Topping DX9 Discreet - What's the point?

[Roland68]

you mean it just cant use two outputs simultaneously? then yes, as i said earlier having two PEQ presets for every output will be useless.

You can use as many outputs as you want, but you only have two channels available at a time (R/L), and the PEQ is always the same for all right channels and all left channels.
None of these devices has different capabilities in this regard than the Q5K.

These are all stereo DACs. Setting up a digital crossover requires a multi-channel system/DAC with at least three channels or more.
For mono, two channels would, of course, be sufficient.

 

[solawind]

These are all stereo DACs. Setting up a digital crossover requires a multi-channel system/DAC with at least three channels or more.

there are multichannel DACs which can route output to multiple outputs simultaneously. I expected this one to be like that considering $500 price. Fosi even announced a cheaper one a while ago, but idk if it was released or still in development

 

[Multicore]

What's the point? I sometimes wonder if it's about coming up with projects to train their engineers.

 

[solawind]

What's the point? I sometimes wonder if it's about coming up with projects to train their engineers.

people are ready to pay for new shiny devices with oled screens and insane SNR numbers and trash thier old ones. that is the only point

 

[Roland68]

there are multichannel DACs which can route output to multiple outputs simultaneously.

Can you tell me which DACs these are?
There's the dac8 PRO from Okto Research, and there used to be the DM7 from Topping. But with those, one DAC channel is always assigned to exactly one output.

 

[AetherDrive]

Can you tell me which DACs these are?
There's the dac8 PRO from Okto Research, and there used to be the DM7 from Topping. But with those, one DAC channel is always assigned to exactly one output.

Minidsp Flex can do exactly what you are proposing and can also function as a DAC.

 

[Roland68]

Minidsp Flex can do exactly what you are proposing and can also function as a DAC.

I already mentioned MiniDSP in the thread.

 

[DivineCurrent]

The DX9 Discrete seems to be competing directly with the RME ADI-2 DAC FS. It has similar features of the RME including EQ and Crossfeed. It's even at the same retail price of the RME at $1,299. But the DX9 has a fully balanced headphone amp with way more power, addition of Bluetooth, and more PEQ bands than the RME. Seems like a no brainer upgrade to me, assuming there are no issues with quality control.

 

[SnakeLord]

The DX9 Discrete seems to be competing directly with the RME ADI-2 DAC FS. It has similar features of the RME including EQ and Crossfeed. It's even at the same retail price of the RME at $1.299. But the DX9 has a fully balanced headphone amp with way more power, addition of Bluetooth, and more PEQ bands than the RME. Seems like a no brainer upgrade to me, assuming there are no issues with quality control.

The question is: what makes this device better as any other HPA/DAC combo for around 300-500$ on the market? Yeah, it does have a bit more HPA power, thats it?
I dont see that added 1k$ value besides some marketing "blabla". Its not even an proper preamp since its lacking the basic connectivity like multiple RCA/XLR in/outs. Nor is it a proper audio interface like an RME as example.

Considering the asked price of 1300$ i would always go for an established high quality and support brand like RME (made in Germany btw.) over Topping. At least at this point of time Topping clearly cannot compete with RME in terms of quality.
The bluetooth connectivity and higher power HPA are just not enough to justify the same price, especially considering that we are talking about an Chinese brand with much lower support and production costs.

 

[solawind]

ADI-2 DAC FS is kinda outdated, the low number of PEQ filters makes it less usefull for speaker/headphones equalisation and the lack of bluetooth means it is not a competitive device today. It is still excellent DAC, just its functionality is outdated. DX9 looks better in comparison, i only wondering why toping has not implemented equal loudness control and bitperfect test, having DSP built in it should be an easy task.

