Both will obviously be a lot more expensive. But at least D90 III D will give PEQ on all inputs. I think for the price though it should also include a headphone amp.
Wait which input is this active on?
Both will obviously be a lot more expensive. But at least D90 III D will give PEQ on all inputs. I think for the price though it should also include a headphone amp.
Nope,what you see in the chart is the FFT gain,not the actual noise floor which in the other post's comparison shows some 20db hit and that's the balanced output and with one filter at 100Hz.Well yes, but the Topping is already at -120 dB, below the limit of audibility, this is what counts. If you chuck in additionally -180 dB to make Rob Watts happy, nice, but does not affect sound quality.
Wait which input is this active on?
Is this “true” (uncorrelated) noise? If the D50-III digital filters are processed/calculated in the Xmos XU316 chip, what would create random noise?Nope,what you see in the chart is the FFT gain,not the actual noise floor which in the other post's comparison shows some 20db hit and that's the balanced output and with one filter at 100Hz.
Yes,probably it won't be audible but noise doesn't stay low for sure as it seems.
Have a look at this post and the links.Is this “true” (uncorrelated) noise? If the D50-III digital filters are processed/calculated in the Xmos XU316 chip, what would create random noise?
Used to work in one, in fact, worked in several. Please, be more condescending, I'd positively love that.I guess you’ve never set foot in a professional studio?
Huh?? You seem a bit uptight.Then as I told @Labjr buy a different DAC, I'm sure the D90 iii D with have balanced XLR.
It's already doable to update the DAC with a standalone updater : https://www.tpdz.net/newsinfo/904685.htmlOverall, I was very impressed with fit and finish of the Topping Tune seeing how this is their first attempt at software development. On great addition there would be to be able to update the firmware in the DAC.
Sorry of extend you my bad memories with the early attempt of eq by Topping, the long time forgotten M50.
That device was unable to equalize any audio above 44.1.
@amirm, do you know if this new device shares a similar behavior?
Also it seems the EQ works only for the USB input where actually its needed the least as most such typical devices can implement EQ per software.I don't understand -- for this product or others which have done the same -- why PEQ is implemented in a way that forces the same filter on L and R channels.
this is not necessarily true, when you get down to IC level programming you can run into issues that aren't common today in general computing today, i.e. lack of memory.It doesn't save any significant hardware resources.
It was released the same day as the A50 iii, so it is very much aimed at headphone users!It slightly simplifies the configuration SW, but imho that's not enough benefit when weighed against the loss of independent L/R filtering that virtually every use case outside of headphones would desire.
Based on earlier posts in the thread, the computing for the PEQ filters is in cores in the USB chip, and presumably there is no practical way to route other external sources into the USB chip. So as undesirable as PEQ-only-on-USB is, at least there is an obvious HW constraint that forced this limitation.Also it seems the EQ works only for the USB input where actually its needed the least as most such typical devices can implement EQ per software.
Also it seems the EQ works only for the USB input where actually its needed the least as most such typical devices can implement EQ per software.