Topping D90SE Review (Balanced DAC)

[raif71]

The way I see it, it is a business decision. Maintaining multiple SKUs has a considerable cost (not least related to inventory), and they already have two (case color). In fact, the ensuing cost can be larger than the MQA markup. Hence they have to decide what to do, and for market reasons it is the non-MQA option that gets chopped.

It would have been better to pull a "Matrix" - I remember that they had one DAC where MQA could be activated later at a cost, and this could be done here as well, but apparently software development skills are not among Topping's best (display fonts horrible, behaviour of the volume buttons makes them difficult to use) and this is something they should work on.

 

[Mario Sanchez]

Of course, of all people, your response is the most predictable






D90SE , employs ESS' built in 8x oversampling filters. If you are passing 352.8 / 384 kHz or above PCM, you need to account for headroom yourself in your source.

Hey buddy, would you please propose a new testing method that could help differentiate between op-amps? I am honest to goodness curious whether this difference can be quantified but you seem to ignore my last post. I believe this could be a step forward in ASR's measurement methodology. I'm sure that Topping, because they are trying to acquire optimal subjective preference through great objective performance, will be interested too.
Please? Because you've been making statements but I haven't seen much proof to back these?

 

[milosz]

Luckily there's more to life than SINAD.

There is?

 

[JohnYang1997]

There is?

In all of life there's a rhythm.

 

[raif71]

Well, please don't leave just yet after leaving an interesting statement! If op-amps do sound different despite displaying measured performance numbers that are highly similar where test is conducted, then it must be the measurement that is missing some critical aspect where op-amp performance differs. If you can kindly indicate what type of measurement methodology reveals this model-to-model difference, I believe we have much to gain from this new measurement, as it may well open our eyes to some previously unspotted scam/subpar products! An important part about science is, after all, creating new theories and modifying old ones such that it better fits reality, in this case what we hear. Data and hearing are not two discrete things but rather closely connected, and when the data fails to show something, we should collect more data to try and see if the failure could be explained, instead of just pointing to it and saying “Told ya it won't work!”
I'm sure Topping would like to know too!

 

[dmac6419]

There is?

Price

 

[JohnYang1997]

Of course, of all people, your response is the most predictable






D90SE , employs ESS' built in 8x oversampling filters. If you are passing 352.8 / 384 kHz or above PCM, you need to account for headroom yourself in your source.

Because I am always based on evidence?

 

[Mountain Goat]

Luckily there's more to life than SINAD.

@Vini darko
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...olery-humour-thread.14494/page-13#post-602856

 

[spartaman64]

It is true hand chosen discrete components for given application / topology will trump run off the mill op-amps, It is also easy to get things wrong in lesser hands.
I have personally never liked Topping's stock ESS based implementations (purely from sound quality perspective). But that's my subjective opinion. They seem to chase 5 leading 0s THD+N more than pleasing tonality.

I particularly dislike the use of OPA1612 in I/V stage - it is NOT a part meant for trans-impedance application. For I/V stage, if not using passive components, at least use parts with very high slew rates and bandwidth. Or implement ESS DAC in Voltage output mode.
Similarly OPA1612 is not an optimal (even TI does not recommend using it given the high input current noise) in LPF stages.

D50 (not D50s) particularly sounds horrendous!
Yes it can be made to sound better by swapping those parts with something else. And in the process it might drop a leading 0 (or 2) in the measurements which won't earn the product that high rank
Bottom line is - the company has good engineers in that they can churn out good measuring devices. It's about time they also invest time in extensive listening tests and see if it actually sounds good to human auditory system. Try comparing the sound with DACs which might not break records in measurement department but are highly praised for their sonic performance. After all, we don't listen to music via an AP analyzer.

idk even the subjective reviewers generally like their stuff

 

[Bit Perfect]

Hi all,
Long time lurker, first time poster! This review left me with a question. Is this the first DAC this site has measured where all the distortion is past the point of audibility? Have there been other DACs where the distortion measures past the point of audibility? If there are other, less expensive DACs that measure past point of audibility, then why does it matter if this one measures even further? I guess my question is, what is the value proposition of a DAC that’s $900+ dollars if a $99 DAC can already measure so well that we physically cannot hear the distortion in the signal? Thanks!

