DACs Pt.3: The Ultimate Comparison: Topping vs SMSL vs Sugden vs Denafrips!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks to everyone for your feedback and comments. Some very diligent people have noted some variance in the amplitude of the right channel of the uploaded tracks. Thank you very much for pointing this out, we have corrected the error and have uploaded a new set which are accurate to within +/-0.2db, which we hope is sufficient for most. We have labelled the corrected set 'V2'. Enjoy the music, Harley

[@webmarketing40]

It will be interesting to see a comparison also with the GUSTARD X30 4x ES9039SPRO.

[@DamirPusic]

Someone mentioned Merason Frerot, I'm after that one too.

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@DamirPusic me too now! Very curious!

[@rmzidann]

But how can you eliminate the potential sound coloration of the Sugden DAC from the preamplifier section of the DAP800? It’s not a truly apples to apples comparison then, right? Or am I missing something? If you are recording from the balanced analog output of the DAP800 preamp, then surly the preamp section changes the DAC section’s sound.

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@rmzidann you’re absolutely correct. I used the fixed RCA output in the hope that the preamplifier will have the minimum impact. But I am going to make a recording of the DAC-4 and include it in the download files. But please remember the Topping D90 and SMSL both have pre-amplifier sections of sorts.

[@djangozee4907]

Under my skin indeed. Clare’s vocal when she sings the line “I tried SO not to give in” (0:39 seconds). The sibilance on the S of “So” is a good moment to focus on. The Pontus is sweet but I think the Sugden is that touch smoother. The point of which is the minutia of differences that reveal how good these devices are. An interesting test and certainly helpful. Thank you Harley, your research and efforts are most appreciated.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks so much!

[@Dr.SwinttonEdleyGossier]

Just listening over KZbin I'm surprised how different they sound. I prefer the denafrips. Sounds smooth!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Smooth it certainly is!

[@garyausten5939]

I think I lost the video I watched last, but I know you mentioned "50 ways to leave your lover.". Good song. I have the Simon and Garfunkel Live in Central Park double vinyl album...one of my favorites!

[@normbal]

DAC DAC a Ack, Ack ack a DAC. Using a Topping D90LE for about 15 months, liking it very much. I mostly listen to vinyl when I really listen, for background I’ll use an older iPhone 13 for streaming off Pandora or my playlist, not sure another DAC will do much to improve the resolution through my system, but it’s a temptation. Thanks for all the work and detail.

[@PearlAcoustics]

You’re very welcome. Thanks for sharing your appreciation

[@redkh2017]

You are so right. I made a comparison between three dacs (Gustard r26, Eversolo dmp a6 master edition, topping dx9 pro) in a system consisting of denafrips Hestia preamp, nad m23 poweramp and kef r7 meta speakers, the differnces are minor

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for sharing

[@mcflash23]

I really enjoy this channel, thank you Harley for making it so educational and informative

[@mediascapes2011]

This is high class European style sales wrap. Agreed, impressive.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you. That’s very kind.

[@jimromanski2702]

Well I can't really tell a difference over KZbin so I need to download the files and listen. But I have come to one distinct conclusion and that is that I have to get that recording. What a sweet and beautiful rendition of a classic. Jeez Harley you got that recording under my skin.

[@PearlAcoustics]

😉👍

[@sebastia4193]

For me D90, Pontus and Sugden are the best. Congratulations for the video.

[@PearlAcoustics]

🙏

[@foldspacenavigator6011]

Thanks Harley. This was so helpful. Having an Ares 2 and seeking to upgrade, Pontus had my interest. Via a pair of Abyss TC’s & HD6XX’s, it hit the sweet spot. Cheers.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Great to hear!

[@travisylvania6730]

For me, I preferred the SMSL 400EX and Sugden equally, then the Denafrips next, then the topping 90, and the least I enjoyed was the topping D10. Thank you for doing this. I feel Iike I really learned something. I have to say, the difference between the SMSL and sugden and denafrips was really small. I think probably the most accurate thing I could say is that I preferred that group of three more than the D10, which to me sounded harsh tonally. Great video

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for sharing your observations. I agree that compared to the others, the D10 is a little harsh but perhaps I would not have noticed under normal listening conditions? Thanks too for your kind appreciation.

[@themastroiannis]

fantastic comparison! thanks! really liked the Denafrips Pontus, but especially the Sugden. They both reveal the space of the recording with the sugden being more of a 'wet' sound and the pontus a bit dryer. they're both fantastic! lots of depth! felt both toppings lack depth and dimension... especially the D10...

[@PearlAcoustics]

You're very welcome. Thanks for sharing your findings with us.

[@petermartin9494]

They both sound "fantastic" when their output is played back through your DAC. Makes you wonder what they sound like in real life.

[@mochipepper]

Thank you so much for doing this project, Harley. This was quite helpful for comparing R2R to chip DACs. For me, Denafrips Pontus gave the most airy and engaging sound. But I have to say any audible differences between the DACs were minor and quickly disappeared after few seconds of listening. I will download the flac files and test them again in my audio system. Thanks again for putting time and effort to this video.

[@PearlAcoustics]

You're very welcome! 🙏

[@TheDjcarlos67]

👍 agreed

[@mojahangard]

Thank you so much for another quality video. I really appreciate it. The Sugden sounded the best to me, with the Topping a close second (one of my two DACs). Hope you get to review the Gustard A26 soon (my next DAC, hopefully).

[@PearlAcoustics]

You're very welcome, glad you enjoyed it.

