Topping E30 II Lite DAC review and measurements

[VientoB]

All DACs should have the option to switch the display colour to this orange/red colour.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

Hi guys. Just for the sake of discussion, because it's probably almost impossible to hear the difference in a double blind setup.

So Topping DACs (E30, E30 II Lite, E30 II...) have 6 filters. Default has always been F3 (it was already the default for "good old E30").

With that said, FR-wise F6 seems to be the best. However, wouldn't its linearity up to 20 KHz and beyond make it maybe a bit too bright for our ears?

According to the plot, F3 and F4 would be the warmest because of their attenuation. Maybe that's why Topping set F3 as default: to go easy on our ears. However, F4 impulse response seems better than F3.

What do you think? Thank you.

 

[Barncore]

Hey guys, just wanted to share a little comparison with the internet before i forget about it forever.

I've owned a E30 II Lite for the past year or so, and recently got a D50 III to replace it, and i can say for sure it sounds better. It sounds clearer. The E30 sounds a little murkier in comparison. Perhaps the D50 transients are more resolving or something, i don't know exactly, but the result is more clarity on the D50. Not clarity as in brightness, clarity as in more clear.
I thought the E30 was clear already, but comparing it to the D50 made me see that there is more clarity to be had. That's probably obvious to many of you here, but alas i'll add my little experience to the pile anyway.

Btw i was using the same headphones and amp for the comparison (Hifiman Ananda Nano + L30 II). Same RCA cables too. The only thing that changed was the DAC (and different USB ports too, fwiw).

 

[VientoB]

Hey guys, just wanted to share a little comparison with the internet before i forget about it forever.

I've owned a E30 II Lite for the past year or so, and recently got a D50 III to replace it, and i can say for sure it sounds better. It sounds clearer. The E30 sounds a little murkier in comparison. Perhaps the D50 transients are more resolving or something, i don't know exactly, but the result is more clarity on the D50. Not clarity as in brightness, clarity as in more clear.
I thought the E30 was clear already, but comparing it to the D50 made me see that there is more clarity to be had. That's probably obvious to many of you here, but alas i'll add my little experience to the pile anyway.

Btw i was using the same headphones and amp for the comparison (Hifiman Ananda Nano + L30 II). Same RCA cables too. The only thing that changed was the DAC (and different USB ports too, fwiw).

Are the output voltages the same?

 

[Robbo99999]

Hi guys. Just for the sake of discussion, because it's probably almost impossible to hear the difference in a double blind setup.

So Topping DACs (E30, E30 II Lite, E30 II...) have 6 filters. Default has always been F3 (it was already the default for "good old E30").

With that said, FR-wise F6 seems to be the best. However, wouldn't its linearity up to 20 KHz and beyond make it maybe a bit too bright for our ears?

According to the plot, F3 and F4 would be the warmest because of their attenuation. Maybe that's why Topping set F3 as default: to go easy on our ears. However, F4 impulse response seems better than F3.

What do you think? Thank you.

I think on my E30, the original one, I changed my filter to Filter #1 which was described by Amir in his review as Sharp. It seemed to offer the best frequency response and it seemed consensus was that it was the most neutral transparent filter out of all of them, or at least the most technically correct. Filters #3 was default on that one too, and also offered the same Frequency Response as Filter #1 but consensus was that Filter #1 was the most technically correct filter to use.

For the E30ii Lite in this review though the filters are a bit different it seems, eventhough Filter #3 is the default it looks like it's providing a sub optimal frequency response. Filter #6 does look like the best frequency response, and the reviewer says Filter #2 offers the same frequency response. I think looking at the Impulse Responses then Filter #6 is the most technically correct. When I look at the Filter #6 Impulse Response I have that in my mind that this is a Linear Filter, whereas I think Filter #2 is a Minimum Phase Filter. So Filter #6 is more technically correct than Filter #2 even if they offer the same Frequency Response. I'd use Filter #6. I don't understand the technicalities on a deep level but I do remember that the ideal is using a Linear Filter rather than Minimum Phase Filter and you also want one that offers the flattest frequency response in the audible range whilst offering best attenuation in higher frequencies above 20kHz - so Filter #6.

 

[nick779]

Not to reinvent the wheel, but are these still decent sub $100 DACs to feed an amp in 2025? I've been looking at this and it's simpler cousin the SU-1.

 

[staticV3]

Not to reinvent the wheel, but are these still decent sub $100 DACs to feed an amp in 2025? I've been looking at this and it's simpler cousin the SU-1.

Yes. The E30II Lite is still the best sub $100 DAC with display and remote control.

