Topping D90 Balanced USB DAC Review

[Thomas savage]

Here are too many people who come from Topping, or helping Topping sales. Save your time and money, stay away from Chinese products. We just want to enjoy music quietly.

Totally inappropriate and prejudiced, this kind of thing is unacceptable here .

 

[JustAnandaDourEyedDude]

Despite having spent most of my working life surrounded by audio equipment, I still do not understand exactly what the term “musicality” is supposed to mean.

I've always taken it to be a cop out to excuse kit that performs poorly but “I like it anyway”.

I agree that when comparing gear the term is often used as a cop out to refer to some ill-defined inner essence of music that the kit the reviewer likes somehow manages to reproduce better, regardless of the measured attributes of the kit. When used to describe music, I have inferred from the contextual usage of the term "musicality" that it refers to an ability of the music to engage you, to get your brain and perhaps the rest of your body to echo or mimic or flow along with or "groove to" the music. As in the zen koan "Is it the flag that waves, or your mind that waves?". When you are fully absorbed in watching the flag waving in the wind, your mind waves along with the flag.

 

[fabien32]

To get rid of last few niggles

I don't mind to pay a bit more, what do you suggest?

 

[Pluto]

I still do not understand exactly what the term “musicality” is supposed to mean

You’ve always taken it the wrong way, then

OK, I should have said “musicality in the context of electronic equipment”.

Happier now?

 

[majingotan]

I agree that when comparing gear the term is often used as a cop out to refer to some ill-defined inner essence of music that the kit the reviewer likes somehow manages to reproduce better, regardless of the measured attributes of the kit. When used to describe music, I have inferred from the contextual usage of the term "musicality" that it refers to an ability of the music to engage you, to get your brain and perhaps the rest of your body to echo or mimic or flow along with or "groove to" the music. As in the zen koan "Is it the flag that waves, or your mind that waves?". When you are fully absorbed in watching the flag, your mind waves along with the flag.

The more expensive (and heavier too) your listening equipment gets, the more magical “musical” pixies it produces

 

[paulngo90]

Hello,

I received a pair of Mogami W3173 XLR today to replace my RCAs and I was introduced with static/buzzing noise at low volume. Nothing else is connected to my amp aside from my speakers and subwoofer on Pre-Out. Has this happened to anyone else? Could it be cable compatibility issue? FYI, the amp has an attenuator switch (- 6dB) in the back that seems to solve the static/buzzing but I would love to know why normal connection wouldn’t work.


Bluesound Node2i
Topping D90 MQA (DAC mode)
Yamaha A-S2200
SVS Ultra Bookshelf
SVS Sub SB-2000 Pro

 

[ReaderZ]

Hello,

I received a pair of Mogami W3173 XLR today to replace my RCAs and I was introduced with static/buzzing noise at low volume. Nothing else is connected to my amp aside from my speakers and subwoofer on Pre-Out. Has this happened to anyone else? Could it be cable compatibility issue? FYI, the amp has an attenuator switch (- 6dB) in the back that seems to solve the static/buzzing but I would love to know why normal connection wouldn’t work.


Bluesound Node2i
Topping D90 MQA (DAC mode)
Yamaha A-S2200
SVS Ultra Bookshelf
SVS Sub SB-2000 Pro

That's an AES cable, while in most cases it should work just fine for analog signal as well, keep in mind it's designed to carry digital signal.

Edit: I don't think cable spec is the issue though, do you have any other XLR to try?

 

[Racheski]

I do realize that. I have read through many ASR forum threads embodying the subjectivist vs. objectivist war, and there are wilder flame wars in the world wide wilderness. For various reasons, I do not wish to take up arms and engage perpetually in that war. My attitude is live and let live, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, etc., etc. Also, as you do in your post #1650, I hold that each of us is a subject first, constrained by what our senses tell us and the information that we have access to.

My reason for post #1644 was not to sound the trumpets for another battle in that war. I do not know where the head-fi poster is coming from, and I do not plan to research the matter, having other priorities in life. However, part of his post was repeated here on ASR as hearsay by member Racheski who also in effect asked whether what the head-fi dude said might be true that the use of the AK4499EQ might be better optimized by not cutting costs and that by implication the D90 might be an inferior implementation because costs were cut. Since it was presented here as a dismissive judgement of the D90 without presenting the dude's basis, I felt some push-back at the credibility of the baseless version presented here on ASR was in order, and so I took a guess (based on what I know of the audiophile culture at head-fi, which I realize is a generalization, but no I was not trying to trash head-fi) at the dude's motivation and reasoning. I did preface my remark with the qualifier "Likely as not". The dude was surely not implying that a pricier implementation could pull significantly better measurements from the AK4499. Not a whole lot of room for that.