[@dennis3779]

Or maybe save some. The Cyan 2 or FX Glass Tube dac 🤔

[@JordanPhegley]

I love your videos, and I love how the thumbnail for this particular video looks like you are holding a miniature loudspeaker!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you, that's very kind! There has been a lot of internal discussion on the new logo, so glad you like it. It was designed by our very own Ajay Verma.

[@MrGorpm]

After listening to the downloads, two DAC's stood out. The Denafrips sounded lovely, with a good soundstage (if a bit heavy in the bass), and the Topping D90 was more tuneful in the bass department and a bit more upfront in its presentation which in my system was not agressive, but could be in others. If I had to choose then my budget would (unfortunately) force my hand - the Topping D90 it is!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment. I think the Topping is a fine Dac, so even on your budget, you surely won’t lose out!

[@CastingCelebrity]

Thank so much Harley... Agree with u and Darko, we may more consider to get better amp and speaker instead confusing on DAC... Salute!!

[@PearlAcoustics]

👍😉

[@adamfrost9048]

Just a note that in the Roland recorder it's an ADC rather than a DAC, but that doesn't matter for the point you are making. Great video, thank you!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment. So glad you appreciated it. You're absolutely right. Thanks for pointing this out. Of course within the R88 (not used for the upload files) is also a DAC to convert recorded data back into analogue for monitoring headphones and studio monitors etc. so in the little unit, there's a lot of technology.

[@BrianS-xg5uq]

I have been using the Pontus II version since the last 2 years and love it. I wonder what the percentage improvement in sound between it and the latest model.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Indeed, a good question. Unfortunately, I can’t help… never heard the ll

[@shawnpwatsons1]

D400EX for me followed by the Pontius.

[@DigitalGrease]

Very interesting! I was clearly able to hear differences between the DACs even through all the KZbin re-processing. Now, I am listening with a very resolving system, with a very good R2R DAC that is in the price range of the Denafrips. Of the 3 DAC samples, not only did I prefer the Denafrips, I missed that sonic signature while listening to the other samples. No contest on my system. Denafrips is top dog in this sampling. I still have a bunch of DACs available to me, and a very high quality A/D converter. You inspire me to do my own comparison videos...... Well done!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you. That's very kind.

[@chuanyewlee9502]

Another great video from Harley. The Sugden sounds best to me, a touch more balanced sounding and musical. Would be interesting to see the insides of all the dacs, but my guess is Sugden paid more attention into the design of the dac's output stage as opposed to the others.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you! 🙏

[@johto]

Very interesting videos, thank you. Cheers from Finland 🍺

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks! Glad you like them! Best wishes from Belgium

[@pjono77]

Brilliant as usually Harley, I have the Denafrips 12th and maybe a bit biased but it's close between that and the Sugden.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks! Bring biased is ok! It’s almost impossible to avoid! 😉

[@mickeytheviewmoo]

The differences are small but after several listening takes, the winner is the Pontus. The leading edges are so clear but not harsh. Detail and separation are the best for my ears. The sugden is a warm, natural sound and a respectable second. The others are all good but after a while may become a little fatiguing.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment

[@OgamJan]

I find it puzzling that the dac chip from my first, very budget Philips cd player is now being used by Audio Note, Sugden and others. I have a Musical Fidelity MX dac that is Burr Brown delta sigma and I am very happy with it. I like the natural sound of the Denafrips but I would miss the detail and colour of my dac.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Indeed, it’s interesting that after all these years, many are going back to the very first audio Dac chips for their latest models. But the Philips engineers knew what they were doing and understood the problem their chips were designed to solve

[@razzman2987]

The same dac chip is different implemented so this comparisation is BS

[@frankgeeraerts6243]

Even on a simple laptop I notice a substantial difference , when the Denafrips plays audiophile grade music, it's the Sugden I want to live with , sounds far less tainted clean and lean digital and more human closer to analog or better to real human emotions, rythm, timing and pace I ended up with a personal choice after decades experimenting with digital ( principal CD ) and I settled down for direct coupling the dac chip output to the grid of af a tube , no opamp or SS transistor in the circuit ..........one with a quality cap output , another with transformer output. With trying to use opamps the closest I came to this was with a BB 627....... And what made a final difference was tweaking time , the clock ( crystal ) as well as supressing or lowering the load on the disc while optimizing the servos and the filtering of the PS in general and especialy lower the noise on the power supplly of the dacs....there's more on a what I tought for years , same as what's hidden in the grooves of vinyl. Any time is a greater and more imported factor for the hearing than other classic accepted parameters . Have a nice day Harley and all.... Analog is the natural standard in nature , digitalprocessing nevr makes nature better but we try to get it as close as possible to the real hearing and the nature sound , the possibilities of correcting and wrking inthe digital domain being usefull are not the subject of discussion, god gave me analog ears and brain decoder.........time is the landscape were the sound and music plants it's roots while driving by and enjoying the beauty of it all..........time is also warning and indicating the location and source of danger or the source of joy and life........now we cana have a seat in our home and enjoy.......the world of outside , the past and the present as a gift of our technology and connect to it with our soul. Some prefere the tools and their performance , some prefere the performance of music to connect .......

[@PearlAcoustics]

Dear Frank, thanks for your kind appreciation. Your experiments with DACs sound very interesting indeed. Thanks too for sharing your wisdom. (I was mastering a recent classical recording yesterday and we had to edit out some of the musicians errors.... I was just reflecting on how difficult / impossible it would have been in the old days of real to real. The challenge we had was the replacement take (section) was two seconds longer than what we were replacing. No problem for vinyl or CD but a big problem to sync with the video we shot of the recording! ;-) But we managed it, with only about half an hour of effort).

