Topping E70 Stereo DAC Review

[beefkabob]

;-)
I imagine you have already done this...
but out of curiosity...
little question about the apx555b in num...

by looping via cable, the apx555b in output-input spdif or toslink...
what does this give in aes17 measurement on 1khz (44k like your use or 48k/24b)..enob sinad of it ( apx )?

some measurements at the same time as that of the toslink of the toppping?
;-)

It's all quite clean, actually. Go search through the site.

 

[morillon]

really? i dont found this...

 

[Grooved]

Thank you @beefkabob.

@Grooved , this is exactly what I was saying earlier when you (and the person posting all of that unfortunate gibberish through Google translator) were trying to construct the same logical fallacy. Please, if you have a better set of tests or some innovation, please go do those tests and see if they lead to demonstrably better sound, or some new understanding of reproduction equipment, then post your data. Otherwise, this is just your attempt at a subtle version of "just listen to the music".

No, it's not at all what I was saying.
Maybe I should have took more time to write it clearer, but my main point was to remind to non initiate to look at all measurements, and not one measurement only (so looking at all numbers provided by Amir and not SINAD only, something we knew that some people have done

That's why I took the example of the example of 123dB SINAD DAC, that if faulty, could have a 30dB crosstalk. It would still have a great SINAD, but if listen through this one, I bet you would not get the same sound stage that the same DAC but non faulty, or a 117dB SINAD DAC with good crosstalk value.
It seems easy to me to understand, are you agree?

 

[antcollinet]

really? i dont found this...

You would have done if you'd searched for the word loopback by @amirm

One of the results would have taken you to this which included the AP555 loopback you want:

Recoton RCA Cable Review (Ultra Cheap Cable)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the ultra cheap, "vintage," retail RCA cable. A member kindly sent it to me. It is not available anymore but I see two-packs on ebay for $4. The cable reminds me of the free ones you used to get in audio gear. It fits rather loosely on especially...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[MAB]

No, it's not at all what I was saying.
Maybe I should have took more time to write it clearer, but my main point was to remind to non initiate to look at all measurements, and not one measurement only (so looking at all numbers provided by Amir and not SINAD only, something we knew that some people have done

OK, thanks. Agreed, SINAD alone is not sufficient.

 

[MAB]

really? i dont found this...

What do the loopback measurements on your AP indicate?

 

[morillon]

i haven t this one..modèle before
(and this is not my)

 

[morillon]

You would have done if you'd searched for the word loopback by @amirm

One of the results would have taken you to this which included the AP555 loopback you want:

Recoton RCA Cable Review (Ultra Cheap Cable)

This is a review and detailed measurements of the ultra cheap, "vintage," retail RCA cable. A member kindly sent it to me. It is not available anymore but I see two-packs on ebay for $4. The cable reminds me of the free ones you used to get in audio gear. It fits rather loosely on especially...

www.audiosciencereview.com

that s not in toslink- spdif
;-)
my question is not so much for myself but to present this in another subsidiary which is a little concerned..to clarify a point.
and preferable for the credibility that comes from measurement of mr amirm
;-)

 

[Grooved]

OK, thanks. Agreed, SINAD alone is not sufficient.

At least it's clear now.
It gives the feeling that just because I used the word "listen" in a post, you and @beefkabob immediately classified me with people who don't believe in measurements value.
If you have read some of my previous posts, you should know that's not the case. Maybe you don't, but at it shows also that when people don't understand a post correctly, not necessary because of them but maybe because the post was not written perfectly, instead of asking a question to clear a point, they are just picking the interpretation that fits their POV and use it.

I just can't believe that both of you came to the conclusion that I was saying "just listen" when I took hours and hours to help Pkane on the beta versions of Multitone software.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not angry at all, I'm just surprised at the way you interpret a post without asking for any clarification in case of doubt, I guess it's what happens sometimes on Internet, which would certainly not happen in real life conversation

 

[MAB]

At least it's clear now.
It gives the feeling that just because I used the word "listen" in a post, you and @beefkabob immediately classified me with people who don't believe in measurements value.
If you have read some of my previous posts, you should know that's not the case. Maybe you don't, but at it shows also that when people don't understand a post correctly, not necessary because of them but maybe because the post was not written perfectly, instead of asking a question to clear a point, they are just picking the interpretation that fits their POV and use it.

I just can't believe that both of you came to the conclusion that I was saying "just listen" when I took hours and hours to help Pkane on the beta versions of Multitone software.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not angry at all, I'm just surprised at the way you interpret a post without asking for any clarification in case of doubt, I guess it's what happens sometimes on Internet, which would certainly not happen in real life conversation

Fair. And I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. In fact, I was careful to say that doubt on measurements is equivalent to the "just listen" stuff that is posted here. I understand your point. It is happening in this thread too, and I regret balling you up in that messy conversation. It is easy to jump to that conclusion, and yes online is even easier, and I appreciate your directness!

