Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
A community member
Aug 31, 2020
Does this have the rolled off/recessed treble like the d90? I tried the d90 and didn't like it. Considering this as an alternative
verifonix
1181
Oct 1, 2020
d70 will sound softer lol
A community member
Oct 1, 2020
verifonixThanks for the reply. Actually ended up ordering a Gustard A18 that is still on the way
NEXONUS
269
Oct 2, 2020
I'm quite intrigued by your comment about the D90 having rolled-off treble. If you don't mind, can you elaborate on that? I'm eyeing the D90.
A community member
Oct 2, 2020
NEXONUSSure. If you have ever heard the SMSL SU-8V2 think of the way that sounds, then pull back the treble that it's still there but in the back that you have to focus to hear it. Then remove a little detail(su-8v2 has more detail). It had the type of sound that would sound great for speakers but not headphones(for me in my opinion). I was really surprised by how the d90 sounds. If treble bothers you it could be perfect for you. It wasn't the rolled off treble that was the deal breaker for me but that lacking detail that my $250 SMSL SU-8V2 had more detail. For what I paid for the d90 mqa I didn't find that acceptable to keep. It could have been only my unit though. I'd give the benefit of the doubt. I have a gustard a18 ordered and still being shipped to try and hopefully keep.
NEXONUS
269
Oct 2, 2020
Damn. Thanks for the detailed explanation. I personally prioritize detail in my music as well, so I might look to the SMSL instead.
A community member
Oct 2, 2020
NEXONUSDefinitely. Glad I could be of help. If you do get a SU-8 something to consider is getting a Schiit Eitr. It smooths the sound out a little without loosing anything(less harsh and easier on the ears). Before when I had a DT1990 I couldn't listen to it without the signal going through the Eitr. It was discontinued by Schiit but sometimes they have it on closeout for I think it's $79 or $89.
verifonix
1181
Oct 3, 2020
Eitr is end of life though. Matrix X-SPDIF2 is another very good one.
A community member
Oct 3, 2020
verifonixI've never heard of that one. I only recommend the eitr since it doesn't cost much with it's markdown price and it works well with the su-8(it's what I use). I'll check out the matrix-spdif2 for sure. I have a gustard a18 on the way and if the usb turns out to not be any good that'll be a good option for it. Thanks a bunch :-)
parowOOz
19
Oct 6, 2020
This is a very puzzling comment as the D90 is pretty much as transparent, as in no discoloration/artifacts/distortion, as DACs get. This isn't a subjective opinion on my part, I'm talking about actual measurements of the signal going out of the DAC. In fact it's better than the SU-8v2 in every way except price but that's kind of a given. I'm really curious what went wrong with your particular setup that you ended up saying the SU-8v2 has more detail. I'm an owner of said DAC (+ SP200 AMP) and a Astell&Kern Acro L1000 which features two AK4490 DACs. While there are differences in tonal balance between the two, there's no loss of detail, it's just that the presentation is slightly different so some things pop-up more on one setup vs the other. Since the D90 is equipped in a much newer/better DAC chip I find it quite strange it would somehow give less detailed sound. Culd you elaborate on your setup ?
A community member
Oct 6, 2020
parowOOzSure. Literally the setup was Topping D90 + Thx789 original vs Schiit Eitr into SMSL SU-8v2 into Thx789 original. Same connections used on both. Mogami Gold Studio 3ft XLR interconnect. For Schiit Eitr Mogami Gold Studio RCA 1m. Oyaide Class A Rev B USB 1m. Pangea AC 14SE MKII 1.5m Power cable. I am a believer of measurements and such but I don't believe it's as black and white as people make it out to be. Science and knowledge is always evolving so I personally believe there are things still to be learned so I would choose good measurements over bad measurements yes. But if my ears are telling me the same thing over and over. I'll believe it. I have no reason not too. Hope this helps if only a little edit: D90 MQA to be specific
(Edited)
parowOOz
19
Oct 7, 2020
Not an apples-to-apples comparison since you had additional device in one setup. If I'm understanding both setups correctly, you have also used different input on the SU-8 vs D90 (S/PDIF vs USB). Both inputs have different technical specs/abilities so there's that. The Eitr is actually worse than the native USB interface of both SU-8 and D90 so you are hampering their performance. Schiit introduced the Eitr to help remedy the awful performance of USB interfaces in their lower-end DACs. Only other thing (aside from a faulty unit) that could have created a difference in how both DACs sound are PCM reconstruction filters. AKM doesn't have a sharp filter like, say, Brickwall Filter that ESS chips have, so that might contribute to a different sound, depending on how you set up both DACs. A very slow filter on the D90 could be responsible for a "softer"/"less detailed" trebble. But if that is the reason, Gustard A18 will most likely disappoint you as well since it uses an identical DAC chip as the D90 and thus will have the same PCM filters. If that's the case, SMSL has just released the SU-9 based on the ES9038Pro DAC chip and Topping has the DX7 Pro also based on the ES9038Pro. The SU-9 measures better though so there's that :) Both DACs should be more up your alley than devices based on AKM chips. There are many reasons not to believe your senses but I don't want to get into that conversation :)
