• 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!

Topping D90 Balanced USB DAC Review

So clever.

Not in the slightest. You've read the review. It translates digital signals to analog with the barest hint of distortion. What response were you hoping for?
50 people could give you an answer more in line with what your were probably be expecting. Some of them will conflict with each other. Some will be in line with what your have probably read and seen elsewhere. The value of all that would be what?

There is a reason the review here doesn't include impressions of its "sound".
 
I read the review and it sounds great....but how does it SOUND??????

It will sound much like a clear window looks.

It will be transparent to your source, so will not be audibly distinguishable from any other competent DAC.
 
I read the review and it sounds great....but how does it SOUND??????
I think it sounds great. Previously I was using an MSB Gold III DAC with modifications, upsampling, and outboard linear power supply. The MSB used 4 stereo DAC chips to improve s/n (similar to the AKM4499’s 4 channels summed for stereo) and the MSB used the LME49720 op amps for its output, same as the D90. But the D90 definitely is better for detail, width and depth of sound field and well as a host of flexibility like USB in, remote switching, balanced design, 32/786 processing, DSD, processing amd MQA all at less than 1/3rd the price of the MSB. For me the decision was easy.
 
I've read female vocals are cold.

Audiophile is not 'graphs'; where is the timbre? Tone? Layering? Soundstage? Space between the notes? Extension? Show me one of your graphs and point to all these aspects.

The question stands: How. Does. It. Sound?
 
I've read female vocals are cold.

Audiophile is not 'graphs'; where is the timbre? Tone? Layering? Soundstage? Space between the notes? Extension? Show me one of your graphs and point to all these aspects.
Mostly in your source, speakers, room and brain.
 
I've read female vocals are cold.

Audiophile is not 'graphs'; where is the timbre? Tone? Layering? Soundstage? Space between the notes? Extension? Show me one of your graphs and point to all these aspects.

The question stands: How. Does. It. Sound?
You're gonna have to search a while on this forum if a dose is subjective review is what you're looking for. Not really the place...
 
I've read female vocals are cold.

Audiophile is not 'graphs'; where is the timbre? Tone? Layering? Soundstage? Space between the notes? Extension? Show me one of your graphs and point to all these aspects.

The question stands: How. Does. It. Sound?
Sorry but I think you're on the wrong forum if you're asking this about a DAC.
 
I've read female vocals are cold.

Audiophile is not 'graphs'; where is the timbre? Tone? Layering? Soundstage? Space between the notes? Extension? Show me one of your graphs and point to all these aspects.

The question stands: How. Does. It. Sound?

It will sound like every other competent DAC.

The other things you describe are either part of the recording or part of the room/speakers. Not the DAC.

Spend money on stuff with moving parts to find dramatic differences. If you can hear it, you can measure it. Beyond some point, it becomes purely academic.

Transparent is transparent... Doesn't need to be more complicated. There is no hidden physics, and these are engineered boxes, not musical instruments, nor are they supposed to be fuzz boxes.. At least none of the good ones.
 
It will sound like every other competent DAC.

The other things you describe are either part of the recording or part of the room/speakers. Not the DAC.

Spend money on stuff with moving parts to find dramatic differences. If you can hear it, you can measure it. Beyond some point, it becomes purely academic.

Transparent is transparent... Doesn't need to be more complicated. There is no hidden physics, and these are engineered boxes, not musical instruments, nor are they supposed to be fuzz boxes.. At least none of the good ones.
You are so wrong it's pathetic. You just embarrassed yourself, and you arrogance makes it worse.

Done. Useless site. Bunch of know-nothings wacking off to graphs. Enjoy.
 
You are so wrong it's pathetic. You just embarrassed yourself, and you arrogance makes it worse.

Done. Useless site. Bunch of know-nothings wacking off to graphs. Enjoy.

Got it.
Thanks for sharing.
 
You are so wrong it's pathetic. You just embarrassed yourself, and you arrogance makes it worse.

Done. Useless site. Bunch of know-nothings wacking off to graphs. Enjoy.
That was surprisingly quick. Thank you for your brevity.

Gives me plenty of time to knock one out over the new Gustard DAC measurements!:)
 
That was surprisingly quick. Thank you for your brevity.

Gives me plenty of time to knock one out over the new Gustard DAC measurements!:)

Amir should have a virtual fold out centerfold for the top graphs. Make it the ASR-Mate of the month.
 
Amir should have a virtual fold out centerfold for the top graphs each month. Make it the ASR-Mate of the month.
Now @BDWoody, since your recent promotion to the esteemed position of Moderator, I expected a least a mild chastisement for lowering the tone. There again, I seem to remember an equally wonton disregard for standards emanating from the words of @Thomas savage also.
 
You are so wrong it's pathetic. You just embarrassed yourself, and you arrogance makes it worse.

Done. Useless site. Bunch of know-nothings wacking off to graphs. Enjoy.
Well that escalated quickly.
 
Now @BDWoody, since your recent promotion to the esteemed position of Moderator, I expected a least a mild chastisement for lowering the tone. There again, I seem to remember an equally wonton disregard for standards emanating from the words of @Thomas savage also.

My deal was, I am going to be the same as I always was... If the words aren't in red, it's just me. Once folks pass some point, having a touch of fun isn't the same as piling on someone new with sincere questions.

This is Audio Science Review, not Audio Story Review after all.
 
My deal was, I am going to be the same as I always was... If the words aren't in red, it's just me. Once folks pass some point, having a touch of fun isn't the same as piling on someone new with sincere questions.

This is Audio Science Review, not Audio Story Review after all.
Completely agree. Secretly I knew that I hadn't over stepped the mark!

I'd love to return this thread to topic, but I don't have anything to add to the previous 135 pages on the D90. Unless somebody could explain how it sounds???:facepalm:
 
Back
Top Bottom