[@oliverbeard7912]

That was fun. Only able to listen via headphones to the in room sound.Although i can't be sure i felt (i think) that the first Topping DAC seemed to have a little more "flow" to the sound.

[@PearlAcoustics]

😉👍 thanks for sharing your experience

[@aussie8114]

The Pontus is an easy listen. I like It.

[@cunawarit]

There’s a lot of what I’d classify as nearly fantastical audiophile information out there-beliefs that lean more toward magic than science. But this channel stands apart, and I really enjoyed this video. On KZbin, I couldn’t detect much difference between your recordings, even though I made an effort to listen via a Sabaj DA3 DAC. I didn’t have the chance to listen to your original, uncompressed recordings outside of KZbin’s processing. However, I do notice a difference between my two DACs-the aforementioned Sabaj and an AIYIMA A5 Pro. Since they use different chipsets, it makes sense that there’s a noticeable variation. I think I might prefer the Sabaj, but both sound excellent to me.

[@ronchambers3713]

Enjoyed the discussion as always

[@PearlAcoustics]

🙏

[@nickcoklan3491]

They all sound perfect. I can appreciate the minutiae of tonal differences imparted by various phono cartridges, but really what are we doing here? This takes the hobby to a frivolous place. I appreciate the demonstration. Not so much the strong opinions in the comments 😂

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment and kind remarks. To be fair, in my listening room, obviously one can discern bigger differences than in the recordings but one has to focus and concentrate to detect them! And which is best? 😉

[@alexgregory1887]

As the owner of a Topping A70 Velvet, you have saved me thousands of dollars in 'upgrade' money. Could not hear a lick of difference.

[@PearlAcoustics]

😉

[@RESURRECT2]

10:50 - they are set from the most musical/warm to the most analitycal/dry/cold

[@DamirPusic]

Hello, These are my impressions. Sugden is most accurate regarding timbre, followed by Topping D90 MkIII. Pontus and Topping D10 Balanced are similar to my ears, both giving low frequency boost in vocal. Vocal seems to be closer to me and whispering in that way. In Sugden that sonic weight is not there giving more neutral tonal balance. Sugden vocal is focused litle further away from my ears. SMSL D400EX sounds least hi-fidelity to me, vocal density is slightly bright and shattered according to frequency of her voice, there's no controled image in vocal in comparison to all others. Thanks Mr. Harley, I do hope you will add more samples in future.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you for sharing your findings, and thanks too for your very kind words. I will do my best to add more.

[@VOLTS-tc3bz]

Every DAC is defenetly different. Listed over youtube with AT ATH50x headphones. Most musical is Pontus. Suprised that for me next is Topping D90. Topping D10 clearest sound as mentioned in the video and probaly most accurate as it seems to have correct natural echo clarity.

[@PearlAcoustics]

👍 Thanks for sharing

[@hrvojekant9415]

Ponthus and Sugden...very, very close...my favorite ones...both of them...Thanks a lot..regards. P.S. Quite diferent acustics from your room recording and directly from the DACs

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks very much for your kind message. Indeed, using an XY pair of microphones in a room adds a lot of room effect. It’s not ideal and nothing like what one actually hears. To get it right takes a little of set up and post production!

[@Europhile]

I enjoyed the Denafrips the most - particularly the bass line. I thought the others were a little thin in comparison.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Ok. Thanks for sharing.

[@berchtronix]

hi Harley, thanx for your test, it would be interesting, how an old TDA 1540 or TDA1541 DAC would sound versus the new Delta Sigma DAC`s, best regards from Tirol,Roman

[@PearlAcoustics]

You’re very welcome! I have some good news… sometime between now and mid January, I will upload a recording from an old Sugden DAC with a tda1541 single crown chip in it. I am told it sounds amazing

[@50sterhoulc]

Thank you very much for this experiment and the data! I firstly listened to the wavs from your site. I found my favorites, but only, or much easier at least, through headphones. Then i listened to "cycles" at my streaming service - and this was - surprisingly and without a doubt - the best version for me! Which leaves me quite without a clue: how can that be, what am i missing here?

[@PearlAcoustics]

You’re very welcome, thanks. 🙏 I think the big issue is the extra Dac’s involved in recording the output files. The one you stream is a straight copy from the cd. No DAC in between. Just a guess.

[@nickcoklan3491]

You're not missing anything. The differences, if appreciable at all, are so minuscule as to be a meaningless waste of time and expense. The Topping D10 sounds all but indistinguishable from the more "esteemed" units, as it should. These are devices meant not to impart any coloration of the signal and the vast majority do an excellent job of it. Thanks for taking the time to put this demonstration together @pearlacoustics !

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@nickcoklan3491 thank you for sharing your kind appreciation. And thanks for your contribution to the topic.

[@barrymiller3385]

I've only listened to the clips on KZbin so far. Even from this it is obvious that each dac does indeed sound slightly different. As to which one I prefer - the clips are too short and the differences are too small for me to make a properly considered choice. If I HAD to go for one right now it would probably be the Denafrips. I will come back when I've downloaded and listened to the files.

[@PearlAcoustics]

👍

[@fon75]

I wonder what the input impedance of adc is? Denafrips sound varies a lot with the load!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for taking the time to comment. Good Dac’s should be designed to be rather flexible in that aspect.

[@flemdoghd]

Most enjoyed the D10 sound from the video (not the download).

