Topping E30 II DAC Review

[MC_RME]

A quick question regarding the different filters provided.

These looks like 48khz sampling for me and not 44.1? F2 and F6 seems identical linear filters with great attenuation at around 24khz.

You missed the whole discussion about lax filters for better pass-through and yet no issue when playing back music. The AKM chip does not have a so-called brickwall filter.

 

[Jimster480]

I had promised the company I would get the reviews out by their announcement. But then didn't feel good and barely got the L30II review done. I figured if I leave that as the only product reviewed, folks would question why this review is not out. So got the critical ones out until I could no longer sit up.

Wow you are a dedicated man. I hope you are feeling better now.

 

[nsfgp]

Updated USB measurements in the review.

Can you post a pic or link of the exact Samsung USB power supply used for the USB test please if not too much trouble?? Thank you for another great review!!

 

[Jimster480]

Can you post a pic or link of the exact Samsung USB power supply used for the USB test please if not too much trouble?? Thank you for another great review!!

I'm pretty sure it is the same cheap one he has linked in a few other reviews over the years.

 

[Veri]

A quick question regarding the different filters provided.

These looks like 48khz sampling for me and not 44.1? F2 and F6 seems identical linear filters with great attenuation at around 24khz.

These are the normal filters for 44.1k on AKM-based chips. They do not go steeper.

 

[nsfgp]

I'm pretty sure it is the same cheap one he has linked in a few other reviews over the years.

ok thanks ... did some search and pretty sure that particular charger will be found soon.
But found this post straight from the engineer himself https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...ing-e50-review-balanced-dac.26219/post-898318

(EDIT: found a good review/comparison too: http://www.righto.com/2012/10/a-dozen-usb-chargers-in-lab-apple-is.html)

 

[JSmith]

JSmith

 

[delta76]

Kinda funny reading about guys squawking about very low budget electronics slapped together by low paid workers and expecting longevity and customer service of any type.

Want quality and service, buy an RME or an Okto or Benchmark or Aurilac or T+A...or buy the cheap flavor of the month and realize that you may be replacing it soon. If one can live with this cheap DAC's features, it can break 10+ times and be replaced for the same cost as the quality built stuff. If it doesn't fail, you will big economically.

For my part, having never had a sub $1,500 DAC in my system that drives the inputs of an amp with 4 meter long balanced interconnects. Not convinced that a quality variable output stage and supporting power supply can be inserted in a little box along with a digital receiver and quality DAC chips for $150? Sounds impossible. Was thinking of buying one of these bargain basement units like the Sabaj A20D, just to see if they work (make lifelike, dynamic music) in a real system like mine.

not sure if I agree with you.
Regardless of the price, an electronic device should last at least their warranty period, bar a reasonable failure ratio.

If you haven’t followed the pa5 incident, the failure rate was very high (no body knows exactly how high, but much higher than normal). Then the warranty process was long, tedious, confusing. A lot of people had to provide a lot of proofs to show their units were defective. @MAB for example was even asked to open the unit to test. After all that, they were asked to send the units back to China regardless of where they bought them, and specifically lie on value declaration.

People buying these things knowing they are making a compromise. I would reckon nobody expect them to last 10+ years like a benchmark. But at least they should last for a couple of years and are relatively error free.

 

[JSmith]

I am not talking about Topping specifically... but what often happens is this. A company designs their own products, but they outsource the assembly and distribution to a 3rd party company. On occasion (due to supply or another reason) the 3rd party company may swap a part for a different but similar spec'd part and the company that designed the product may not always know about this. Some companies may even use different 3rd party companies to assemble different products and models. So it's not always as clear cut as blaming the "brand", as they are often not the manufacturer. This is not limited to audio products.


JSmith

 

[respice finem]

People buying these things knowing they are making a compromise. I would reckon nobody expect them to last 10+ years like a benchmark. But at least they should last for a couple of years and are relatively error free.

IDK... DACs and such have nearly no mechanical parts, and are rather low-temperature devices nowadays, why shouldn't they last many years?
I still have an 8 years old Musical Fidelity DAC at my secondary PC, my mother has a DAC/HPA from the same company, which is on more or less all day, every day, no issues. None of these was really expensive back then. If I would expect a device to fail within 2-3 years, I wouldn't buy it, but maybe it's just me.

 

[delta76]

IDK... DACs and such have nearly no mechanical parts, and are rather low-temperature devices nowadays, why shouldn't they last?
I still have 8 years old Musical Fidelity DACs in my secondary PC, my mother has a DAC/HPA from the same company, which is on more or less all day, every day. None of these was really expensive. If I would really expect a device to fail within 2-3 years, I wouldn't buy it, but maybe it's just me.

Yes that was the reason a lot of us bought those things at first place, thinking they will last a long time. But reliability must be proven, and that takes time. I am talking about minimum requirements here.

