• 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!

Topping D50 III Balanced DAC with EQ Review

Rate this DAC:

  • 1. Poor (headless panther)

    Votes: 7 1.7%

  • 2. Not terrible (postman panther)

    Votes: 13 3.1%

  • 3. Fine (happy panther)

    Votes: 59 14.1%

  • 4. Great (golfing panther)

    Votes: 339 81.1%
  • Total voters
    418
amirm said:
It is source independent. In my case I have EQ in Roon but when I play youtube, there isn't one.
Click to expand...
I know you mentioned it will not do room correction (separate channels) but is it basically capable of replacing Roon should one not want to pay for Roon. Or am I mistaken on this. I kinda miss the videos on tidal and as you mentioned you tube videos.
 
Also, source independence is in general true, but not for this device, as it doesn’t EQ your Toslink or coaxial source.
 
Am I right in understanding that it is impossible to turn off the display in the active state? The current DAC (SMSL SK10TH MKIII) is located close to the TV and can completely turn off the display without distracting attention when watching a movie in a dark room. The D50 will be constantly lit, right?
 
Nuke said:
Am I right in understanding that it is impossible to turn off the display in the active state? The current DAC (SMSL SK10TH MKIII) is located close to the TV and can completely turn off the display without distracting attention when watching a movie in a dark room. The D50 will be constantly lit, right?
Click to expand...

The Auto function of the screen brightness settings makes it so (most of) the display turns off after X amount of seconds (it will display the input selected - i.e. USB, BT, etc...). You can experiment between that and dimming it to the lowest setting. It's a very small screen, and shouldn't be too big of a distraction.
 
So, I remembered that VMWare has become free for personal use, and downloaded that to my Mac. Once it was all up, I installed Topping Tune to be able to try out the PEQ functionality, finally. I'm not sure if there's something I'm doing wrong (unless it says something in the manual that I've overlooked), but I noticed that in order for the PEQ to take effect, even if it's enabled in the DAC settings menu, you have to have the sample rate on the DAC set no higher than 192kHz (24 or 32-bit).

So it appears to me at this time that there is a limitation to what you can set the DAC to for the PEQ to be active.
 
Got a little story about my experience with this site and Topping. Long time lurker here (and long time poster at the AVSForum). I have a Philharmonitor BMR desktop setup and a Philharmonic HT Tower (+ 18" Sealed Rhythmik) setup. I've been out of the DAC game for a long time (10+ years). Personally, I concluded they weren't the best use of money in a normal audio budget. With that said, I did enjoy the last DAC I owned way back when (the ol' Cambridge DacMagic). Eventually, I ended up moving onto Denon A/V receivers for all my setups, because I thought the Accessories4Less options were extremely competitive as "all in one" solutions (and I still believe that).

I have a computer-science background and this site wasn't much of a thing when I was last going down this rabbit hole. But once this site grew in popularity - it made me happy to see a community taking a pragmatic and technical approach to a downright predatory industry. In other words, this website made me feel comfortable going down this rabbit hole one more time. My ancient Onkyo TX-SR607, which powered my BMR monitors, died nearly 2 years ago. Without requiring much use out of that setup, I squeezed by with the cheapest Amazon DAC and T-Amp I could find (for less than $50 total). I've moved some months back and I have a larger living space where I can give my multiple HiFi setups more attention, so I started researching some options. My younger brother (who shares my audio setups) really wanted Schiit, so I was used their cheap DACs at a starting point for my product research, but quickly saw other brands that seemed more competitive for the price point.

Nabbed the Topping E30 II off Ebay for about $110 and a Fosi V3 desktop amp on sale. And I've really got to say - this modest audio setup really sings compared to the cheap A/V receivers it's been hooked up to. I ended up plugging the DAC into my main HT Tower audio setup (through my Marantz SR5014 receiver) to see if I could hear a difference, and my brother was so taken back by the difference that he had to order his own Topping DAC that evening. FWIW, the Marantz SR5014's DAC performance measured very poorly (likely due to its "golden ears" design), so this might've been one of the few scenario's where a DAC could make such a difference.

