Topping D90SE Review (Balanced DAC)

[PacoRabbane]

What guarantees are you willing to give us except your scout's honour? What audible differences did you find? Can you confirm them with any measurements? Did you do a proper double-blind test?

I don't have Amir's tools to be able to carry out the tests.

My indications are based on pure listening, with direct connection between DAC, McIntosh MC462, B&W 800 D3.

I asked to verify with his instrumentation if my feedback is also measurable

 

[Mulder]

If you really have a problem with an old CD transport whose clock is too far out of spec then you could try an S/PDIF reclocker, which might have some utility in such a situation.

I have tested with the SPDIF reclocker you linked to, but it did not help at all. Maybe it's because the reclocker does not work as the manufacturer promises. I also want to point out that my CD player is not very old at all.

 

[voodooless]

I don't have Amir's tools to be able to carry out the tests.

My indications are based on pure listening, with direct connection between DAC, McIntosh MC462, B&W 800 D3.

I asked to verify with his instrumentation if my feedback is also measurable

So, no guarantees after all then..

 

[PacoRabbane]

So, no guarantees after all then..

Can I invite you to listen to my house?

 

[voodooless]

Can I invite you to listen to my house?

You think I'd trust myself with a subjective test .. no way

 

[abdo123]

You think I'd trust myself with a subjective test .. no way

you can just record the output in both situations and ABX it.

 

[bidn]

https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=31545
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=29667
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=27870
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=29856

This is why I decided not to purchase RME ADI 2

Excellent point!
My RME ADI 2 Pro has this defect too....
I learned to live with it (e.g. trying to turn the volume knob very slowly, else it may do the opposite of the intended volume change...), and it becomes less of an issue when using an external amp, but no quality control for such an essential element and widespread defect is absolutely not acceptable.

The problem is that there are established strong prejudices here :
- On are hand, German products = perfect quality
- On the other hand, Chinese products = sh*t
But reality is different. And I see this widespread issue re. the volume knop on the RME ADI 2 as speaking for Topping.

 

[charleski]

I have tested with the SPDIF reclocker you linked to, but it did not help at all. Maybe it's because the reclocker does not work as the manufacturer promises. I also want to point out that my CD player is not very old at all.

That's a pity. There are DACs with variable-window PLLs that allow you to choose greater jitter with increased compatibility, here's one Stereophile reviewed in 2014 ... note that it's around 4 times the price of the D90se.

 

[kopczas]

Not to mention its display

There is one major difference between any DAC and ADI2:
RME is basically DSP with DAC function in price. It makes sense to pay more for RME only is DSP is necessary.
I`ve owned RME for 3 day, sold it cause it sounded strange to me. It measures good but there is something weird about it IMO.

 

[PacoRabbane]

You think I'd trust myself with a subjective test .. no way

are you telling me that you choose an audio system according to the measurements that are made, without relying on your personal listening experience?

I'm baffled

 

[voodooless]

I'm baffled

Welcome to ASR

But no, that is not what I'm saying..

 

[abdo123]

are you telling me that you choose an audio system according to the measurements that are made, without relying on your personal listening experience?

I'm baffled

yes because not everyone is privileged enough to purchase every product on the market and then picking what we like based on preference alone.

we have to filter our purchase choices by evidence first.

 

[Trell]

are you telling me that you choose an audio system according to the measurements that are made, without relying on your personal listening experience?

I'm baffled

The COVID pandemic for sure made it much harder (if at all possible) to listen to any equipment/speakers before buying. Even before the pandemic this has been the trend for a long time as Brick and Mortar shops closes and online shopping is the only viable possibility for many. A good return policy, of course, is needed.

 

[kchap]

It’s a bit more complex than that. For absolute best jitter performance you need to set up the PLL in the receiver with a narrow lock range, but that means it will reject signals that already have loads of jitter embedded in them. Older receivers had a wider lock range and better compatibility, but as a direct consequence also displayed poorer jitter performance.

I am not singling out an individual DAC manufacture as anecdotally it seems my thoughts would apply to a lot of the manufactures; and users for that matter.

