is the highest performance at 0.0008% THD+N. Not sure what the -J version is supposed to do.

SMSL VMV V3 Measurements
I focused my measurements exclusively on XLR output. Here is our dashboard:
View attachment 181643

Good news is that unit meets specification of 0.001% THD+N. Bad news is that this translates into 98 dB of SINAD which is very much non-competitive today:
View attachment 181644

You can buy over 150 DACs I have tested with better performance than D3! A spray of distortion is responsible for this. Fortunately their levels are below 100 dB so if you are playing 16 bit audio, it is likely transparent to that.

Dynamic range is disappointing as well:

View attachment 181645

But again, good enough for 16 bit audio.

Multitone with its lower overall level shows better performance:
View attachment 181646

Intermodulation test relative to level though shows non-linearities courtesy of that imprecise R2R implementation:

View attachment 181647

The curve needs to be noise dominated, i.e. sloping down. It does that but distortion is getting so high as to overwhelm noise, resulting the jagged line. Indeed its best performance is what I show in the dashboard. Actual performance is worse than a $9 dongle at lower digital inputs. As you see, I tested both 8X and 4X oversampling modes but results were the same.

Here is the response variations for the two oversampling modes:

View attachment 181648

Jitter performance is very good showing good clock handling:

View attachment 181649

Linearity is not so good:
View attachment 181650

THD+N vs frequency using 90 kHz bandwidth was surprisingly good, given the previous results:
View attachment 181651

Conclusions
There is no getting around the simple message that you are paying a ton more, but getting far less fidelity. What this fascination is with older DAC technology, I never know. Bur-Brown (TI) would still be making these DAC chips if they had merit. But they don't. We have learned to use signal processing to upsample audio to higher rates as to not need 24 bit R2R anymore as used here. Getting a few bits accurate is far easier and that is why newer DACs perform so much better.

Until the folklore around R2R DACs and anything unconventional goes away, I guess I can't blame SMSL for chasing that market. They are taking a similar path to another confused American audio manufacturer doing the same. Hopefully reason prevails in the future and resources are not wasted to produce dirty water to sell at 30 times the price of clean water....

I can't recommend the SMSL VMV D3 DAC. I know, a shocker!

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

The way things have been going lately, you may have to accidentally allow another panther to make a head-severing leap so they can take some of the load off this poor overworked headless guy!!!

 

[Billy Budapest]

I think the real counter is that people like Holo and Denafrips have shown that it is possible to make expensive R2R DACs that measure well.

I am not sure how the HoloAudio stuff measures, but looking inside of their DACs, a high level of craftsmanship and parts quality is evident. So in their $2,000 DAC, it looks like it almost might be worth it.

 

[amirm]

The way things have been going lately, you may have to accidentally allow another panther to make a head-severing leap so they can take some of the load off this poor overworked headless guy!!!

We are in a terrible rot with a number of products requiring its services. Hopefully I land on more good gear soon!

 

[Spocko]

On what ground? The DAC performs as advertised.

It advertised 112dB of dynamic range and @amirm discovered "Dynamic range is disappointing as well" as it falls far below 112dB. This discrepancy to me means the DAC did not perform as advertised, but hey, one man's material misrepresentation is another man's "it's not audible because I only listen to 16 bit music" meaningless spec - but then why send this DAC to ASR for review if not to double check the lofty claims of this "high end detail design" with "every detail is made as better as possible"?

This should be ground enough, no?

 

[Lambda]

But here's the thing, if people want the music to sound different (less accurate? more distortion? different preference EQ curve?), it's far cheaper and way better to just add DIRAC or some similar EQ software into the digital signal path and do even MORE, like room correction, bass management, etc.

People still uses vinyl Records other analog sources or CDs.

Mechanical watches with their complications are an exercise in craftsmanship that's visible, tangible and thus greatly appreciated.

What level of effort or craftsmanship was put into a custom R2R DAC that measures horribly? How do we know it wasn't a first attempt by a 6th grader?

Some can appreciated even non directly tangible things.
It is by no means horribly around 100dB from a R2R DAC requires incredible precision/accuracy and calibration.
But i guess its hard to appreciate craftsmanship and engineering if one don't understand the engineering and cant see the craft

kind of paradox that way more primitive things like Mechanical watches get more/border appropriation because they easier accessible.

Do the math about required precision for R in the R2R.

 

[gvl]

It advertised 112dB of dynamic range and @amirm discovered "Dynamic range is disappointing as well" as it falls far below 112dB. This discrepancy to me means the DAC did not perform as advertised, but hey, one man's material misrepresentation is another man's "it's not audible because I only listen to 16 bit music" meaningless spec - but then why send this DAC to ASR for review if not to double check the lofty claims of this "high end detail design" with "every detail is made as better as possible"?

View attachment 181831
View attachment 181832



This should be ground enough, no?

That might be speced usung A-weighting which is often the case. Given the THD on hand I don’t think it matters all that much anyway. The point being the specs do tell it’s a meh DAC, if you dump 3.5k on it it’s your problem now.

 

[laudio]

After reading this thread now I want an r2r DAC. Lol.

 

[aj625]

It is way harder and more expensive to make a good (non over sampling) R2R DAC.

It is not better, just a different approach. for all practical reasons its even way worse performing.
Like a mechanical analog watch is clearly inferior to a modern digital one.

Or like Cassettes and Vinyl is inferior to CD/digital.
but some still seam to use and enjoin it.

Can't compare analog watch with music imo. With analog watch you may be caring less for accuracy because you get more accuracy from your phone clock as it is connected to net. So a person may be preferring analog watch for "style". But for music lovers the goal is clarity and realism, if it was not so then everyone would have been still using am radio . Or there would have been no reason to shift to digital from tape or am radio. Nostalgia is other thing but how many such people are there ? How many of those people at all concerned with asr or care about asr. Clearly this forum is not for those.

 

[testp]

Never knew that I did it that wrong all the time...

yes... or the more analog your car is, ur gone want r2r dac in it.. it's a NOS thing

 

[aj625]

It is way harder and more expensive to make a good (non over sampling) R2R DAC.

It is not better, just a different approach. for all practical reasons its even way worse performing.
Like a mechanical analog watch is clearly inferior to a modern digital one.

Or like Cassettes and Vinyl is inferior to CD/digital.
but some still seam to use and enjoin it.

You also must be knowing that vinyl of modern digital recording is nothing but another form of listening native digital recording. But vinyl pressing of original analog recordings do sound more natural despite all the limitation of format. Reason is simple during the process of transferring from master tape to vinyl you did not chop the analog wave unlike digital where you save only some samples. Dac fill in those samples to recreate the wave back. Some dacs use more processing power to recreate that analog wave and use more and more samples for interpolating as close as possible as per Shannon theorem. One of my friend rips his old vinyls at 768khz and since with 768khz you get lot more points, the sound quality is very close to original vinyl. But if you rip to say 48khz the dac has to do lot more work to fill in those spaces and sound quality is not near to original vinyl. So imo people use vinyl mainly for original analog recordings. Vinyl of modern digital recording is nothing more than a fad. You would be lot better using a dac with that digital recording.