My brother wanted the E30 II but I nudged him towards the D50 III because in my opinion, it had worthwhile features for a small price difference. Particularly the EQ, because I use MiniDSP for my subwoofer and am very fond of it. When the D50 III arrived, he seemed pretty disappointed with it, and wanted to send it back for the E30 II. Apparently there's something about the Topping E30 II that sounded more pleasant. But before I let him do that, I decided to hook the E30 II back up to let him do some A/B comparison. Then we worked on figuring out the EQ software (which was confusing at first). But after an hour of fiddling around with it, we figured it out. And oh boy, this EQ software adds a lot of value to the package. I threw together some variations of house and the Harmon curve (some "safe" equalizations). Now he seems to be really impressed with it. And I am too. I've never had the opportunity to use a proper EQ outside of some awful software EQ (e.g. WinAmp's built in EQ).

In my case, I listen to a lot of metal music and rock music. Particularly lots of death metal and black metal, which can be challenging for a person who enjoys HiFi. I'd imagine many people would say the master mixes for some of the classics are practically sabotaged. Common production issues would be way too much treble with a tinny "scooped mids". Then, other death metal albums sound way too "flat" and traditionally mixed (which sounds less impressive compared to the dynamically mixed albums). I'm already in love with my speakers and their neutral sound signatures, so for me, EQ isn't about rebalancing the sound of my speakers, but making music that is nearly unlistenable at the source level into a downright enjoyable experience. And that's my 2-cents.
 
As indicated on the product page:


1742115342757.jpeg
 
Last edited:
t1337dude said:
Got a little story about my experience with this site and Topping. Long time lurker here (and long time poster at the AVSForum). I have a Philharmonitor BMR desktop setup and a Philharmonic HT Tower (+ 18" Sealed Rhythmik) setup. I've been out of the DAC game for a long time (10+ years). Personally, I concluded they weren't the best use of money in a normal audio budget. With that said, I did enjoy the last DAC I owned way back when (the ol' Cambridge DacMagic). Eventually, I ended up moving onto Denon A/V receivers for all my setups, because I thought the Accessories4Less options were extremely competitive as "all in one" solutions (and I still believe that).

I have a computer-science background and this site wasn't much of a thing when I was last going down this rabbit hole. But once this site grew in popularity - it made me happy to see a community taking a pragmatic and technical approach to a downright predatory industry. In other words, this website made me feel comfortable going down this rabbit hole one more time. My ancient Onkyo TX-SR607, which powered my BMR monitors, died nearly 2 years ago. Without requiring much use out of that setup, I squeezed by with the cheapest Amazon DAC and T-Amp I could find (for less than $50 total). I've moved some months back and I have a larger living space where I can give my multiple HiFi setups more attention, so I started researching some options. My younger brother (who shares my audio setups) really wanted Schiit, so I was used their cheap DACs at a starting point for my product research, but quickly saw other brands that seemed more competitive for the price point.

Nabbed the Topping E30 II off Ebay for about $110 and a Fosi V3 desktop amp on sale. And I've really got to say - this modest audio setup really sings compared to the cheap A/V receivers it's been hooked up to. I ended up plugging the DAC into my main HT Tower audio setup (through my Marantz SR5014 receiver) to see if I could hear a difference, and my brother was so taken back by the difference that he had to order his own Topping DAC that evening. FWIW, the Marantz SR5014's DAC performance measured very poorly (likely due to its "golden ears" design), so this might've been one of the few scenario's where a DAC could make such a difference.

My brother wanted the E30 II but I nudged him towards the D50 III because in my opinion, it had worthwhile features for a small price difference. Particularly the EQ, because I use MiniDSP for my subwoofer and am very fond of it. When the D50 III arrived, he seemed pretty disappointed with it, and wanted to send it back for the E30 II. Apparently there's something about the Topping E30 II that sounded more pleasant. But before I let him do that, I decided to hook the E30 II back up to let him do some A/B comparison. Then we worked on figuring out the EQ software (which was confusing at first). But after an hour of fiddling around with it, we figured it out. And oh boy, this EQ software adds a lot of value to the package. I threw together some variations of house and the Harmon curve (some "safe" equalizations). Now he seems to be really impressed with it. And I am too. I've never had the opportunity to use a proper EQ outside of some awful software EQ (e.g. WinAmp's built in EQ).

