Topping DX5II Balanced DAC and Headphone Amp Review

[respice finem]

Fuck.

I'm on the fence regarding my next purchase and obviously this market is saturated with amazing value compared to years past, but there is a part of me that wants to purchase the RME over the DX5 II (disappointed with the bugs and read that the sound can be harsh), FiiO K13 r2r and the T71. I just can't justify it completely, you know.

In a hobby, no one has to really justify anything (IMHO). It's simply horses for courses.
I got my second ADI-2 DAC this year, mainly because of the nice "feature package" - EQ+Loudness+Crossfeed.
Topping might probably add Loudness and Crossfeed later, but will they?

 

[teleblaze]

In a hobby, no one has to really justify anything (IMHO).
I got my second ADI-2 DAC this year, mainly because of the nice "feature package" - EQ+Loudness+Crossfeed.
Topping might probably add Loudness and Crossfeed later, but will they?

You are right. just got back to this hobby so that's why
I hope that they do. But just now they released the DX9 Discrete and the D900. There is no end to this ah

 

[donjoe0]

This unit looks like a complete Dac/Amp that will drive any headphone that's not an electrostatic (or maybe an Abyss)

Funny thing is, the only reason I'm currently looking into powerful headphone amps is I'm curious how some Stax estats would sound through an SRD7 transformer/adapter fed from a separate amp. Usually people talk about that kind of setup as requiring a speaker amp, but considering these transformer units have 20-30 ohm input impedance for most of the audio band, these super powerful headphone amps coming out in recent years would seem to be damn near perfect solutions for this, not to mention they have far better sonic performance metrics than equal-price speaker amps AFAICT.

So far, the DX5 II works well, there are only problems with PEQ... although this is one of the main features of this device.

That was going to be my question: is there anything else to worry about QC-wise with this model if you're planning to just ignore its PEQ? I prefer to EQ in the source computing device that's playing the music anyway, and have all the profiles I need in one place, independent of DAC choice.

I think another worrying complaint I've heard is that it's a ridiculous multi-step process just to switch from headphones to speakers, and that would be a deal-breaker for me, but apparently you can get around this by configuring some of the remote control buttons?

 

[Timbo2]

Funny thing is, the only reason I'm currently looking into powerful headphone amps is I'm curious how some Stax estats would sound through an SRD7 transformer/adapter fed from a separate amp. Usually people talk about that kind of setup as requiring a speaker amp, but considering these transformer units have 20-30 ohm input impedance for most of the audio band, these super powerful headphone amps coming out in recent years would seem to be damn near perfect solutions for this, not to mention they have far better sonic performance metrics than equal-price speaker amps AFAICT.


That was going to be my question: is there anything else to worry about QC-wise with this model if you're planning to just ignore its PEQ? I prefer to EQ in the source computing device that's playing the music anyway, and have all the profiles I need in one place, independent of DAC choice.

I think another worrying complaint I've heard is that it's a ridiculous multi-step process just to switch from headphones to speakers, and that would be a deal-breaker for me, but apparently you can get around this by configuring some of the remote control buttons?

It has the C1 and C2 buttons that you can configure one for headphone and one for speakers. Even using the menu system I didn’t find switching outputs worse than any current modern piece of electronics. Meaning it sucks, but no worse than any other minimal button design.

 

[donjoe0]

Even using the menu system I didn’t find switching outputs worse than any current modern piece of electronics. Meaning it sucks, but no worse than any other minimal button design.

Has to be worse than plug-detection ones, though I hate those for making me wear out my headphone jacks faster. Then we have the actually convenient solution of flipping a damned switch on the front of the device, also present in modern devices, just not ubiquitous sadly.

 

[Noske]

Who could have thought proper QA costs money, and time. Which is money itself. Why not release immature incomplete products and let the buyers buy and test them. And fix some of the bugs before your next shiny product is released and your less then 2y product EOL? Isn't that more cost effective and let you sell more?

No, not with "durable" products. They are expected to function reliably for many years.

It is often very inconvenient and costly to return a durable item for repair or for a recall, eg, sometimes with defective components in cars. A stich in time saves nine, Ford Pinto.

It's a cost-benefit analysis that wealthy Western throwaway cultures don't quite appreciate.

In the meantime, the manufacturer loses market cred.

The question is sometimes put why do they put out so many products?

Simple. Because people buy them with a short-term time horizon, either anticipating an upgrade/obsolescence or breakdown. That is a very Western concept. Do not underestimate how well the Chinese know this.

 

[ziggurcat]

... there is a part of me that wants to purchase the RME over the DX5 II (disappointed with the bugs and read that the sound can be harsh) ...

1. Nothing is bug-free
2. The DX5 II does not sound "harsh" -- the objective data, IMO, simply does not support that argument.

 

[Bleib]

It does seem though that they have sold an unusual amount of these, this is why it receives so many updates

 

[delta76]

1. Nothing is bug-free

While true, it is just a blanket statement. There is a difference between a company that stands behind their products, fixes bugs promptly and does not introduce new bugs with their releases (at least, not often), and a company that fixes half of reported bugs while introducing plenty more, and drop supports as soon as their new product line hits market.

It has been argued to death here and there is no absolute right. It is always your money your call

 

[Joachim Herbert]

While true, it is just a blanket statement. There is a difference between a company that stands behind their products, fixes bugs promptly and does not introduce new bugs with their releases (at least, not often), and a company that fixes half of reported bugs while introducing plenty more, and drop supports as soon as their new product line hits market.

