Six DAC Comparison

@helomech I did not find the top end Topping DAC (forgot the model) sounded better than the DAC3B. I had both at the same time and was using them with my uber revealing RAAL SR1a earphones. Both DACs were not ideal with this phone, but DAC3B was the lesser of 2 bad matches.

@audphile1

I stated “objectively,” not subjectively.

In my personal experience, some Topping DACs, such as the E70 Velvet, subjectively outperform some much pricier units that also perform quite well objectively. For example, the Chord Qutest and Electrocompaniet ECD-2…especially the Qutest.

In fact, it was the DAC within the $2K Eversolo DMP-A8 that inspired me to try the Topping E70 Velvet. After which, I sold both the Eversolo and Electrocompaniet (the latter which objectively measures a little better than the Benchmark DAC3 IIRC).

No, I am not an ASR Zealot who believes that SINAD is the end-all, be-all of sound quality. However, I also strive for an open mind and go through the hassle of level-matching my components when conducting comparisons. I do my best to not let the retail price of a given component influence my judgement. Similarly, I do not presume a component will sound good simply because it measures well. Somewhat recently, after acquiring some Børresen speakers, I sold my Revel towers despite them qualifying as an ASR readers’ wet dream speaker. I don’t need to see graphs to hear that the Børresens are not as objectively accurate as the Revels, however, the former are without question the all-around better speakers to my ears.

Regardless, as for all known OBJECTIVE measurement parameters, there are indeed some DACs from Topping, SMSL, and the like that measure better than the DAC3, and by a rather wide margin in terms of noise and distortion. That is simply an indisputable fact. It seemed the OP was unaware of this fact. I am not here to claim that one should not subjectively prefer the DAC3 to those performing better in a bench test. I am merely pointing out that the DAC3 is no longer state-of-the-art, even by Stereophile’s measurement battery.

Based on my subjective experience, I do believe many audiophiles would benefit from giving some benefit of doubt to these “Chi-Fi” components, and judging them by sound rather than impact on the bank account. I realize that some avoid these brands for sociopolitical reasons, which is perfectly fine, but to conflate that stance with a component’s actual performance, subjective or otherwise, qualifies as implicit prejudice.

I will occasionally post on my progress here starting with the purpose, which is to share my subjective observations based on my direct comparisons of the listed DACs.  This is NOT a play-off or “best DAC” competition, and I will probably not select a “winner” as I will be keeping at least two of them.  Readers should understand that anything I observe and report is through the lens of my personal auditory preferences, my home system (virtual system posted here), my musical choices (to be listed), my methodology (or lack of), and is not intended to be interpreted as an authoritative “last-word” or an analysis following the scientific method.  I am certainly open to suggestions and questions, and I don’t mind if people disagree with me, but if anyone simply wants to complain or argue because they don’t like my methods or reported observations they should conduct their own evaluation and post their own results.

FWIW, assuming that the digital section of a DAC is competently designed, I feel that the topology and parts selection of the analog output stage is more influential on the final sound quality of the DAC. 

The comparisons you make will be interesting.  The fact that "DACs sound different from each other", even at what most would consider "high end" prices, does bring up a question. Why isn't there something like the RIAA curve for DACs? How can we ever know that a manufacturer is shooting for "neutrality" or not? 

In other words, say the output from your DAC is from 0 to 2 volts (RCA jacks). How can we ever know that for any of the thousands of volume levels at thousands of frequencies from 20Hz to 20KHz, that a DAC outputs exactly the level it should based on the digital input signal? 

Or is that at best a "pipe dream" and all DACs will always sound different, and some are accidentally or intentionally "voiced" to sound a certain way? 

What is "truth"? And if we could get "truth", would we want it? 

 

@porchlight1 - There is something to that based on the SMc Audio DAC which uses 1990's technology with a Crystal Semiconductor CS8412 "E" Version receiver and CS4328 DAC.  The DAC-2 sounds very good in spite of the older digital technology. 

The process of upgrading my original McCormack DAC-1 to an SMc Audio DAC-2 included installing a new/upgraded receiver but it still uses the same CS4328 DAC chip, which was rated as "good odnobitnik" by the reviewer in their 2012 DAC Chip List, while the AD1862 chip in my Mojo Audio DACs was rated "one of the best of the world’s Audio" and the PCM1794 in the Merason was rated "best of odnobitnik."

I think the designer has to get both the optimal performance from whatever DAC chip (or ladder) they use as well as nailing it with however they choose to implement the output.