Topping D90SE Review (Balanced DAC)

[wizardofoz]

When you are the developer the software is not free. It has to be written, tested, debugged and supported ongoing.

If it was a paid option how much would pay for it?

 

[sq225917]

I'll clear that up for you then. I don't need it, don't want to pay for it. My purchasing doesn't exist to subsidise your poor source choices

 

[Eddy H.]

I use a laptop, TV, and a bluesound node 2i and I have never had any problems with the dac. If you're having problems maybe you got a bad unit.

 

[gvl]

I'll clear that up for you then. I don't need it, don't want to pay for it. My purchasing doesn't exist to subsidise your poor source choices

At $900 a pop your already paid for this and other features that are missing and prevent this product from being used in all use cases.

 

[sq225917]

I'm not sure how purchasing works for other people, but I buy things based in the features they have, not the ones they don't have.

 

[Barryfromholland]

i bought this dac to WORK in my hifi system. And with my Samsung tv.
but Is has problems with Samsung.

so I see the update as a “repair” rather than a new feature.

 

[sq225917]

Why is it Topping's job to make up for Samsung's spdif output being out of spec?

 

[Atanasi]

Why is it Topping's job to make up for Samsung's spdif output being out of spec?

It is an old interoperability principle to receive liberally and send conservatively. At least this is more convenient in the short term. In the long term it allows bad implementations to grow.

 

[Rover]

Why is it Topping's job to make up for Samsung's spdif output being out of spec?

Do you have documentary evidence with measurements that Samsung,LG do not meet the specifications?Or are you saying this to justify not a high-quality optical Entrance Topping?

 

[sq225917]

Why do tiu rhink its always tv'a that don't work with many dacs....?

 

[gvl]

Why is it Topping's job to make up for Samsung's spdif output being out of spec?

Because it’s very unlikely that Samsung will do anything to make their TVs work with Topping DACs.

 

[TunaBug]

Why do tiu rhink its always tv'a that don't work with many dacs....?

As an example of "receive liberally and send conservatively", consider that you can't spell very well Do you expect people to still read what you wrote, or just ignore it completely? Note that, as with the devices in question, the reason for your spelling is moot: the sequence of characters rendered on my screen has nothing to do with your reason.

The ESS DAC in the D90se is a bit sensitive regarding what it accepts, causing it to not work with some devices. IIRC there are some disc players as well. I assume it has to do with some attributes of the signal (jitter?) and has nothing to do with whether it's a TV. Other DAC chips don't have a problem. Other vendors using the same ESS chips have offered firmware that tweaks some of the configuration values for the DAC so that it is able to work just fine with those devices, but Topping does not offer that.

I don't have one of the offending combinations, and I don't believe Topping has any obligation to fix it. But I also think it's part of the value consideration when deciding what to buy. We live in a world where people regularly get firmware/software updates at no cost, so for better or worse that has become expected, and it's stands out when others have clearly fixed it.

 

[elvisizer]

I use a laptop, TV, and a bluesound node 2i and I have never had any problems with the dac. If you're having problems maybe you got a bad unit.

well I DID contact topping support about the issues I had with dropouts over optical from my LG CX OLED. They couldn't fix it and said the dac was not defective. <shrug>

 

[gvl]

It’s not clear if this can be fixed by setting control registers on the ESS chip, @JohnYang1997 mentioned it had something to do with the SPDIF receiver chip not being able to deal with the incoming signal. AKM receivers could apparently help if used but unavailable due to the factory mishap. I suspect you could build a more robust solution around non AKM receivers as well but perhaps Topping just went with a cookbook approach that works for the majority of sources and cheap/easy to implement.

 

[Eddy H.]

Quick show of hands. How many people own a Samsung TV? - 75%? Wow... It would appear that Topping is indeed under a (an assumed) obligation to produce a product that works flawlwssly with electronics most likely to be used with their devices. An obligation to adhere to their own good reputation as well as present and future profit expectations... Topping can of course do whatever they want. They can sink their own ship if they so desire. But if they plan on remaining a strong market force they are absolutely intrinsically obligated to pay attention. I don't think that a few extra keystrokes in developing a proper firmware is asking too much. (And it truely is a few keystrokes to enable timings which have already been tested and successfully implemented in multiple devices. It will work here easily).

I've never owned a Samsung or LG TV and never will. My cheap Vizios and TLC TVs work great with my D90se. It's kind of weird that the more expensive TVs don't work with this dac.

 

[rlwings]

I've never owned a Samsung or LG TV and never will. My cheap Vizios and TLC TVs work great with my D90se. It's kind of weird that the more expensive TVs don't work with this dac.

Lol, I changed my mind and deleted my post... But yes, it is a bit weird about Samsung.

 

[MikeJ]

If the D90SE has issues working with known devices via optical or other ports Topping has an obligation to compile a list and disclose the information in sales literature so prospective buyers will clearly understand limitations exist and are not expected to be fixed.

If the company knowingly sells a product which is not functional with certain configurations and makes no effort to disclose the known incompatibility prior to sale they open themselves up to claims and poor customer relations. That type of business activity can damage a company.

As far as my research goes, this is not primarily Topping's fault. Did you know that ESS DAC's jitter rejection algorithm is, unfortunately, very unforgiving to poor input sources? Hence that's the reason for dropouts / loss of clock synchronization. There are other ESS-based DACs out there which exhibit this behavior. It's not that straightforward as you say.

 

[Veri]

If the D90SE has issues working with known devices via optical or other ports Topping has an obligation to compile a list and disclose the information in sales literature so prospective buyers will clearly understand limitations exist and are not expected to be fixed.

If the company knowingly sells a product which is not functional with certain configurations and makes no effort to disclose the known incompatibility prior to sale they open themselves up to claims and poor customer relations. That type of business activity can damage a company.

There are barely any good functioning digital receivers in the current supply chain, what with corona and AKM factory fire..

 

[Trell]

As far as my research goes, this is not primarily Topping's fault. Did you know that ESS DAC's jitter rejection algorithm is, unfortunately, very unforgiving to poor input sources? Hence that's the reason for dropouts / loss of clock synchronization. There are other ESS-based DACs out there which exhibit this behavior. It's not that straightforward as you say.

The new RME ADI-2 DAC fs with an ESS DAC chip won’t have this issue. Part of the reason why RME is more expensive.

Edit: spelling

 

[Rover]

The new RME ADI-2 DAC fs with an ESS DAC chip won’t have this issue. Part of the reason why RME is more expensive.

Edit: spelling

The D1se on ES9038PRO is cheaper than the D90SE and has no problems .Because there is a built-in DPPL controller and SMSL knows that users need it.