Topping G5 Review (Portable DAC & HP Amp)

[Jimster480]

I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but for us planar addicts is it possible to start showing 16 ohm power for mobile HPAs? Topping have proven their specs match real world pretty closely, but not all are so "forthcoming."

Historically, although it seems to have improved lately, many mobile devices lose power below 32 ohm (I've still never heard why that is, if anyones willing to link/summarize I'd appreciate it)

Also, could you let us know what track gave you trouble w sub-bass on Stealth? I'd like to try it with my NX7 (only slightly more powerful)

YES PLEASE. I have multiple headphones under 32 Ohm.

 

[oscar_dziki]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Topping G5 portable, battery operated DAC, headphone amplifier with bluetooth. It was sent to me by the company and costs US $299.
View attachment 224471
The G5 comes in a super stout metal enclosure. It is on the heavy side for a portable product (2 to 4 times heavier than a typical mobile phone). There are dual headphone output jacks but they both have same power. There is aux in if you want to just use its headphone amp. I tested it as a combination DAC+Amp.

The G5 is very easy to use courtesy of simple to set sliding switches:
View attachment 224472

Topping G5 Measurements
I treated the unit as a DAC by setting the gain to medium and maximum volume. This is our usual dashboard:
View attachment 224473

This is excellent performance for a desktop DAC. For a portable one, it is state of the art.
View attachment 224474
View attachment 224475

And that is at 2.1 volt output. Performance will likely improve at higher output level.

Noise performance is up there as well:
View attachment 224476
View attachment 224477

This makes the G5 very suitable to drive very sensitive IEMs.

IMD distortion is excellent:
View attachment 224478
Linearity is nailed:

View attachment 224479

Multitone is superb:
View attachment 224480

Jitter is near perfect:
View attachment 224481

The default filter is set to one that starts to attenuate early:
View attachment 224482

It has great suppression but you do lose a bit of audio spectrum:
View attachment 224483

I have email into Topping to see if this is intentional or specific to my sample. Fortunately there is little audible impact as most of us don't hear that high up. Getting older has some benefits!

The strong filter makes great showing in THD+N vs frequency:
View attachment 224484

This kind of performance would make a lot of desktop DACs blush with embarrassment.

Switching to headphone amp performance (which using DAC as input), we get plenty of power for a portable product:
View attachment 224485
View attachment 224486

Notice how it easily beats its desktop older brother, the DX3 Pro in every category: noise, distortion and output power.

Output impedance is essentially zero:
View attachment 224488

There is some variability in channels as volume is adjusted. But it remains below my 0.5 dB threshold until max attenuation:
View attachment 224487

Topping G5 Listening Tests
I started with my hard to drive, low impedance Dan Clark Stealth headphone. I was pleased that I could get pretty high volumes out of it using high gain. For loud listening, I had to go to 3:00 pm on the volume control. There was a bit more volume to be had if you turned it to max. There, I only heard distortion when the sub-bass notes arrived. Otherwise, the sound was super clean, detailed and enjoyable.

I then switched to high impedance Sennheiser HD650. The G5 drove these with ease, allowing every bit of their performance to shine through. Dynamic range was fantastic with bass notes almost causing resonances in my ear lobes at highest volume. Low level detail was superb as was overall fidelity.

With either headphone, I just wanted to sit back and just listen to my music!

Conclusions
We expect perfection from Topping and company delivers even in this constrained category of battery operated product. No excuses are made for that with a DAC that provides state of the art desktop performance. The headphone amplifier is quite powerful although desktop products do edge it out. This only impacts the least sensitive headphones though. For vast majority of headphones out there, the G5 drives them as hard as you need with any distortion being the headphone, not the amp.

The only "hitch" is the slower roll off in the DAC filter. I almost knocked the overall rating lower but once I listened to the G5, I could not go there. Performance is too good to give it any score other than top of the line. You get to disagree otherwise by voting in the poll.

The other bit is the size and weight of the unit. This is no small device to tie up to your cell phone even though Topping provides the usual rubber band and cabling to do so.

I am happy to put the Topping G5 on my recommended list.
----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

I was waiting for this kind of device from topping. What a killer.

 

[Garrincha]

So... desktop stack killer anybody?

The Topping Dx3Pro+ costs only $200, is not portable but still very small and has a very superior filter and more power, so no.

 

[Jimster480]

No IEM remotely warrants an Amp as powerful as the G5.
Good IEMs under $200: Moondrop Kato, 7Hz Timeless

1More Quad driver IEM.

WolfX-700 did a bunch of measurments once via USB, once via LDAC:
https://www.l7audiolab.com/f/topping-g5/

Wow that is still transparent! Didn't think LDAC was that good.

Half the price of Mojo2 but without EQ. With EQ it could have been a Mojo beater.

How much EQ does the mojo really have? There are phone apps with EQ.

 

[amirm]

YES PLEASE. I have multiple headphones under 32 Ohm.

I have shown the voltage curve for all loads. Just convert them to power = V * V/R.

 

[Universal Cereal Bus]

Absolutely a flat response is number 1. Everything else comes second in high fidelity.

What's next? Roll off above 10kHz and get even better numbers?