As you say, many subjectivist audiophiles are opining that objectivist audiophiles are mistaken in trusting measurements over listening. It is unclear, though how many of them believe what they say without any doubts versus how many of them are reflexively dismissing the counter-evidence and defending their egos from the feeling that they have been making expensive mistakes. Same opinions, different internal beliefs. It is unknown why they are so vocal about it, verily they do protest too much, and so I may or may not be over-egging the cold and clammy fear that whispers to the dude (which of course was a caricature to make the point about his motivation). The fairy tale does not tell us whether the emperor ever admitted his own foolishness and had the tailor beheaded to soothe his own ego, or whether he thanked his tailor for teaching him a bitter but valuable lesson, or whether he kept ordering new clothes from the same royal tailor throughout his reign. If the latter, did he ever feel that fear and shame and rage? Did these lead him to mock the finery of his courtiers?

So yes, I do realize that many subjectivists opine that objectivists fetishize measurements to the exclusion of musicality. But I do not pay much attention to that, having spent nineteen twentieths of my life without really reading the specs of audio gear, and continuing to enjoy some poorly recorded music that no amount of the finest audio gear will make sound as good as if it had been recorded with better technology.

I was trying to dig a bit deeper into what “optimized” meant in the context of the D90’s implementation of the AK4499, and it was pointed out that the D90 still isn’t perfect based on Amir’s measurements of the THD+N vs freq., which is a fair point. Amir noted this wasn’t an audible issue, but it does give something for Topping to improve in their pursuit of the perfect DAC.

 

[JustAnandaDourEyedDude]

I was trying to dig a bit deeper into what “optimized” meant in the context of the D90’s implementation of the AK4499, and it was pointed out that the D90 still isn’t perfect based on Amir’s measurements of the THD+N vs freq., which is a fair point. Amir noted this wasn’t an audible issue, but it does give something for Topping to improve in their pursuit of the perfect DAC.

Good point, thanks for clarifying. I understood you were just curious about further optimization, and I was not faulting you at all I was reacting to the head-fi dude's statement that the D90's implementation of AK4499EQ was hobbled by cost considerations, and the implication that a better implementation would necessarily be pricier. I realize the dude is likely never going to see our comments, but our replies were more for the sake of any newbies or innocents that happen to see the dude's words on ASR.

Edit: How much the implementation can be improved is of course a topic worthy of rational discussion, though I am not competent to contribute to that.

 

[Gavin]

It's musician's job to create musicality, not DAC's. DAC's job is to honestly recreate what's already there.

Totally wrong. You completely ignore the importance of design implementation and experience, even if the same chip is used.

 

[ReaderZ]

Totally wrong. You completely ignore the importance of design implementation and experience, even if the same chip is used.

How does that have anything to do with musicality?

 

[Gavin]

It's musician's job to create musicality, not DAC's. DAC's job is to honestly recreate what's already there.

According to your literal meaning, there should be no difference in DACs on the market, as long as the same chip is used.

 

[JohnYang1997]

According to your literal meaning, there should be no difference in DACs on the market, as long as the same chip is used.

As long as the performance is better than hearing threshold. Even with different chips.

 

[Gavin]

As long as the performance is better than hearing threshold. Even with different chips.

Agree. Many DACs are even using 4490\4493. Different designs and implementations bring different sense of hearing (In the same playback environment).

 

[JohnYang1997]

Agree. Many DACs are even using 4490\4493. Different designs and implementations bring different sense of hearing (In the same playback environment).

But in that case there will be minimal to no differences between them. And ReaderZ is correct, DAC is to accurately reproduce the recording instead of render the live situation or anything along that line.

 

[Gavin]

Lol

 

[ReaderZ]

According to your literal meaning, there should be no difference in DACs on the market, as long as the same chip is used.

No, never said that, you need to stop putting words in other people's mouth and be respectful. My point is some DACs are more accurate or hi-fi. But none will add musicality.

 

[paulngo90]

That's an AES cable, while in most cases it should work just fine for analog signal as well, keep in mind it's designed to carry digital signal.

Edit: I don't think cable spec is the issue though, do you have any other XLR to try?

I do not, unfortunately. Looks like I may end up rolling the dice on Mogami 2549 or using the attenuator on amplifier to lower the input volume.

 

[BDWoody]

Totally wrong. You completely ignore the importance of design implementation and experience, even if the same chip is used.

And once you have a look at the measurements, you can see if it was done competently or not.

It's a box that has a simple, measurable job. Properly designed, it adds or subtracts so little to the signal that differences are going to be beyond any human's ability to discern. It isn't an instrument...

The result has little to do with the chip, and everything to do with proper engineering...which is awesome because that means we can move along to things which will easily have audible differences (like speakers) once we've checked off the 'competent for the job' box. No further angst needed.

 

[Pluto]

It's a box that has a simple, measurable job

Precisely. The job of a DAC is to reproduce the incoming digital signal as accurately as possible in the analogue domain. No more, no less, except possibly to adjust the volume.

Infallible mathematics enable us to determine how well that objective is being met. Unless you can demonstrate those mathematics to be incorrect or inappropriate, the argument rapidly becomes too boring to be of concern.