 

[Hirsebrei]

Hi, I'm fiddling with the order of the tables, they differ.
The manual shows: F1: sharp, F2: slow, F3: short delay sharp, F4: short delay slow, F5: Super slow, F6: Low dispersion short. In this review there is another order, or am I wrong? The AK-Doc lists another, different order. Thanks in advance.
I own E30II lite and E30II. The ladder is a little bit better, I guess. And, ifi zendac II, it is too harsh for me.

 

[Victorr_]

I bought Topping E2x2 for vinyl digitization. For testing, I tried to digitize the output signal from E30II Light. I fed the DSD64 stream to the DAC. During digitization, I saw that the DAC does not filter the high-frequency noise of DSD conversion. The first screen is the F1 filter, the second is F2. F2 is more filtering. I switched the filters on the fly while playing the file.
Question.. Is this how it should be?

I am not an English speaker, so I apologize for the Google Translate.

 

[staticV3]

Question.. Is this how it should be?

Yes. An inherent flaw of DSD

If you want cleaner playback, best stick with PCM.

 

[Mudflapper]

Yes. An inherent flaw of DSD

If you want cleaner playback, best stick with PCM.

How is that a flaw? I love the sound of DSD.

 

[staticV3]

How is that a flaw?

The elevated HF noise? Because it's not part of the signal.

I love the sound of DSD.

You love the sound of the masters stored in your DSD tracks. DSD has no inherent sound.

 

[Mudflapper]

You love the sound of the masters stored in your DSD tracks. DSD has no inherent sound.

You don't think DSD from a DAC that converts directly from DSD to analog without converting to PCM first sounds any different from straight PCM to analog? Because then wouldn't that mean there is no reason to be concerned about the elevated DSD HF noise since it sounds the same as PCM anyway? To be clear I'm not being sarcastic whatsoever I'm just trying to understand your position.

 

[staticV3]

You don't think DSD from a DAC that converts directly from DSD to analog without converting to PCM first sounds any different from straight PCM to analog? Because then wouldn't that mean there is no reason to be concerned about the elevated DSD HF noise since it sounds the same as PCM anyway?

Inaudible, but still a technical flaw, as are the horrendous file sizes.

And with zero advantages over PCM.

 

[Victorr_]

Yes. An inherent flaw of DSD

If you want cleaner playback, best stick with PCM.

Yes, I've known this for a long time. I thought that the DAC filters wouldn't let this noise through. That's why I asked. Apparently it doesn't work that way.

F1 does nothing at all, F2 reduces the noise a little. Although it should be the other way around. Am I missing something?

 

[Mudflapper]

And with zero advantages over PCM.

That is your opinion, and that's fine. Some of us think DSD sounds better, and that's fine too.

 

[staticV3]

That is your opinion, and that's fine. Some of us think DSD sounds better, and that's fine too.

This is not subject to opinion, or preference.

We can quite easily perform Null tests to show transparency.

 

[antcollinet]

That is your opinion, and that's fine. Some of us think DSD sounds better, and that's fine too.

Measurements (and maths) show otherwise. "Thinking" (opinion) means nothing.


If you "think" otherwise, feel free to prove what you think in the form of a well controlled blind ABX audibility test.

 

[Blew]

Hi, I'm fiddling with the order of the tables, they differ.
The manual shows: F1: sharp, F2: slow, F3: short delay sharp, F4: short delay slow, F5: Super slow, F6: Low dispersion short. In this review there is another order, or am I wrong? The AK-Doc lists another, different order. Thanks in advance.

I've found this confusing too, so have compiled a reference table to help clarify the disparities between Topping's manual and the measurements of this review. The measurement graphs, impulse responses, and descriptions appear to be mostly consistent each other, with the exception of the impulses of F4 & F5. Topping's descriptions in the manual are mostly inconsistent with the measurements.

E30 II Lite setting	Topping E30 II Lite manual label	ASR measurement profile	Impulse-response observation
F-1	Sharp Roll-off	Slow	Consistent with a slow roll-off filter. Linear phase.
F-2	Slow Roll-off	Short Delay (SD) Sharp	Consistent with SD Sharp filter. Minimum phase
F-3	Short Delay Sharp Roll-off (Default)	Short Delay (SD) Slow	Consistent with SD Slow filter. Minimum phase.
F-4	Short Delay Slow Roll-off	Super Slow	Impulse does not appear consistent with filter graph or “Super Slow”. Impulse looks more consistent with F5 impulse response image (minimum phase).
F-5	Super Slow Roll-off	Low Dispersion (LD) Short	Impulse does not appear consistent with filter graph or “LD Short”. Impulse looks more consistent with F4 impulse response image (linear phase).
F-6	Low Dispersion Short Delay Filter	Sharp	Consistent with sharp filter. Linear phase.

@Rja4000 Could you please check your measurements and comment?