Topping D90SE Review (Balanced DAC)

[JSmith]

My question about the value proposition is legitimate.

It is a legit concern and opinion, for sure... however it came across more so as a statement veiled as a question, rather than an actual legit question IMO. Just sayin'.



JSmith

 

[Veri]

And yet Topping has built the first D90 version without MQA with the XU-208 chip. Dto. also Gustard with the A18, first version with XU-208 chip.
The XU-216 had been around for over 2 years.
Why should you install the more expensive chip when it is not needed? It says "XMOS" on it, that's important.

? well if you design around the less expensive chip right now, chances are extremely high that you can't manufacture it anymore once XU208 chips are entirely dried up. That was the only point I was trying to make

 

[JohnYang1997]

I just asked Amir for his source regarding MQA licensing fees. Since he seems to be throwing statements left and right without substantiation.

I also don't see how 'the extra cost is for the effort to make MQA work' makes this situation any better.

Maybe I shouldn't say but it's single digit.
Of course I don't have to make sense to you it's from our perspective.
To consumer, it's simply a feature.
And again, if one finds it too expensive just look for something else.

 

[boXem]

Maybe I shouldn't say but it's single digit.

You shouldn't. I fear that what will follow may be neither factual nor rational

 

[bboris77]

It is a legit concern and opinion, for sure... however it came across more so as a statement veiled as a question, rather than an actual legit question IMO. Just sayin'.



JSmith

It is both a question and a statement for sure. I don't think it was veiled either - I clearly said I was not convinced about the value proposition. I am open to having my mind changed by facts and arguments. In a sense, I thought I was giving John an opportunity to demonstrate the advantages of the D90SE over the D30 Pro that would explain the discrepancy in price other than measuring better.

EDIT: Please, let's not make this about me and about my choices in DACs and what I am able or not able to afford.

 

[Svperstar]

It looks quite nice but I am not convinced if I got it if I could tell the difference over my current Topping D30.

 

[PierreV]

I clearly said I was not convinced about the value proposition.

Same. While we can certainly admire the quality of the implementation, I don't think there is any value in chasing SINAD for the end-user.

Let's face it: most Hi-Res music is essentially a ripoff.

Yes, some users can pass blind tests on clean real Hi-Res recordings using "tricks" such as background noise level checks at very high levels that aren't relevant to most listening scenarios... but most Hi-Res you can purchase or stream is just fake oversampled Hi-Res, or Hi-Res on recordings that weren't Hi-Res in the first place. That's a very shaky foundation that leads to even shakier things downstream. Higher streaming prices until recently. Controversial non-free codecs. Additional hardware costs. Never-ending pointless upgrades. Chasing something that doesn't even exist in the first place: the Hi-Res recording that undisputably passes a blind test with most people.

What I need is 1) reliability 2) features (remote/remote control from my phone/tablet/computer, inputs/outputs, EQ) 3) looks and convenience.

 

[Spocko]

Maybe I shouldn't say but it's single digit.
Of course I don't have to make sense to you it's from our perspective.
To consumer, it's simply a feature.
And again, if one finds it too expensive just look for something else.

Thanks John, this answer doesn't need further elaboration but speaking of licensed features: what about room correction like Dirac? Now that you literally have perfected the DAC for consumer purposes, will Topping consider adding DSP to a future product?

 

[JohnYang1997]

Thanks John, this answer doesn't need further elaboration but speaking of licensed features: what about room correction like Dirac? Now that you literally have perfected the DAC for consumer purposes, will Topping consider adding DSP to a future product?

Won't say I won't.

 

[spartaman64]

i corrected the statement to say hifiguides. like i said i will not derail this thread. however the way you talk to your customers has been unacceptable, and permanently damaged toppings credibility for some people outside of the engineering mistakes that destroyed headphones, many people mention in many threads. if you dont care fine i wont argue with you here.

well link the comments then

 

[BenF]

D90SE is reviewed by Zeos. I didn't watch it yet, just wanted to let you know that it's up.

 

[Spocko]

...the advantages of the D90SE over the D30 Pro that would explain the discrepancy in price other than measuring better.