 

[solawind]

Its not even an proper preamp since its lacking the basic connectivity like multiple RCA/XLR in/outs. Nor is it a proper audio interface

do you need a lot of analog intput nowdays ? DX9 has many digital inputs, two spdif ports for a streamer/video player/whatever

 

[DivineCurrent]

The question is: what makes this device better as any other HPA/DAC combo for around 300-500$ on the market? Yeah, it does have a bit more HPA power, thats it?
I dont see that added 1k$ value besides some marketing "blabla". Its not even an proper preamp since its lacking the basic connectivity like multiple RCA/XLR in/outs. Nor is it a proper audio interface like an RME as example.

Considering the asked price of 1300$ i would always go for an established high quality and support brand like RME (made in Germany btw.) over Topping. At least at this point of time Topping clearly cannot compete with RME in terms of quality.
The bluetooth connectivity and higher power HPA are just not enough to justify the same price, especially considering that we are talking about an Chinese brand with much lower support and production costs.

I guess what I meant to say was for those who are using the ADI-2 DAC specifically for headphone listening as a DAC/Amp, like myself, the DX9 Discrete seems to be a great upgrade. The ADI-2 DAC is geared more towards pro use, so of course it will serve better as an audio interface.

 

[SnakeLord]

do you need a lot of analog intput nowdays ? DX9 has many digital inputs, two spdif ports for a streamer/video player/whatever

Well, same question goes for the digital inputs. How many is enough?
In my case i actually do. I have 2x ST/STXII soundcards/DACs which are very handy for proper blind op-amps A/B testing going into an older stereo-receiver/amp -> (another amp if needed). So i actually need those additional analogue in/outs.

I would not mind if DX9 would make my Stereo-Receiver/Preamp obsolete. Less hardware on the table for me.

 

[Roland68]

Well, same question goes for the digital inputs. How many is enough?
In my case i actually do. I have 2x ST/STXII soundcards/DACs which are very handy for proper blind op-amps A/B testing going into an older stereo-receiver/amp -> (another amp if needed). So i actually need those additional analogue in/outs.

I would not mind if DX9 would make my Stereo-Receiver/Preamp obsolete. Less hardware on the table for me.

Yes, I've already criticized that.
One of the points where @TOPPING could have made the DX9 much more interesting and generated significantly more potential buyers with little effort: placing two to four additional analog inputs directly in front of the relay-based volume control.
Alternatively, they could have installed an additional connection, like on the PRE90, for a box with additional inputs.
Unfortunately another good opportunity wasted.

 

[ruumis]

It looks like the DX9 Discrete is shipping now. Whoever receives it first, please do share your initial impressions.

 

[Sir Sanders Zingmore]

Personally I'm excited that it appears to be waterproof...

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

Main point of every business is $$$
Hope that helps

 

[kandamrgam]

Can someone explain what's the point of 1-bit DACs? Dont these DACs have to convert PCM to DSD, because 1-bit DACs can only convert DSD natively? Which is a lossy conversion? As far as I know, PCM to DSD is lossy. Not that it is audible, but why do something that's theoretically inferior?

 

[oleg87]

Can someone explain what's the point of 1-bit DACs? Dont these DACs have to convert PCM to DSD, because 1-bit DACs can only convert DSD natively? Which is a lossy conversion? As far as I know, PCM to DSD is lossy. Not that it is audible, but why do something that's theoretically inferior?

Well, I don't know what exactly Topping is doing here, but all modern "off-the-shelf" audio DACs are doing something vaguely like this (though their modulators usually have a few bits).

There's no sense in being precious about preserving the original PCM signal - simple resistor ladder converters that give each digital code a discrete output level without oversampling will be far less precise, since you need extremely precisely matched components to have enough linearity to hope to even approach CD quality. And once you add oversampling, well, that's also "lossy", though in reality it improves performance vs the alternatives of omitting it or trying to implement some kind of analog brickwall filter.

Remember that the goal of a DAC is to reconstruct the sampled signal, not reproduce the discrete samples. This is invariably easier by doing everything at a far higher frequency than the PCM sample rate.