Topping E70 Velvet (AKM 4499EX)

[Punchy_Power_Cat]

For a dac to sound ‘different’ it will have to be adding audible distortion, there are a few dacs which are that poorly designed the majority will sound identical.

Why is there still development from AKM/ESS then? Why haven't they just halted@DAC-ICs with a SINAD of 115 for that is already perfect to the human ear. Why are there DAC-ICs for 3 dollar a piece and DAC-ICs for 80 Dollar a piece when both achieve the same quality (to human ear)? Who spends 25times the amount for a product delivering the same output?

 

[Purité Audio]

Really, companies need to continue to sell to exist, as to who spends 25 times, that would be someone with more money than sense.
Keith

 

[Toku]

Who spends 25times the amount for a product delivering the same output?

When ordinary audiophiles are presented with beautifully written product descriptions, they tend to want to buy it. That's the nature of audiophiles.

 

[staticV3]

Why is there still development from AKM/ESS then? Why haven't they just halted@DAC-ICs with a SINAD of 115 for that is already perfect to the human ear. Why are there DAC-ICs for 3 dollar a piece and DAC-ICs for 80 Dollar a piece when both achieve the same quality (to human ear)?

Because lab equipment still reveals miniscule improvements and, frankly, because suckers keep buying.

Who spends 25times the amount for a product delivering the same output?

All those particularly susceptible to their own cognitive biases (sunk cost fallacy, confirmation bias etc), and those who have never performed a controlled test, which would expose all the perceived improvements from years of "investing" in new DACs, streamers, Amps for what they are: imagined.

 

[JSmith]

I said;

There seems to be a lot of baseless subjective comments happening in this thread referring to well measuring DAC's sounding different. May I remind posters that these comments need to be qualified, as they are misleading for other members... there is no point saying a DAC was too light in the bass or whatever without showing that they were level matched and compared properly without peeking. Keeping in mind, to date, no one has been able to prove any difference between well measuring DAC's.

You replied;

The only way to get an indication of how an audio device sounds by measurement is by comparing the actual complete audio signal outputs of a musical piece.

Can you see where you've gone wrong?


JSmith

 

[Mark74]

I said;

You replied;

Can you see where you've gone wrong?


JSmith

No. By measurement I do not mean listening. Besides, blind level matched comparison is inaccurate because of the psycho-acoustic human tendency to alleviate differences in sound signals.

 

[JSmith]

blind level matched comparison is inaccurate

Please... teach us all your wisdom on this topic.


JSmith

 

[Mark74]

Please... teach us all your wisdom on this topic.


JSmith

You can find out about it by using a search engine on the internet, google for example: www.google.com/search?q=psycho-acoustic+tendency+to+alleviate+differences

 

[Veri]

When ordinary audiophiles are presented with beautifully written product descriptions, they tend to want to buy it. That's the nature of audiophiles.

Exactly. Well put, Toku.

 

[Roland68]

You can find out about it by using a search engine on the internet, google for example: www.google.com/search?q=psycho-acoustic+tendency+to+alleviate+differences

Just like many other nonsense that AIs produce and spread, this is also called AI hallucinations.

This topic is a little more complex and cannot be easily taken out of context and applied to audio/music.
For example, many people with appropriate experience with an engine, machine, transmission, device, etc., can perceive the slightest changes in noise and tonality and thus assess what is happening, whether it is an impending defect, wear and tear, etc.
According to your Google search results, this would be either impossible or unlikely.

 

[JaccoW]

You can find out about it by using a search engine on the internet, google for example: www.google.com/search?q=psycho-acoustic+tendency+to+alleviate+differences

Nah, just saying LetMeGoogleThatForYou.com is an intellectually lazy way to answer a question and something most people haven't been doing since the 2010's.
Cite your sources.

All I am finding on your link is tons of discussions about psychoacoustics, an AI summary and complaints about double blind tests that hurt their feelings about their favourite device.

The reason why blind experiments are the gold standard in science is to reduce or eliminate various biases. You then combine it with a larger sample size to remove the experience bias to a negligible level.
There is still the risk of unblinding when someone figures out which group is which.