[@jungtarcph]

I thought it was clearly the worst, without looking, I thought maybe the volume is down. I do have the S10, it's better with an external psu. But I found the Denafrips and Topping D90 best.

[@shawnpwatsons1]

Surprisingly I really liked this too.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment, I think you are not alone

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@jungtarcph Hi, FYI there were some minor discrepancies found with the uploaded files (to our webshop). These have now been corrected and replaced with V2.

[@stevenhoward3358]

The one that sounded different to me was the D10, not in a good way though.

[@manitoublack]

Fun test. But good you addressed the limitations.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks. Indeed

[@rmzidann]

I have to listen to it with my iPad and proper headphones but Denafrips Pontus 15 ( I have the Pontus II myself) sounded too smooth. The Sugden with the TDA 1543 sounded more natural and the voice was the best. Now I think what I am going to get: a chip based R2R DAC. I have two TDA1541a chips handy. 😜 Edith: Ok, I was able to listen several times with 7 Hz Timeless and a Fosi DS1 dongle DAC and my iPad. I have clear preferences. And unfortunately I own a Pontus II DAC. So in order of preference: 1) Sugden DAC. It’s the most engaging, more lively and realistic soundstage and better separation. And the most realistic vocals and singer location and shape. 2) SMSL D400… closest to the Sugden with similar characteristics but the Sugden is slightly better. 3) Topping D90. Nothing objectionable except the vocals were less realistic as was the imaging of the singer. But generally ok. 4) Denafrips 🤦🏻‍♂️… too laid back and yes some could say analog but the problem is it wasn’t engaging for me. Too polite and the kick drums a few seconds in was the least obvious among the 5 DACs. 5) Topping D10. The smallest soundstage and singer sounded like she was thin as a pencil, almost like an anorexic singer. 😂

[@jungtarcph]

See Gabster dac for that chip 🎉❤

[@billedifier8584]

@@jungtarcph Or Audial.

[@PearlAcoustics]

good idea... good luck!

[@audiofool4u]

Listening via iPad and Apple earbuds couldn’t spot any differences really although did her vocal come through a smidge clearer on the Topping D10? Possibly.

[@Morido-1]

The Toppong d90 was surprisingly clear and 3 dimentional, almost like the denafrips.

[@PearlAcoustics]

👍

[@cremersalex]

Over the internet I can hear the differences between speakers but amps and DACs?

[@GentielioGaming]

From the video there was a big difference from the sugden to the smaller topping that folowed upon that one in that video. The topping sounded more like an older recording maybe or maybe more realistic, less bassy. Tell me what dac sounded more realistic. You know it better then me.

[@itzhakazoulay1271]

The most realistic is the Sugden of course but it support up to capable of 24 bit/96kHz and no DSD neither MQA

[@PearlAcoustics]

ah, but that's the thing... its all about perception and then preference. If I record a scratchy sounding violin, I might not want to be faithful to the original sound. Some dacs make everything sound 'nicer' but perhaps are not 100% accurate. A good example of this is compression. Most CD labels and radio stations compress music to make it easier to listen to. But it is very inaccurate of what was recorded. to answer your question, I think the Topping D90Mklll (in my system) is the most accurate, but the Sugden and Denafrips (in my opinion) are very nice to listen to and a little 'forgiving'. If this makes any sense?

[@dennismoore1116]

Are the downloads for the recorded DAC files still available? The only ones I see are from the earlier ESS vs AKM comparison. I don't see what you show in the video at the 2:18 mark. Could you provide a link to them or otherwise point to where they are? Thanks in advance.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi, I have just checked. they are still in the shop. Look for the video icon in the music and cd’s section. I have also put in a link in the description

[@marcusbrsp]

Fun fact: if you break apart Sugden into two words, sug den, it means "suck it" in Swedish.

[@majtextwriter1794]

LOL!! :))) so it sucks the listener into the sound :)))

[@TheCharlesAtoz]

That is very funny. Lol.

[@jungtarcph]

Same in Danish 😂

[@PearlAcoustics]

😂

[@mikeuk4130]

To my ears, just from this video, the Sugden is the only one to do justice to the swell of the big band as you would hear it live. That’s what I’m trying to achieve in my home system: the freedom of sound that you hear from a live source.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment. Enjoy!

[@chinmeysway]

then have a band show up and play in your home. recordings are very very different sonically than live. the two are not even really comparable !

[@papabear1417]

Also how the dac matches with the equipment attached to it. System synergy is important.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Indeed, I notice much more difference when they are directly connected in my system, validating the point you make.

[@lokerola]

To me, the Denafrips was much more organic sounding than the other DACs. Sugden was my second choice.

[@PearlAcoustics]

👍🙏

[@jumpingwhale]

i like the pontus the best, most real natural sound, the samples from your website.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your feedback

[@priedits]

Which one did you like the most?