I will take a device that begins to roll off slightly at 18kHz - a frequency that I, a person under 40 who has taken care of his ears, can barely hear and a frequency above which there is no musical content, if I'm getting essentially perfect numbers across the board in all other respects, and that goes double if I can up the sample rate and get flat response well beyond the audible range.

You're being ridiculous.

Is it really so ridiculous? In a vacuum, maybe. But if the tradeoff is merely bandwidth vs. ultrasonic leakage, John's position doesn't seem so unreasonable.

Honest question: what is more likely audible? Wouldn't the aliasing through the wider bandwidth filter merely lower SINAD at those high frequencies you claim are inaudible? Would the difference in SINAD at 18 kHz be audible?

The whole debate is rather philosophical so any argument resorting to pragmatism, real musical content, real use vs. measurement, etc. holds no water IMO. To be clear, arguing that 0.6 dB at 18 kHz is inaudible requires that you concede the tradeoff you seek is likely equally if not more inaudible.

 

[notabenem]

can it charge (or not use the battery in the first place) when connected to a laptop/Desktop PC?

 

[Robbo99999]

Topping got back to me and said the filter choice is by design. They are willing to change it if we/I ask for it. Do we want to do it?

The trade off here is getting rid of out of band noise with current filter vs flatter frequency response but potentially more bleeding due to ultrasonic leakage.

That's very responsive of Topping! I think it's important to be flat 20Hz-20kHz.........about the leakage, so how would the other filters look if roughly sketched onto the following graph of yours?

 

[staticV3]

so how would the other filters look if roughly sketched onto the following graph of yours?

Like this:

 

[Cars-N-Cans]

YAY! Finally one with a battery and SOTA performance! Definitely going to have to check it out.

 

[Liya]

Wow, the fact that they are willing to change that based on users asking for it speaks highly of the company.

This forum is Topping's best marketing tool so why not.

 

[JSmith]

This forum is Topping's best marketing tool so why not.

How long did it take you to think of this shitpost?

Any manufacturer is welcome to send items to ASR for testing... get it right.


JSmith

 

[pma]

The choice is ringing vs. mirror images, logical constraint of low 44.1kHz sampling rate. What is "better"?
Any valid scientific research on this?

 

[Garrincha]

How long did it take you to think of this shitpost?

Any manufacturer is welcome to send items to ASR for testing... get it right.


JSmith

Yes, we all are waiting for dCS, Nagra, Weiss, EMM, Gryphon, MSB and the like sending in their precious gear!

 

[PeteL]

to all the folks arguing about the filter.
Why not used 96khz or 192khz and apply what ever filter you like?

I don't know why this is not more common? your PC/player is million times more powerful then the DACs interns DSP. why not use it to get waht ever filter you like with way better fidelity?

Because many of us have 44.1k content we want to listen to? You mean over sampling on the PC?

 

[PeteL]

Is it supposed to play music or pass lab tests?
If I was in the market, that wouldn't bother me at all.
I am not a bat.

That's a much wider debate, but this website normally give thhe highest marks and recommendations to products that first and foremost perform flawlessly at "lab tests" This has a flaw at something that can at least theoretically be audible. Many device get's criticise for some metrics that are below audible levels but are not competitive to the state of the art. This one receive the highest praise, it should be SOTA on all metrics.

 

[Lambda]

You mean over sampling on the PC?

Yes. to filter it it needs to be over sampled.
This is better done before the playback and not in real time

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinc_filter.

Brick-wall filters that run in realtime are not physically realizable as they have infinite latency (i.e., its compact support in the frequency domain forces its time response not to have compact support meaning that it is ever-lasting) and infinite order (i.e., the response cannot be expressed as a linear differential equation with a finite sum), but approximate implementations are sometimes used and they are frequently called brick-wall filters.

 

[jerm_ph]

Most of what I listen to is 16/44.1k
I will STILL buy the G5 because of my use case BUT…

I believe that manufacturers must prioritize achieving the ff
1. 20Hz-20kHz flat freq response. I can’t hear anything beyond 14-15kHz but OTHERS surely can
2. SINAD of 100dB or so whatever value is proven inaudible

Why? Because fidelity.

Once the above is achieved, ONLY then can they start pushing their engineering prowess to the limits.

The key here is prioritizing fidelity. Prioritizing one metric while compromising the other is not good engineering IMO.

(But of course let us not forget reliability )

 

[Liya]

How long did it take you to think of this shitpost?

Any manufacturer is welcome to send items to ASR for testing... get it right.


JSmith

I think your post is not a response to what I said... and why use words like 'shit'? for what reason?
So you don't think this forum is Topping great marketing tool?

 

[Jimster480]

I have shown the voltage curve for all loads. Just convert them to power = V * V/R.

Which graph is that? The load @ 32Ohm graph you are saying can be converted?

Topping got back to me and said the filter choice is by design. They are willing to change it if we/I ask for it. Do we want to do it?

The trade off here is getting rid of out of band noise with current filter vs flatter frequency response but potentially more bleeding due to ultrasonic leakage.

What do you think about audibility? IMHO if its 0.5db then its barely anything and I don't see how anyone would hear that.