A community member
Oct 7, 2020
parowOOzI did try both usb and spdif on both. I'm not arguing my man or lady. This audio community likes to eat each other which I choose not to participate in. My experience is my experience. Prefer to enjoy my music than fight :-)
parowOOz
19
Oct 29, 2020
Deleting your account because someone challenged your opinion is a bit of an exageration... Even though the user is no longer with us I'm going to respond as if they were still here. First of all I wasn't attacking you or picking a fight. I just read a comment that made no sense from a technical point of view and therefore my brain switched to troubleshooting mode. That's just who I am. I like to know why things are the way they are. I mean, isn't it better to understand how audio hardware works ? To understand why a given piece of hardware acts they way it does in one environment but not the other ? In this particular case, the D90 (like I've said) is as transparent as it gets. If there is some discoloration in the treble or more importantly lack of detail then either the unit is faulty, your setup isn't propperly tuned or you're just hearing things. I did not assume the last one and proceeded to find out what your setup looked like. You presented two different setups so I questioned that. I have also informed you (just an FYI) that you were using a piece of hardware that was introduced by Schiit for a very specific task and that it was technically worse than what either the SU-8v2 or D90 had on board. BTW it is kind of strange that you recommend the SU-8v2 as the better option because it has "better" treble and detail and then recommend to add another piece of kit to subdue that treble... You can do the same thing with an EQ that won't cost you anything other than some time but whatever. I then proceeded to list possible other reasons for both DACs sounding potentially different. How did you get "attack" from that ? I even recommended you two DACs if the Gustard A18 turned out to be the same as the D90. How is that an attack ? I gave you information on how to potentially tune the next DAC more to your liking instead of sending it back again and blindily choosing another one to buy... If PCM filters are the reason you don't like one DAC vs another don't you think testing them out might be beneficial to you ? You could save yourself the trouble of sending another DAC back. You might be able to choose the right device for yourself by looking at the spec sheet alone. Isn't that a good thing ? You know, learning, becoming wiser, more aware ? As for believing your senses the problem is that our ears (or senses in general) are very, very bad when it comes to objective measurements. The things that can influence your experience, be them real or just imagined/suggested, are numerous and we are not even aware of a lot of them. Hell, people that are given two types of wine - one expensive the other worth 5$ a bottle - that have their stickers swapped will experience more pleasure from drinking the cheap wine because they think they are drinking that "fine wine". The same thing happens to us all the time and audio is no different. Now you can argue that the experience is real nonthe less but I ask you, wouldn't you like to know when you are being fooled/manipulated by others people or your own biases ? Wouldn't it be better to know your experience, as real as it is to you, is based on a lie ? That is why we have measuring equipment designed specifically to test how good a particular piece of tech is at doing it's job. A machine has no bias, prejudice or preference. And such measurments show that the D90 is at least as good as the SU-8v2 (actually better). So don't you think it would be wise to consider that as a baseline rather than "listening and believing" your senses that can be fooled by something so trivial as a sticker applied to your device ?
Tzamaz
47
Nov 18, 2020
parowOOzThe problem is you associate “better” with the instrumentality of objective measure. So you prefer textual criticism over canonical criticism. The previous author did not. You are not right any more than he is right, you simply have a different phenomenological goal. Leave out the better, or better yet, state you presupposition that the measure of a component is how your machines assess its contribution or lack of contribution to the signal chain. I am less interested in that and more interested in what my brain thinks after getting info from my ears.