[@PearlAcoustics]

Me? For critical listening, I like the Topping D90Mklll and for pure music listening, the Denafrips Pontus. But I could live solely with the SMSL and Sugden too ;-)

[@giovannipepe5945]

Ok, so I tried all five dacs through my system. Downloaded the tracks on to USB key and then played through Yamaha Musiccast streamer but used the DAC in my integrated amplifier Rotel 1592 version1 for the playback. The speakers are Sonus Faber Chameleon towers backed up with 2 Rel sealed subs. So here is what I heard on my system. D90Mk3 sounded mega muffled and too much bass. Unpleasant to my ear. SMSL D400EX also sounded muffled. Not quite as much bass as the D90mk3 Sugden DAP800 muffled again. Didn't work for my ears. Topping D10B very good clarity but perhaps a tiny bit thin on the bass. Topping D90mk3 very good clarity, I think I heard a bit more bass, it seemed a bit more balanced over the frequency ranges than the D10B but maybe my imagination. So conclusion. I would in all likelihood choose the Topping D90mk3 for my 59 year old ears and using my setup. I did this test without checking the prices so that I wouldn't be influenced by price. And yes I could definitely hear very clear differences in the DACs. Thanks Harley for all the effort that went in to this experiment. Always a pleasure to hear your expert opinion on hifi matters.🙂

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you, that's very kind! Glad you enjoyed it. We did find some minor discrepancies with the output volume on the right channel of the uploaded files (to our web shop). These have now been corrected and replaced with V2. Just in case you want to re-run them! ;-)

[@gbzmamob]

Thank you. But very strange: I would choose quite a different winner for my system. So I think it quite depends. On everything. 😅

[@giovannipepe5945]

​@@gbzmamobyes I was surprised too. My conclusion was also that it must depend on setup, room acoustics, personal preference, preferred style of music, ones hearing etc. etc 😁 So really the ideal situation is to actually try them out in-situ which in the real world is a bit tricky without buying them all 😂

[@geoffreydebrito7934]

A bit of a surprise. The differences are subtle and direct comparison is needed to determine what differences exist. Thank you for this Harley. Listening closely to the samples through my modestly priced audiophile headphone system, I was surprised to discover that I preferred the Topping ESS DAC's more forward mix of the instruments over the SMSL AKM DAC's but preferred the smoothness of the AKM's rendition of the vocals. I found the Sugden a bit lacking in comparison to the others but if memory serves, the Sugden is not a stand alone DAC. I saved the Pontus for last and prefer it, as it seems to present the best aspects of both the Topping ESS DAC and SMSL AKM DAC.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for sharing your appreciation and your interesting observations. Indeed Sugden is linked to its pre but I used the direct output. I will make a comparison with the DAC4 in the future

[@chinmeysway]

differences will never be enough or bad enough to care. save your money and use it to support your local music stores and artists w physical media purchases.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment, and also use the money to go to live concerts? ;-)

[@JurgenKraus-calgary]

Thanks for your informative comparison. D90 sounds overly sharp and unpleasant/fatigueing to my ears (hence with added pseudo resolution/transparency, D10 unorderly/bumpy in the lower frequencies and thin/lean in the mids, the SMSL sounds way more rounded and balanced than the Toppings. The other ones I don't include as they are way more expensive...and really appealing to my ears. I am very sensitive to unnaturally fast decays and sharpness due to my musical education from childhood on. A cello has to sound like a cello and not like a saw. It is like with wine: if it's off, it is off, no detailed explanation or sommelier needed. Sour is sour. If there were no differences between DACs, we all would buy $100 ones. P.S. I would never take a Topping even for free but have had lots of luck with SMSL. Out of your lot, I'd go for the SMSL considering the value.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you for your kind appreciation and for your excellent feedback

[@michelrochette3066]

The Sugden for me, I mean way beyond the others. It's also a pretty good preamp too. Ty sir for the share.

[@PearlAcoustics]

👍

[@r423fplip]

Way beyond !

[@raulortega4462]

My two cents: It seems to me that the majority of the audience here listens to the same thing as me: the Topping D90 is the fastest and most analytical, with the best dynamics and mathematical precision, with the widest extension in the sub-bass and treble, but for that reason the most aggressive and exhausting, and the Denafrip and the Sudgen are the most grateful with the voice because they are the most caramelized in the mids, which in audiophile language we call "musicality", and which is the effect that valves and class A produce in analog. The SMSL is halfway between both, we could say. This means that if we listen to another musical cut, for example a drum solo, the sigma-delta would stand out more, especially the Topping. My opinion is that "musicality" is "just" the presence in the foreground of very well processed mids, which favors the voices, all the instruments in the midrange and classical music in general. It's a matter of equalization, in short, which is what ends up creating the planes and the sound stage. I propose something very simple: measure the frequency response of the room with each DAC with a microphone, and see, in a scientific way, where the differences are that clearly exist, even if they are subtle. (If the files are passed to an audio editing software, the sound spectrum already tells a lot about the dynamic differences between each of them)

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi, You have summed up the general comments and opinion very well indeed. I also enjoyed reading your definition of "Musicality"! So thanks for that. For your "very simple" exercise, of course it could be done but it would take quite some work. I am not sure I have the time to do this at the moment, but I will give it some thought, I have been thinking for a while to tackle the complex story of how (if) recording technology (in its broadest sense of the word) can indicate quality. sure it can detect difference but when using music as a source, its very hard to read. Maybe a topic for the future!

[@raulortega4462]

@@PearlAcoustics Thank you for your reply. Of course, I understand. Nothing in music technology is "simple". In reality it is about doing the same thing you have already done but analyzing the frequency spectrum that each device has provided. If we all hear more bass and treble in D90 III and more prominent mids in Denafrips that should be scientifically reflected in a graph. I have already pointed out that the dynamic differences are perfectly visible in the spectrum graphs. The controversy that exists around DACs is terrible. Some claim that it is impossible for them to sound different and others claim that their ears are not making up reality. Everything we do to end this absurd war is welcome. I am glad that my simplification of what sounds "musical" has been amusing to you. It is exactly that: an exaggerated simplification, a caricature, but it shows features that I believe have something to do with that complex reality.