We should be careful about blaming S/PDIF for distortion caused by jitter. Is there is stated tolerance for clock accuracy and a jitter mask applicable to S/PIDF? If the answer is yes and the incoming signal is within the frequency range and fits inside the mask then the DAC should be able to decode and dejitter the signal.

Doing a quick web search I did not find a reference for clock but I did find an indirect reference for jitter:
https://web.archive.org/web/2014060..._high_performance_SPDIF_receiver_Oct_2006.pdf

Figure 2 in the PDF is the jitter mask and it is really bad, but the PDF states it is the standard. It makes it tougher for DAC manufacturers but the solution proposed in the PDF is similar to techniques used in data communications for well over 40 years. There must chip sets available that can extract the clock and data as well as attenuating the jitter.

Of course it is also reasonable to apply jitter and clock measurements to signal sources. There might be a lot of signal sources out there, CD players, PCs, streamers etc. that send a S/PIDF signal that is outside the mask. In that case fair enough, nothing wrong with the DAC.

 

[Marc v E]

I wonder why there is so much discussion here, that I don't see when a speaker is measured? Is it because there is a new best measuring device? Or that dacs can easily be measured and speakers not to that degree?
Or that the Goliath branded dacs are being bested by the David equivalent?

 

[raif71]

I wonder if any spdif purifier that is connected to the "deviant" cd player then output of the purifier connected to DAC, if this works then it's a success case for spdif purifier.

 

[JohnYang1997]

I wonder why there is so much discussion here, that I don't see when a speaker is measured? Is it because there is a new best measuring device? Or that dacs can easily be measured and speakers not to that degree?
Or that the Goliath branded dacs are being bested by the David equivalent?

It seems the best performing speakers have quite a lot views and discussion too.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ds/genelec-8351b-review-studio-monitor.23432/
A little bit controversy also adds a lot
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/kef-r3-speaker-review.12021/

Another reason is I get to reply to people having questions here so a bit of back and forth is a lot.

 

[bidn]

i agree. you cannot blame topping for following trends and giving what people want. yes a lot of us on here think its a scam or whatever but many more people dont think so. it will fade over time if it is truly a scam and thats that. if you are paying 899 for a DAC it should have every feature and MQA is a feature, you dont have to use it. its smart business for topping and doesnt hurt you. other than seeing the logo i suppose.

Probably they made this decision before GoldenOne published his famous game-changing video on youtube (today roughly 270 000 views (it never stops strongly increasing), 20 000 likes, 3000 comments), or at least before it became viral in the audio world.

Now taking the most influential youtube audio reviewer, Zeos (who BTW ponders about the D90SE having MQA) and looking at the comments on his youtube review of the D90SE, many say that they will not buy it (i.e. boycott it) just because it has MQA. Something one would not have seen pre-Golden One.

For me personally the video is not a game changer because over the years there have been several MQA threads here on ASR before that video (all having similar patterns, many members shocked by Amir's posts or at least unable to reconcile his stand with ASR's, and each thread ending by being locked), so, if I may say so, I have long, several years ago, been vaccinated against MQA-19, I have never and will never buy a product or service supporting MQA as long as I perceive that the threat has not really vanished (e.g. renowned labels like Warner or 2L having converted their tracks to MQA and still not having reverted to a lossless and open format, Tidal still using it, etc.).

So, though I do admire a lot the D90SE and Topping's and John Yang's outstanding accomplishments and breakthroughs, I am sorry to say that I am among those not buying this excellent product just because of this.

Edit,
PS.:
a general marketing tip for future audio products:
advertise them as being MQA-free!
I believe that it will bring in more sales in than having MQA!

 

[kopczas]

Won't say I won't.

I`m really waiting for Topping`s DSP, standalone or built-in, that would go for instrumental grade parameters and measurements.
Market for room correction, or headphone EQ is growing so I guess this kind of device would sell easelly.

 

[kopczas]

just because it has MQA.

I`m pretty convinced that most of commenters won`t buy D90e because of the price. D90 vs D90e for someone who is not dedicated geek and already owns D90 , make no sense. For premium users it is still to cheap, but those do not care much about measurement. One thing Zeos misjudges in my opinion is statement that DAC is just DAC.