I think you stripped away the value proposition when you said "other than measuring better". It's like saying the advantages of an M3 and M3 GTS other than being lighter. Why even have the SINAD chart at all? Your statement suggests that measurements are of value up to a point beyond which the value proposition then switches to other features/measures (by the way, I don't disagree with you). The D90SE premium is the engineering required to design a product that has greater signal integrity per dollar than any other product on the market - whether or not you value this accomplishment is a different matter! Just like some people pay an extra $12,000 just so their M3 can drop its 0-60 time by another 0.2 seconds.

 

[Spocko]

D90SE is reviewed by Zeos. I didn't watch it yet, just wanted to let you know that it's up.

Can't disagree with his conclusions, other than had he known that MQA did not increase the cost of the D90SE significantly, he probably wouldn't spend so much time ranting about it. The likely reason for the price increase is (1) supply side constraints (2) inflation in electronic parts worldwide.

 

[JEntwistle]

it was a 100 euro for me on audiophonics.com which was a 13% bumb. It's the biggest premium a user has ever paid for an audio codec, infact tens and hundreds of magnitudes higher. IT'S INSANE.

But sure Amir thinks it's insignificant so what do I know.

The few buyers they loose would be worth the much better margin they have. MQA costs are very little compared to bump in retail pricing.

There is demand for MQA anyway so it is not a given that this is net negative.

I think you have misinterpreted what Amir said. He said the cost to the manufacturer is much smaller than the increased price they can charge, so it is worth it for the manufacturer to included MQA. In fact, your point agrees with his.

To your point, if a manufacturer can charge 13% more for MQA, and assuming it costs them much less than that to implement it, why wouldn't they add that feature?

 

[muslhead]

I think you stripped away the value proposition when you said "other than measuring better". It's like saying the advantages of an M3 and M3 GTS other than being lighter. Why even have the SINAD chart at all? Your statement suggests that measurements are of value up to a point beyond which the value proposition then switches to other features/measures (by the way, I don't disagree with you). The D90SE premium is the engineering required to design a product that has greater signal integrity per dollar than any other product on the market - whether or not you value this accomplishment is a different matter! Just like some people pay an extra $12,000 just so their M3 can drop its 0-60 time by another 0.2 seconds.

If you are a business owner who determines price (and premium) it is almost always what the market will bear.

 

[vkvedam]

Maybe I shouldn't say but it's single digit.
Of course I don't have to make sense to you it's from our perspective.
To consumer, it's simply a feature.
And again, if one finds it too expensive just look for something else.

If it's that cheap then why was the D90 being sold with a ~£100 price difference (Shenzhen Audio or any other)? If it was the same price for both then I would not have bothered. Enlighten me please!

Edit: Don't bother, looks like you have already answered it. I was on the same page for sometime.

 

[abdo123]

If it's that cheap then why was the D90 being sold with a ~£100 price difference (Shenzhen Audio or any other)? If it was the same price for both then I would not have bothered. Enlighten me please!

He already answered that question.

 

[abdo123]

The likely reason for the price increase is (1) supply side constraints (2) inflation in electronic parts worldwide.

Is the desire to make more money not a valid/potential reason anymore?

 

[DSS]

I am the opposite. If I am paying so much for a DAC, I want it to play natively anything I throw at it.

While you are at it, why not take a position against DSD? High-res? IIS connector in the back? Should it cost $800 without these features?

That is exactly why I play redbook and have a DAC that does just that via SPDiF.
Point is that of my whole collection I have one SACD <hybrid> and bought it because a regular CD was not available in that store many many years ago. If collections are only HiRes files and so on I can understand people go for these kind of product but I believe that majority of the production (past and today) are redbook.

 

[abdo123]

I think you have misinterpreted what Amir said. He said the cost to the manufacturer is much smaller than the increased price they can charge, so it is worth it for the manufacturer to included MQA. In fact, your point agrees with his.

To your point, if a manufacturer can charge 13% more for MQA, and assuming it costs them much less than that to implement it, why wouldn't they add that feature?

I just wanted someone to confirm how much does it actually cost to be MQA certified so we have proof that this is actually the case.