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@raulortega4462 well said! 👍

[@JustBe74]

Have you ever had the opportunity to listen to a PS Audio PerfectWave DirectStream DAC?

[@PearlAcoustics]

No, sadly never have.

[@JustBe74]

@@PearlAcoustics Me neither, sadly. Would be lovely if you get the opportunity so we can hear your opinion.

[@mike_lowndes]

So, the Sugden: are we hearing DAC only, direct or could the preamp be influencing the sound (given everyone seems to think its so different)?

[@PearlAcoustics]

I think you have a point here. I think the Pre out is influencing it a bit. I will try and go a comparison with a DAC-4

[@normansoh]

Interesting set of tests… However it would be preferable to compare the waveform of the DAC output to the original master analogue waveform. The primary objective of a DAC is to convert the digital signal to an analogue signal accurately without colourisation or distortion. Another interesting topic to discuss is whether a high end CD transport sounds better than a laptop playing a wave file of the ripped CD through the same DAC…

[@abraxalito]

If the laptop's powered from mains via a power brick then potentially it'll sound worse, depending on the DAC. If the laptop's battery powered then hopefully no difference.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks!

[@johanlundqvist8853]

hi. for me 1-D90 2-sugden 3-denafrips 4-D10

[@cory3685]

After reading the comments , I have concluded that each person will hear things differently ....just like everyones vision differs, Hearing /freq response will differ from person to person

[@PearlAcoustics]

Good point, thanks for sharing. I am sure you’re absolutely right. My wife and I see (or at least describe) colours completely differently and neither of us is technically even remotely colour blind.

[@thomaskuhn6541]

I had a difficult time differentiating with the exception of the D10 which I perceived to be a bit more edgy with the vocals and horns on Under My Skin. So given a choice I wouldn't want the D10 in my system. Of the remaining 4 DACs the Sugden could be a bit more "musical" and somewhat softer in the mids, but it's really splitting hairs. As with your last comparison video, the downloads worked really well and the Clare Teal is a wonderful recording.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for sharing your observations. Much appreciated.

[@bevanyoung9222]

I liked the smsl best on my iem. Thank you! Every one of these sounded different! If dacs, which measure close to the same, sound this different, then I feel we are missing something. 👍

[@PearlAcoustics]

I know, what I say does not make me popular, but not everything is measurable. ie by measuring two violins, its very hard to know which one sounds the nicest. I would love to spend more time researching this.

[@wim1983]

ahe frankly I have to admit I'm not able to hear differences for all the DACs :), perhaps need really dynamic and even more aggressive vocal (something like Whitney live at David Letterman show) to see how the sound swing, I can't decide aha, yes enjoy the music. Switching between an SMSL C100 and Fostex HP-A3, my long term conclusion is the Fostex does smooth the sound a bit even at higher volume, while the SMSL bring out every nuance of details, which at times could be a bit bright for long listening.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi thanks for your feedback. In the download file you will find the ‘Cycles’ track which might help you further. Enjoy!

[@wim1983]

@@PearlAcoustics Alright.

[@revelry1969]

Ok…now record the vinyl with that recorder then play back on these DACs. DACs make a little bit of difference not as much as source improvement. I couldn’t hear much difference thru my AirPods on phone. I will audition the files in my main system. Update: in my main system with a RME ADI-2 Pro BFE DAC. They are all pretty close but the Denefrips has a little more clarity in the voice and horns. I prefer the Denefrips. So 1. Denefrips, 2. Sugden 3/4 tie smsl and topping. I also noticed the Sugden and Topping both have DR13 and the Denefrips and SMSL have DR 15. Is it possible the Sugden and topping are slightly juicing the compression to fatten the sound? Not sure if in the D to A they are slightly monkeying with the signal. This could be because of internal gain settings of the DAC. I have noticed if I use a too high of recording level I get clipping and the ADC accounts by compressing. I don’t think your recording is compressed. But it appears 2 of these DACs are compressing the signal slightly. This is the issue with DACs they have so many little details. I say go to the best source then find a transparent DAC. Also, I don’t use PCM wherever I can. DSD. That is the next test. Record the vinyl to PCM and DSD then do playback. Source source source is most important (to me)

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your contribution to the topic. On a technical point, I think of all the DACs , the Topping D90lll is the least likely to compress. It has the best specifications and a massive signal to noise ratio. Indeed, I did not compress my recordings, leaving plenty of headroom, to avoid any distortion in the recording process.

[@revelry1969]

@@PearlAcoustics interesting. Did you do DR measurements on the output files? Not sure why I am getting the differences

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@revelry1969 hi, yes, absolutely. Each file was very carefully checked and matched. Very strange

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@revelry1969 Hi, a quick update.... After, I read your comment, I went back to check the files and indeed I found some discrepancies with the output volume on the right channel of each of the uploaded files (to our web shop). I have now corrected them and replaced with V2. Just in case you want to re-run them! ;-) Thank you so much for raising your point. Harley

[@sukeongcheah]

Can’t find the download, could you please put a link for the download!!!!!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Ah ok. Just go to our website / shop and Music - you should see it there.

[@maxbg]

Couldn't find the files to download on your website. Can you share the actual link?

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi, sorry about that go to the shop / music, they are in that section.

[@66hats]

The best DAC chip is the TDA1541 followed by the TDA1543. Everything else pales in comparison

[@rmzidann]

I have two original TDA1541a chips. Wanna buy them? lol one is from a Marantz CD40 and the other from a Rotel RCD855.