parowOOz
19
Nov 19, 2020
TzamazSo you're ok with the fact that your brain might be telling you there's a difference in sound even though whatever piece of hardware you introduced to your setup has absolutely no chance of creating said difference in the first place ? And no, as far as reality is concerned, if 2 DACs produce an equivalent signal (transparency wise) and one person is hearing a difference, then that person is factualy just wrong. This "all things are relative" mentality doesn't work when there are objective ways of determining who is right and who is just fooling themselves. The actual problem is you have assumed that about me. I haven't stated that measurements alone have the ability to tell you which piece of kit is going to be "better" for you. Only time I referred to D90 as being better was in the context of it's transparency. That is a measureable fact. This in no way is the same as saying it is "better" in every way shape or form. I have stated it clearly that I think it would be a good idea to have some provable facts as the baseline of our decision-makig process. Why ? Well because reality doesn't change depending on our mood, preferences or any other biases we might have. So instead of blindly buying hardware why not discover the links between the stuff you like (the subjective) and reality we live in (the objective) ? Have you ever woderred why is it that you can read a bunch of reviews about the exact same piece of kit which say stuff that directly cotradicts each other ? That's what happens when you "listen and believe". You learn nothing because there is no baseline, no bedrock those opinions are built on. Then comes the realization that parts of those opinions are fabrications of peoples' minds and makes them even more redundant. You can't make an informed decision in an environment such as this. It helps noone but snake-oil salesmen that prey on the belief in your fee fees above reality. You may be ok with being taken for a ride by some manufacturers, and that's fine. However if you say something that is provably false I'm going to call you out on your BS.
(Edited)
Tzamaz
47
Nov 20, 2020
parowOOzScience is a phenomenology that seeks, as its goal, objective reproducibility. To achieve this, it uses a machine as an intermediary in the chain of perception. Noumena -> machine -> Human sight -> Human brain. Notice that the chain begins and ends with things that cannot be known and consequently, cannot be called “fact” without imagining that we are the sole arbiter of objective reality. Science’s goal is not to eliminate bias (Newton and company were far too intelligent and self aware to imagine they were creating a non-philosophical construct), it is to reduce it and make reproducible observations. I read reviews recognizing that no one can offer anything except their opinion. Even after all the observations have been scrubbed by the machine, their brain intrudes in the process. Thank whatever logistical process that is responsible for our existence. Human brains are why we collective give a rat’s behind about music in the first place and seek to make machines to reproduce it. So, the final “informer” in the chain of what I like when I listen is my brain. Not what you like nor what an oscilloscope says or a Fourier analysis of a given waveform describes. Might all of those things be helpful? Surely. But the original poster was expressing an opinion on a canonical basis, “what they heard.” It doesn’t get “better” than that.
parowOOz
19
Nov 20, 2020
TzamazNo it's not. You are mixing up science with the scientific method and even then you're wrong as neither expects you to use a machine. And you can't even stay consistent about what the goal of science is throughout your response. Also I haven't said anything about the goal of science being eliminating bias. Science CAN be used to minimize/eliminate it from discourse but that is not the goal of it. Argue my actual points. Secondly it's very interesting how you chose to word your response. You first define science as phenomenology and then proceeded to put "noumen" as a starting point to how you imagine science (the world, perhaps ?) works. Now, to those unaware, noumen is a "thing in it's own", a philosophical term which means something that can't be known. To put it a different way what Tzamaz did is like trying to prove that X exists and opening with: "Since X exists therefore...". I'm sorry that's not how debates work. You need to try a little harder. Your chain is complete nonsense. As for reviews I can definitely see you'd consider any review just an opinion since you don't know what science is, how it works and you start your reasoning with your conclusions. Reviews absolutely can contain provable, measurable qualities of whatever is being reviewed. For example a review of a graphics card contains graphs showing how much FPS (frames per second) said card achieves in a number of games, how much power it draws, how hot it gets etc. Those are not just opinions and if a reviewer claimed that to him/her card A is faster than card B even though every possible test shows it not to be, that reviewer would be considered stupid, dellusional or both. The same applies to audio equipment. You can think you hear whatever you please but when faced with objective data proving those are just figments of your imagination a rational mind should accept reality and adjust accordingly. There are people who act on their auditory hallucinations and we call them sick, dellusional or simply crazy. We are not talking about what you or I like/dislike here. Once again you are arguing a point I haven't made. The OP presented information which can be verified through testing - 2 DACs producing different sound. I don't care how hard someone believes the difference they hear is real. If tests show there's no difference then a logical next step would be acknowledging the fallibility of your senses. Choosing to stay in "la la land" is an intellectual cop-out. How are you going to learn anything or evolve as a person if you are unwilling or unable to admit your own limitations ? One of the core principles of the scientific method is fallibility. If a better theory shows up, you scrap the previous one and change your worldview accordingly. That's how we advance as a spieces. Your way looks like a mental asylum where patients - people - are roaming the halls aimlessly, mumbling to themselves, trapped in their own little worlds. The balls to say it doesn't get better than that...
parowOOz
19
Nov 21, 2020
TzamazAnd there you go. At least I know who I'm dealing with now.
PRODUCTS YOU MAY LIKE
Trending Posts in Audiophile