In my case, I listen to a lot of metal music and rock music. Particularly lots of death metal and black metal, which can be challenging for a person who enjoys HiFi. I'd imagine many people would say the master mixes for some of the classics are practically sabotaged. Common production issues would be way too much treble with a tinny "scooped mids". Then, other death metal albums sound way too "flat" and traditionally mixed (which sounds less impressive compared to the dynamically mixed albums). I'm already in love with my speakers and their neutral sound signatures, so for me, EQ isn't about rebalancing the sound of my speakers, but making music that is nearly unlistenable at the source level into a downright enjoyable experience. And that's my 2-cents.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have to say that for the price, it's hard to beat the performance you get from their DACs, HPAs and even their power amps. I would seriously consider the PA5 II if you're ever looking to "upgrade" from the Fosi V3 (I think the PA5 II beats the Fosi in a lot of the important areas). Even the Topping PA3s is quite good (I have it as well). These devices really do a good job to bolster the argument that you do not have to spend thousands of dollars on a DAC or HPA to get state-of-the-art performance.

I would be curious to know what had your brother thinking the E30 sounded better than the D50 III. I had an E50 before acquiring the D50 III, and it has always felt to me that the D50 III's dual ESS9038Q2M chips have a bit more oomph on the bottom end vs. the E50's single ESS9068AS. I don't know the technical differences between those two chips, but the two MX5s I had (before they both ceremoniously failed less than a week after getting them), which has a single 9038Q2M chip, also sounded more pleasing to my ears.
 
I like this DAC but I consider the display to be an insult. You can read the volume but that's it. Everything else is too small. Needs a bigger, better designed screen. Preferably an orange one.
 
VientoB said:
I like this DAC but I consider the display to be an insult. You can read the volume but that's it. Everything else is too small. Needs a bigger, better designed screen. Preferably an orange one.
Click to expand...

The display isn't really that much of a dealbreaker for me because the size of the screen doesn't affect how it performs - which is phenomenally well. I'm looking forward to the DX5 II (which should be released by the end of the month?), and hope that it is as good (or better) than the D50 III. Its screen is also much nicer-looking.
 
ziggurcat said:
The display isn't really that much of a dealbreaker for me because the size of the screen doesn't affect how it performs - which is phenomenally well. I'm looking forward to the DX5 II (which should be released by the end of the month?), and hope that it is as good (or better) than the D50 III. Its screen is also much nicer-looking.
Click to expand...
And headphone amp
 
Bleib said:
And headphone amp
Click to expand...

I'm hoping that's as good or better than the L50. I would be happy to swap out two components for one even if it's a lateral move.
 
ziggurcat said:
Yeah, I have to say that for the price, it's hard to beat the performance you get from their DACs, HPAs and even their power amps. I would seriously consider the PA5 II if you're ever looking to "upgrade" from the Fosi V3 (I think the PA5 II beats the Fosi in a lot of the important areas). Even the Topping PA3s is quite good (I have it as well). These devices really do a good job to bolster the argument that you do not have to spend thousands of dollars on a DAC or HPA to get state-of-the-art performance.