[@66hats]

​@@rmzidannI have several CD players with the chip and an amp the Marantz PM-75 which has a 'crown' TDA1541 in it - that amp is endgame stuff. Thanks anyway

[@highfell1]

⁠​⁠@@66hatsYep I also have the Marantz PM 75. It is well hidden secret. The DAC implementation in the PM75 has the same circuitry ie Chips, jitter circuitry as the very famous Marantz DA12, which goes for silly money.

[@ColinBrown99]

Amazed to discover here that my old Akai CD-M670, with TDA1543 should be right up there with these super-DACs. Certainly always sounded great to me, but would love to be able to compare to the Sugden implementation of this chip, and to these other DACs

[@dkokalanov]

What about other brands? RME, Okto, Gustard have good options in the reasonable price range.

[@christiantessier1661]

Gustard is amazing for my taste x26 pro

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi, thanks for your comment. Indeed I have considered them all and heard many, including the wonderful Gustard. Perhaps one day I will add more sound recording samples to the download section on our site.

[@christiantessier1661]

@@PearlAcoustics I had old Sugden SDA1 dac and their is no match with the Gustard,That make me think the new Gustard H26 Pre amp could be amazing product too ,especially for the price.

[@christiantessier1661]

Room acoustic and synergy is so important. Your test help a lot to give idea 💡 what could be a good match in my set up. With return policy their is no risk to try in room.

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@christiantessier1661 so pleased to hear this

[@thomprd]

What is airy and why do I want my sound system to have it?

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your question. ‘Airy’ is the amount of reverb one can hear in a recording. A bit like it sounding in a bigger room. I hope that helps?

[@guystpierrecomposer]

I'm pretty sure there is more differences than what we can here (with the download). The triple conversion is not technically a good idea ;). I don't think that on a good system you can be « tricked » just by the look of those Dacs... I did test a sabre DAC ESS ES9028Q2M in my Primare SC15 versus a Mojo 2... and it's not close, the mojo 2 is way better. I REALLY wanted the ESS to sound better or as good because than I could have sell my Mojo 2. So the bias was on the money side ;) and still... I kept the mojo 2 certainly not for the look ;)). For now, I don't want to test other expensive Dac by fear of hearing better ones...

[@PearlAcoustics]

:-) I totally get your point! The fear of discovering a device that is so much better, but also very expensive! Stick with what you have and enjoy the music ;-)

[@curtiscroulet8715]

Any way I listen to this, either through my computer (Schiit Magni DAC/headphone amp, headphones) or saving it to disc for my main system (Schiit Bifrost 2/64, speakers), the sound will go through another DAC before I hear it. It seems to me that will affect any differences -- or none! -- that I hear. UPDATED TO ADD: I can't hear any differences that would survive an ABX test, As heard on my computer via the Schiit Magni DAC/headphone amp and HifiMan Sundar headphones. There's a KZbin reviewer who complains about "glare" from ESS chips, but (to me) the cheapo ($109 USD) Topping D10 (ESS DAC chip) actually sounds very good, and it's not readily distinguishable from the others. To me! Also, why does the singer sound like an American, even though she's from Yorkshire? Strong, American-style rhotic Rs.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi Thanks for this interesting contribution to the topic. With regards to Clare singing with a mild American accent, I personally think its logical because the lyrics were written with the colour of an American accent in mind (tomaato vs tomarrto). But indeed every singer must decide what feels right for themselves. Best wishes, H.

[@curtiscroulet8715]

@@PearlAcoustics Thank you for your good-natured response. I'm an American in California. I speak with an accent similar to Ms. Teal's singing accent. It would be interesting to hear her sing the song in her native accent. The varied accents of the English-speaking world are a topic of continuing fascination to me. Prof. Geoff Lindsey from University College London has some KZbin videos about the topic. As for the DAC comparisons, I'm not sure how I can get around the likely nullification of the results by my own equipment. Plus, I'm almost 80 years old. There are probably things going on in the highs that I simply don't hear. I thank you for providing the files.

[@CarlVanDoren61]

W4S 10th edition DAC2V2SE Discrete class A output stages 😊

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment. Absolutely. To be honest, I think most DAC's have class A outputs as the amount of amplification is so small.

[@AllboroLCD]

Right on the money sir! I had been using a Creative USB DAC few years now, and it was a HUGE jump from my PC's onboard sound. Just last week I picked up a DAC Magic 100 and a 1st gen Bifrost. They both were noticeably better than the Creative, but between the 2 of them its difficult to notice. It seems the better built power supply on the Bifrost gains it a very marginal boost over the Cambridge. Like you said, very hard to tell!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks!

[@mswdesign9164]

I'm going to guess that the Roland has manual volume controls and that they were adjusted independently for each DAC source. That's the only way I can explain why if you control for volume on the left channel, the right channel - at least in the "cycles" files, varies between samples by up to 3 DB. If the Roland is not at fault, then some of these DACs have a mismatch in channel output volumes. Could that be the case?

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment. Indeed, you are 100% correct. I volume matched to the left channel only. Looking back now, that was an error on my part. Not the DACs.

[@PearlAcoustics]

After, I read your comment, I went back to check and indeed I found the discrepancies you mention with the output volume on the right channel of the uploaded files (to our web shop). I have now corrected them and replaced with V2. Just in case you want to re-run them! ;-) Thank you so much for pointing this out! Harley

[@mswdesign9164]

Thanks. One channel was sufficient for my tests. Did you see that one of the DACs is outputting inverted phase for both channels? Does that affect playback?