 

[beefkabob]

I tend to force me to not believe anything based on one side only (or one measurement only), and always balance things because in a lot cases, the truth is in between and not on an extreme side.

This sure looks like you're saying that objectivists and subjectivists are extremes, when really objectivists are simply looking at the facts, and subjectivists are looking for the Easter Bunny and Bigfoot.

 

[antcollinet]

This sure looks like you're saying that objectivists and subjectivists are extremes, when really objectivists are simply looking at the facts, and subjectivists are looking for the Easter Bunny and Bigfoot.

Exactly - when there is a debate between someone talking objective, measureable facts, and another talking fantasy, the truth does not lie half way between them.

 

[MAB]

Exactly - when there is a debate between someone talking objective, measureable facts, and another talking fantasy, the truth does not lie half way between them.

Thanks and agreed, very well stated.

 

[Atanasi]

Does anyone know whether the E70 exhibits the same SPIDF / TOSLINK connectivity issues as the D30Pro and E30, or are they resolved in the E70?

Has anyone had the opportunity to test this yet?

If I recall correctly, ESS chips have an integrated processor for S/PDIF. The datasheet for ES9028Pro mentions: "Supports SPDIF, PCM (I2S, LJ, RJ 16-32-bit), DoP or DSD input". I have not heard that DACs based on ESS chips would commonly exhibit compatibility problems, so I expect it to work fine, but it cannot be known for sure without testing. D30Pro and E30 used different chip series: DAC chips were AKM and CS, which I don't think include S/PDIF processors, and the incompatible S/PDIF processors were CS chips.

 

[Massimo]

This sure looks like you're saying that objectivists and subjectivists are extremes, when really objectivists are simply looking at the facts, and subjectivists are looking for the Easter Bunny and Bigfoot.

Is it really necessary to have this same debate every time a DAC is reviewed on ASR??

 

[beefkabob]

Is it really necessary to have this same debate every time a DAC is reviewed on ASR??

I didn't start it. It just needs to be said again and again. I'm helping him, not hurting.

 

[antcollinet]

Is it really necessary to have this same debate every time a DAC is reviewed on ASR??

Its the law.

 

[Massimo]

Its the law.

So it seems ... for those with OCD.

 

[Phippers]

If I recall correctly, ESS chips have an integrated processor for S/PDIF. The datasheet for ES9028Pro mentions: "Supports SPDIF, PCM (I2S, LJ, RJ 16-32-bit), DoP or DSD input". I have not heard that DACs based on ESS chips would commonly exhibit compatibility problems, so I expect it to work fine, but it cannot be known for sure without testing. D30Pro and E30 used different chip series: DAC chips were AKM and CS, which I don't think include S/PDIF processors, and the incompatible S/PDIF processors were CS chips.

Thanks for the reply. Sounds hopeful.

 

[Grooved]

This sure looks like you're saying that objectivists and subjectivists are extremes, when really objectivists are simply looking at the facts, and subjectivists are looking for the Easter Bunny and Bigfoot.

I understand, like I said, I should have take a bit more time to make it look clearer:
- the "I tend to force me to not believe anything based on one side only" was about general life, should have made it clearer.
- the "(or one measurement only)" was about audio, and is clear: with one measurement, you can't be sure.
And I made it even clearer later in the post when saying:
"Measurement is good, and better, measurementS are great because if it's based on one measurement only, you can be wrong.
Imagine a 123dB SINAD DAC that has a faulty crosstalk: you look at SINAD and "Oh yeah, this one is good"; then you listen and find the sound stage a bit strange..."

It can't be clearer in this part: one measurement (one value, not one set of measurementS) is not enough. It's exactly the difference between what you thought I was thinking and what I was really thinking:
you thought I said something like "objectivists and subjectivists are extremes"
while in my mind, and in ly post, it was "objectivists looking at one number only, and subjectivists, are extremes", and I think it's correct.

Now, again, I should have made it clearer, I will certainly pay attention to that the next time, remembering how quickly you both jumped based on what you thought I was thinking (and from the first sentence of the post, not the whole post) instead of what I thought, or without asking "one part of what you said was not clear, can you explain or make it clearer?"
At least, I appreciate the answer of @MAB, but yours... just picking one sentence in my post... while you could quote the whole post and set in bold the part you want to highlight and was not clear enough
You were the one attacking me based on what you thought I was thinking, but you were the one saying that I was attacking someone, isn't it funny?
And my posts were never harsh, but yours were and not based on what I wanted to say. You answered me talking about Amir providing several measurements, just under a post where I said that we have to look at several measurements and not one only, isn't it funny too?

If you can't admit you were harsh, it's your problem, not mine, and I know what measurements has to offer, or I wouldn't have done hundreds of measurements trying to help to fix/improve Multitone .