 

[Labjr]

I remember when original Auralic Vega was only $3,500. The new G2.1 is $7,200! But it's a streamer too.

 

[Deleted member 31709]

Hey buddy, would you please propose a new testing method that could help differentiate between op-amps? I am honest to goodness curious whether this difference can be quantified but you seem to ignore my last post. I believe this could be a step forward in ASR's measurement methodology. I'm sure that Topping, because they are trying to acquire optimal subjective preference through great objective performance, will be interested too.
Please? Because you've been making statements but I haven't seen much proof to back these?

Hi sorry. For some reason I got the perception of a clannish attitude from all previous responses, against anyone with a different opinion here. So restrained from responding to all.

While I don't have an access to AP like analyzer (I could use RMAA with my PCI soundcard), may I ask you this - do all amps with similar THD / IMD sound the same?
I mean Amir quite conveniently claims these differences are too close to matter in his post - https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ng-replacing-op-amps-in-topping-d10-dac.4576/

By that token two amplifiers with similar THD+N specs should sound the same right? So all those reviewers comparing THX-789 vs A-90 are day dreaming ?
Anyways, if you have access to an SMD station, get an inexpensive DAC like D50 or Soncoz LA-QXD1 and try swapping the parts and listen for yourself.

 

[Maki]

So all those reviewers comparing THX-789 vs A-90 are day dreaming ?

Yes

 

[Tks]

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.

I think the real SINAD battle these days is for the 50mV spec. Anything that clears 96dB there, is to me personally like seeing 120dB+ SINAD with 4V+

Agreed with everything else btw.

 

[THW]

Hi sorry. For some reason I got the perception of a clannish attitude from all previous responses, against anyone with a different opinion here. So restrained from responding to all.

While I don't have an access to AP like analyzer (I could use RMAA with my PCI soundcard), may I ask you this - do all amps with similar THD / IMD sound the same?
I mean Amir quite conveniently claims these differences are too close to matter in his post - https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ng-replacing-op-amps-in-topping-d10-dac.4576/

By that token two amplifiers with similar THD+N specs should sound the same right? So all those reviewers comparing THX-789 vs A-90 are day dreaming ?
Anyways, if you have access to an SMD station, get an inexpensive DAC like D50 or Soncoz LA-QXD1 and try swapping the parts and listen for yourself.

wasn't it shown that most "subjective" reviewers are absolutely unreliable in picking out actual sonic differences? why would I ever trust them for their listening impressions?

also, you say "all reviewers" like number of data points actually means anything. Having 100,000 unreliable data points is no different from 100 unreliable data points or from having no data at all: it's all f*cking worthless, good only for the garbage. So you may as well throw all of it out and concern yourself with none of it.

edit: actually, unreliable data is worse than no data. at least with no data you can't draw misleading conclusions from it because there's no data to draw conclusions from to begin with

 

[Deleted member 31709]

wasn't it shown that reviewers are absolutely unreliable in picking out actual sonic differences? why would I ever trust them for their listening impressions?

Hi, could you please post the link you are referring to so that I may educate myself of such a poll or study undertaken and which prominent reviewers were the participants? My naive google search didn't yield any meaningful results.
Whether we trust them or not is secondary.

Thanks!

 

[Spocko]

For a person who's channel is about stopping the FOMO you're not doing a very good job

LOL the name is ironic!

 

[amirm]

Is this the first DAC this site has measured where all the distortion is past the point of audibility? Have there been other DACs where the distortion measures past the point of audibility?

No, plenty of them do. Everything above mid-point in the SINAD graph in blue can be shown to be completely transparent. The claim to fame of this unit is that it achieves the lowest level of noise+distortion. Distortion has been quite low for many including budget DACs. Getting noise down has been the difficulty in attaining the highest scores.

 

[amirm]

Hi, could you please post the link you are referring to so that I may educate myself of such a poll or study undertaken and which prominent reviewers were the participants? My naive google search didn't yield any meaningful results.
Whether we trust them or not is secondary.

Thanks!

The test was to see how reliable stereo reviewers were in detecting frequency response errors in speakers. Here were the results:

As you see, they finished pretty low in this regard.

 

[THW]

The test was to see how reliable stereo reviewers were in detecting frequency response errors in speakers. Here were the results:

As you see, they finished pretty low in this regard.

was looking for that but alas, you were much faster than me