[@mswdesign9164]

Denafrips, if memory serves.

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@mswdesign9164 I didn’t notice the phasing! I don’t know why Denefrips put a phasing button on the front of their DAC, I must have knocked it by mistake. To be honest, it shouldn’t make any difference, unless you superimpose one on another! Thanks for pointing that out!

[@danedes9297]

The Pontus has a wider soundstage extending a bit beyond the speakers. The decay is better defined and I can hear more resonance around each note. This is true for the vocals on the second track as well. Admittedly, I have a bias as my system has both the Denafrips Iris DDC and Ares 12th DAC. I am familiar with and enjoy the sound of a ladder DAC.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you for your feedback

[@IMER-s9u]

10:49 11:27 12:04 12:41 13:18

[@segonscom]

Gràcies per aquests vídeos tan carregats de bona informació. Per a les meves oídes les diferències son mínimes, però, triaria el Denefrips en primer lloc,més sensació d'espai; després el Sugden, tots dos molt elegants. Salut!

[@PearlAcoustics]

You’re very welcome. Thanks for sharing your findings

[@richardabouchedid1783]

Hi. Please , Where in the website are the downloads ?

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi, just hi to the shop and select the music and cd section. You should find them there.

[@cineaudiophile4465]

The Sugden comes across as smoother and a little fuller than the rest. The Toppings allow you to hear into the room a little more. That said this is the kind of recording that will sound good on most dacs because there's not much happening in lower treble and high frequencies which is where poorer dacs start to show limitations.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi, thanks for your comment. If you go to get the download tracks you will find an additional track which I think you will find very suitable for your needs.

[@filipviljamaasvensson]

Commenting here before watching the whole video, I'd like to point out that the difference in DACs is also room/setup dependent. In my treated room with, I think, a pretty good setup of the speakers with vibration dampening beneath the amp and DAC, the difference is more than subtle. It's more like a different set of speakers. At least when I A/B between my Denafrips Ares II and the built in DAC in my Denon DCD-1700ne CD-player (which I'm able to do with a simple click on the remote). Same cables, both pathways thouroghly burnt in. Most of the difference is in the three-dimensionality of the soundstage. It's almost like going from a 3D-movie to a big screen TV. And a lesser, but still important, difference in tone. Perhaps it's the same thing about the Pontus that draws you to it. That "musical" tone. Anyways, much appreciated video! Looking forward to hearing the Sibelius one day.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Hi Filip, Thanks for your very kind message and interesting comment. Perhaps we’ll see you in one of our listening rooms, or at a show one day! Best wishes

[@TomasKlockrike]

Thanks for your work. I downloaded and my favourite is the Sugden. Her voice is more alive and natural I think.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks! Enjoy the music!

[@Coneman3]

I think a good strategy with Hifi is to avoid mainstream brands. Newer companies can often be much better value, but China made usually helps too.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment

[@jasonfoy7847]

Listening just through my system the sugden sounded more human rhythmical more like music

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for sharing

[@octothorpe12]

When listening to recordings with brushed drums, it's always difficult to really listen for detail.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Indeed, a very good point. Did you go to the website and download the additional tracks, there its much easier and obviously a little more detail on both?

[@dennis3779]

At first hearing i put the Sugden Dac 4 back in competition after somehow probably mistakenly thinking the Harmony and Cyan 2 dacs would walk over it. The Sugden Dac 4 is the most involving and real and least artifical and plastic clinking though the Pontus has maybe a bit more resolution or insight or is more spacious on some tracks it otherwise is not that interesting anymore to me at first hearing. The others are too artificial, plastic, uninvolving and the opposite of analog.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Interesting feedback, thanks

[@dennis3779]

Probably the Sugden Dac 4 is the most pure and real clinking because probably it is the least processing dac and processing is very lossy even though some say it is not in the Analog domain. That is the sort of effect when you use the pure function on AVR amps. Or the sort of effect when using fixed lenses instead of zoom lenses. The more glass will not always mean clearer view 🤔

[@PearlAcoustics]

@@dennis3779 indeed.

[@jeffreythurston1822]

Great fun. The Denafrips and Sugden sounded very similar and quite good compared to the others. The Topping I very veiled. R2R for the win.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Glad you enjoyed it! Thanks for your feedback

[@havbeen18]

As much as I admire Sugden products it has to be the Denafrips in this comparison. Sugden a little too forward and more distortion. The Topping D20 also gave a good sound.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thank you for your feedback

[@petermartin9494]

Listening to DACs can tell you something but only maybe about differences between the DACs. You have to use YOUR OWN DAC, so you can not judge any other DACs absolutely. You can listen to other DACs through your own DAC but the value of such an exercise is questionable to say the least. The impressions of someone who is actually listening to the DACs in person are on the other hand very valuable.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Absolutely. The exercise here was only for fun and to see if differences could be detected, even when the signal is passed through a number of Dac’s in the chain.

[@66hats]

Sugden is the best out of these, can't beat the TDA1541 and TDA1543!

[@PearlAcoustics]

Thanks for your comment

[@JRVick]

I fear we may need a R2R recorder now. 😅

[@PearlAcoustics]

😀

[@JohnDoe-np3zk]

I have to believe my all Bryston systems beat any of these. My Bryston BDA2 is fantastic.

[@PearlAcoustics]

Indeed, just enjoy the music.

[@spacehopper77]

Listened to the files on your website. For my ears I rank them 1. Pontus, 2. D90 3. Sugden. 4.SMSL 5. D10.

[@PearlAcoustics]

👍 thanks.