I would be curious to know what had your brother thinking the E30 sounded better than the D50 III. I had an E50 before acquiring the D50 III, and it has always felt to me that the D50 III's dual ESS9038Q2M chips have a bit more oomph on the bottom end vs. the E50's single ESS9068AS. I don't know the technical differences between those two chips, but the two MX5s I had (before they both ceremoniously failed less than a week after getting them), which has a single 9038Q2M chip, also sounded more pleasing to my ears.
Click to expand...
Difficult to say regarding my brother. Simplest explanation that I'm tempted to say, is his listening experience might've had external influences that he wasn't considering (e.g. his mood in that moment). By forcing him to A/B them, it forces him to critically analyze his first impressions (something anybody should do when leaning into a new DAC). I wasn't around during his initial listening session, and I let him do the comparison on his own as well because I didn't want my presence to push him in either direction. On the other hand, I do think the D50 III has an ever-so-slightly sharper sound - as if its sound presentation was perhaps more "clinical", particularly in the high end. And while I'm not the kind of person to go out of my way to seek out validation on my experience - my brother was able to find enough discussion online that fit that line of thinking that he appeared pretty dug in on his opinion (until we fiddled with the EQ). At that point, it's difficult for him to complain that it sounds "sharp" because he knows I'd tell him to simply put on a high shelf filter.

Never looked at the PA5 II prior to now but it looks really nice - I might pick one up down the road. Thanks for the recommendation. The primary use of that desktop study has been studying (for which I require low-volume music listening) and some occasional gaming. Needless to say, the setup is complete overkill for its purpose but I couldn't possibly bring myself to selling the BMR's (felt too sentimental). In fact, despite not having any particularly high end gear (outside of a nice collection of Philharmonic speakers), I'm extremely satisfied with everything I have and foresee myself using everything "til death". Perhaps I'll trade up to a more expensive EQ DAC from Topping in the distant future, if one exists. I've still got some old Accessories4Less receivers in my household powering bedroom setups - those will likely get replaced with cheap separates.

With that said, EQ has been a gamechanger in this household. My brother spent nearly the entire day re-listening to his collection and experimenting with different EQ's. I also spent quite a few hours fine tuning a few EQ profiles. So we'd end up listening to music together and comparing our sound profiles. Something I never realized until now is that these Philharmonic HT Towers are astonishingly flat in their present - even moreso than studio monitors I've owned in the past. I'd never describe their high end as bright or shrill, but what I've realized is that the sound is so detailed (particularly in the mids and highs), is that the accurate presentation comes off as overwhelming. And the only way I've come to realize this is that I've learned the sound can be significantly "relaxed" and "tamed" by simply introducing a few dips of 1-2dB in specific frequency regions. Then - as if a veil has been lifted, this rebalanced presentation turned into the tropey audiophile experience of "hearing things I've never heard before" (specifically improved separation among harmonized guitar riffs allowing me to better hear their individual notes).

It's not that I appreciate having neutral or accurate speakers any less. If anything, I appreciate them more, because I believe neutral speakers give you a lot more versatility for equalization compared to speakers that out-the-box are "voiced" in a specific way.

I also forgot how nice it is to have a "low volume curve", which emphasizes the bass region as lower volumes. My next wish, which likely will never happen, would be the option to create our own dynamic EQ. It could be as simple as creating a new variable for each parametric equalization which scales the magnitude of the equalization relative to the volume scale (and giving us the option to determine the scale).
 
t1337dude said:
I also forgot how nice it is to have a "low volume curve", which emphasizes the bass region as lower volumes. My next wish, which likely will never happen, would be the option to create our own dynamic EQ. It could be as simple as creating a new variable for each parametric equalization which scales the magnitude of the equalization relative to the volume scale (and giving us the option to determine the scale).
Click to expand...
This reminds me of loudness function of RME ADI 2 DAC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

btkli
Topping D30 Upgrade to D50 III?
Replies
8
Views
1K
btkli
btkli
V
  • Poll
Topping D50 III optical input bug with 44.1kHz files
3 4 5
Replies
82
Views
7K
VientoB
V
M
D50 III vs E70 (and which E70?)
Replies
8
Views
1K
marsound
M
E
DAC Recommendation: SMSL C200 vs Topping D50 III for M3si & Q Acoustics 3050i
Replies
9
Views
3K
Black Cat Pi
B
M
My first DAC, Topping D50 iii, makes two pop sounds at the end of any audio, including system sounds.
Replies
10
Views
2K
btkli
btkli
Back
Top Bottom