It has been argued to death here and there is no absolute right. It is always your money your call

I bought one of the first units and enjoyed it ever since. Topping has been very busy fixing bugs and adding features. In fact they still are.

Ongoing updates are the nature of the game with software driven devices,

 

[donjoe0]

It does seem though that they have sold an unusual amount of these, this is why it receives so many updates

They must be selling like hotcakes - when I looked for one on Ali today I could only find Pre-Order listings, I thought it was a just-announced product.

 

[Berwhale]

Regarding software bugs, quality, etc... The Qudelix 5K & T71 now have an excellent Android application and Chrome plug-in, but it's easy to forget that the original software was essentially an evolution of the Radsone ES100 app and had quite a few issues and bugs. IIRC, I'd owned the Q5K for well over a year before the 2nd generation application was made available. The new application was a complete rewrite of the app with substantial enhancements to both useability and functionality - the Q5K was already a very decent device, but new app transformed my experience of it.

Personally, I am willing to give Topping some time to sort out the DX5 II firmware and Topping.Tune bugs, especially as many on ASR pleaded with them to go down this path.

 

[Sokel]

Fuck.

I just can't justify it completely, you know.

Add its ingenious volume control and you will, specially if you listen to low levels.

 

[ziggurcat]

While true, it is just a blanket statement. There is a difference between a company that stands behind their products, fixes bugs promptly and does not introduce new bugs with their releases (at least, not often), and a company that fixes half of reported bugs while introducing plenty more, and drop supports as soon as their new product line hits market.

It has been argued to death here and there is no absolute right. It is always your money your call

I've not seen Topping just drop support the moment a new device is released to the public, and they've been pretty prompt in addressing the bugs that have been reported with this particular device.

It's also quite common for new bugs to be introduced when a different bug has been fixed. That's just the nature of how these things work sometimes, and it happened all the time when I was involved with video game QA.

 

[Sokel]

I've not seen Topping just drop support the moment a new device is released to the public, and they've been pretty prompt in addressing the bugs that have been reported with this particular device.

It's also quite common for new bugs to be introduced when a different bug has been fixed. That's just the nature of how these things work sometimes, and it happened all the time when I was involved with video game QA.

Now look. ongoing support and stuff is nice, all companies should do it.
But AFTER they have shorted out the crucial points, specially anything related with levels, these must be unaffected even by a sledgehammer.

The +20dB bug some days ago only saved speakers and headphones for the simple reason that this thing cannot physically output 40V.
Can't say the same for its output stages though, these must have suffered by it.
I would certainly not buy a used one after that.

 

[teleblaze]

Add its ingenious volume control and you will, specially if you listen to low levels.

Fuck off man! Haha

 

[ziggurcat]

Regarding software bugs, quality, etc... The Qudelix 5K & T71 now have an excellent Android application and Chrome plug-in, but it's easy to forget that the original software was essentially an evolution of the Radsone ES100 app and had quite a few issues and bugs. IIRC, I'd owned the Q5K for well over a year before the 2nd generation application was made available. The new application was a complete rewrite of the app with substantial enhancements to both useability and functionality - the Q5K was already a very decent device, but new app transformed my experience of it.

Personally, I am willing to give Topping some time to sort out the DX5 II firmware and Topping.Tune bugs, especially as many on ASR pleaded with them to go down this path.

I would be curious to know if any of the PEQ issues are present with their Centaurus since they both kinda sorta use the same OS with the same PEQ functionality.

 

[ziggurcat]

But AFTER they have shorted out the crucial points, specially anything related with levels, these must be unaffected even by a sledgehammer.

Sometimes it's unavoidable, and you just fix the new bug.

 

[Sokel]

Sometimes it's unavoidable, and you just fix the new bug.

Agreed but one must set the priorities straight.
Set levels SW, lock it under special measures so it's air-tight and then fix the insignificant screen-bleeding (an example) .

To break the device itself it's 200-300 euro, a nice dinner money.
To break a set of nice speakers can be a nice car money, not mentioning our hearing, that's invaluable.

(I know, digital VC should always have counter-measures down the way, not all people take care of that though)

 

[jkim]

Add its ingenious volume control and you will, specially if you listen to low levels.

Fuck off man! Haha

Why DX5 II or RME if you listen at low levels?

• Qudelix 5K has even more ingenious volume control.
• In fact, thanks to its volume control scheme, Q5K boasts state-of-the-art noise at low signal levels, not properly measured in Amir's review.
• Concerned about apparently mediocre SINAD from Q5K measured by Amir? There is a caveat in that SINAD result.
• Also, the PEQ software in DX5 II's DSP should have the same quantization noise issue as in D50 III. Q5K has no such problem (will post my measurements soon).
• Of course, unlike RME, Q5K does not provide volume-adaptive loudness compensation. But instead, it supports more PEQ bands. I also own an RME ADI-2 DAC Fs. To me, a fixed amount of loudness compensation, saved as a separate PEQ profile for each headphone, works better because each music album has a different recording level and I naturally adjust volume to my prefered "low listening level" depending on music. It works better this way than RME's volume-adaptive loudness control.

In my view, unless one needs to drive very insensitive headphones (i.e., low volume issue), I see no reason to consider any other DAC/HP amp. In fact, Q5K's nearly 3 Vrms max balanced output into 32 ohm load can handle quite a few headphones.

Attention to detail in the engineering of Q5K is simply astounding. An example many Chinese brands should follow...