And it might not be the absolute best in the hierarchy of evidence but meta-analysis systematic review and clinical practice guidelines are hard to do as a single person.

 

[Mark74]

Nah, just saying LetMeGoogleThatForYou.com is an intellectually lazy way to answer a question and something most people haven't been doing since the 2010's.
Cite your sources.

All I am finding on your link is tons of discussions about psychoacoustics, an AI summary and complaints about double blind tests that hurt their feelings about their favourite device.

The reason why blind experiments are the gold standard in science is to reduce or eliminate various biases. You then combine it with a larger sample size to remove the experience bias to a negligible level.
There is still the risk of unblinding when someone figures out which group is which.

And it might not be the absolute best in the hierarchy of evidence but meta-analysis systematic review and clinical practice guidelines are hard to do as a single person.

Google Search

 

[theREALdotnet]

Please... teach us all your wisdom on this topic.

Well, he's not wrong, you know. A subjective (i.e. audibility) test, as blinded as it may be, contains a variable that is hard to control – the listener. The test subject may get tired, bored or unable to concentrate in the course of the test runs, for example.

In addition to that, all a subjective test can show is whether the test subject (or subjects) were able to hear XYZ, but this result has validity only for the test subjects, not anyone else. In order to address this limitation, the subjective test would have to be conducted with a suitably large cohort of listeners.

He's also correct in saying that the only way to prove that two DACs produce identical outputs is nulling their outputs, using tools like DeltaWave for example. If a null test shows that there is no difference then subjective tests are unnecessary.

I also find that the constant posturing about "gold standards" etc. is out of place and not adding much to the conversation. Each test setup has to be judged on its merits. While double blinding is the gold standard for eliminating perception biases, there is a lot more to obtaining trustworthy and universally applicable test results.

 

[JSmith]

out of place

I think you missed the ebb and flow of the discussion, the goalposts were moved... no problem, it happens.


JSmith

 

[theREALdotnet]

I admit that I hadn't paid close attention to this thread in a while.

 

[Lux Maldini]

(im using node sub out, because with usb its disabled).
What does this mean?

I bought this to replace dac in Bluesound Node n130. How I set this thing right? Currently E70 Velvet is in DAC mode. Speakers connected with RCAs to E70. Node to E70 with optical toslink (im using node sub out, because with usb its disabled).

So node is controlling volume, and connected to tv with hdmi earc.

Is this correct? Or it is better to use E70 as DAC+preamp? And set node volume to max?

 

[Lux Maldini]

The SMSL DO300 could be interesting in comparison with the E70Velvet.
they both cost around 500 euro in the EU.

The DO300 uses the 1 x ESS9039 pro. Chip.

but the DO300 supports MQA for those that need it / want it.
The E70 Velvet doesn't seem to support MQA?

only downside to the E70 velvet seems to be the DSD cutoff frequency of 19khz. that's really low for DSD. so if you want more than that you have to upsample to higher DSD rates.

I wonder how the parts inside the dac used compare.. has one a better power supply, shielding op-amps and all that audiophile stuff.

Hello, may I ask what shielding op amps and all that audiophile stuff mean?

 

[Lux Maldini]

On another forum someone asked Topping to release a firmware to enable DSDD mode.

He said Topping replied they will not enable DSDD mode lol

Sorry, I still can't understand the benefits of DSDD mode? If not, what impact will it have?

 

[Lux Maldini]

I had using E70 for a little bit it was new enclosure built quality is bad for the price and it makes some annoying noises when working or browsing in silence even three times cheaper audio interfaces has way better build quality. I was very disappointed by quality and send it back to amazon. The value for the money is tremendously bad it also uses that stupid 3pin ac input instead of two pin what probably is the main issue.

Hello, do you mean 3pin like this? Isn't a 3-pin interface more universal? What are the benefits of 2 pins?

 

[Lux Maldini]

So, does it do direct DSD streaming via HQplayer/Roon now (after several firmware updates) or does it only work in DoP mode or does it not work at all?

If I can't use the ASDM7ECv2 shaper with this DAC it is pointless.

Hello, why? Isn't the DAC capability itself already very good? Why do we still need ASDM7ECv2?