 

[goat76]

Yes that was the reason a lot of us bought those things at first place, thinking they will last a long time. But reliability must be proven, and that takes time. I am talking about minimum requirements here.

When reading product threads here at ASR, it’s pretty obvious that Topping products have a much higher failure rate than other brands in general. It seems like those other brands got the reliability right from the get-go, why isn’t that the case with this brand?

 

[Sokel]

Low prices do not justify short longevity.
15 years old E-MU with the price of 120 euro back then is still going strong.

The inside

And yesterdays measurement that match the published measurements of the time back then.(be nice,I only learn now how to measure).

No excuses then.

 

[delta76]

When reading product threads here at ASR, it’s pretty obvious that Topping products have a much higher failure rate than other brands in general. It seems like those other brands got the reliability right from the get-go, why isn’t that the case with this brand?

For once they are likely most popular. When you have similar products at similar prices you will most likely buy product with highest measured performance. And once you bought from a brand you will be more likely buying other products from that brand, especially in audio stack (dac preamp amp).

Another possible explanation is that Topping pushed for measurements more than they really should. Engineering is a compromising process and if you push something too hard you usually don't have time and budget to properly think about other aspect

 

[Plcamp]

When reading product threads here at ASR, it’s pretty obvious that Topping products have a much higher failure rate than other brands in general.

I see no evidence to support that statement.

To make that statement you would need statistical data you do not possess. Anecdotes don’t suffice.

Perhaps Mr Yang has such data, but on a consumer product like this even he might not.

Edit: It is not my experience that manufacturers can substitute parts due to things like supply constraints. In my experience, manufacturers were entirely controlled to use only devices on an approved supplier list specified by the project’s lead engineering team, and any variance from that, no matter how tiny, would require formal design control change.

 

[delta76]

I see no evidence to support that statement.

To make that statement you would need statistical data you do not possess. Anecdotes don’t suffice.

Perhaps Mr Yang has such data, but on a consumer product like this even he might not.

well, perhaps not "much higher failure rate" - except for the notorious PA5, but evidently you will see more posts reporting issues with Topping products here. It gives the senses of higher failure rate (while statistically they might be not)

 

[JohnYang1997]

For once they are likely most popular. When you have similar products at similar prices you will most likely buy product with highest measured performance. And once you bought from a brand you will be more likely buying other products from that brand, especially in audio stack (dac preamp amp).

Another possible explanation is that Topping pushed for measurements more than they really should. Engineering is a compromising process and if you push something too hard you usually don't have time and budget to properly think about other aspect

I kinda agree with you. It's relatively easy just to make a good measuring product and just sell many units of them. I do really wish that the build quality and "quality control" can be measured in a such straightforward way. Someone said about stress testing, we have started doing that. But it will really take time to see the difference.

But I would say we didn't pushed measurements more than it should in the sense of sacrificing thermal performance or pushing beyond the part's limit etc. And we really do care about every component we use in our products. Even resistors are important and can make differences. Let alone the caps. However we do have to design new circuits, making new experiments and perhaps ways to prevent our own designs to be copied. And those processes may cause issues. But this is the way to go, a period/phase we have to go through.

 

[Plcamp]

I kinda agree with you. It's relatively easy just to make a good measuring product and just sell many units of them. I do really wish that the build quality and "quality control" can be measured in a such straightforward way. Someone said about stress testing, we have started doing that. But it will really take time to see the difference.

But I would say we didn't pushed measurements more than it should in the sense of sacrificing thermal performance or pushing beyond the part's limit etc. And we really do care about every component we use in our products. Even resistors are important and can make differences. Let alone the caps. However we do have to design new circuits, making new experiments and perhaps ways to prevent our own designs to be copied. And those processes may cause issues. But this is the way to go, a period/phase we have to go through.

John, do you perform static timing and signal integrity analysis during PCB development, to assure maximized timing margins within new designs? (I used to operate a company performing those services using advanced tools from Cadence and Mentor Graphics)

I was in a different ‘domain’ here with hundreds of thousands of nets on 32 layer blind and buried via technology…a 0.1” error on a critical track length could reset a project’s timetable by 8 months, so it was truly critical. But we knew timing margin and noise margin were close to one and the same thing, and I wonder how that might apply in your space?

 

[goat76]

I see no evidence to support that statement.

To make that statement you would need statistical data you do not possess. Anecdotes don’t suffice.

Perhaps Mr Yang has such data, but on a consumer product like this even he might not.

Edit: It is not my experience that manufacturers can substitute parts due to things like supply constraints. In my experience, manufacturers were entirely controlled to use only devices on an approved supplier list specified by the project’s lead engineering team, and any variance from that, no matter how tiny, would require formal design control change.

I never said I had any numbers. I just said it's obvious that Topping products have a higher failure rate than other popular brands. If you fail to see that you must be turning the blind eye to all the reported problems.

 

[Koeitje]

Kinda funny reading about guys squawking about very low budget electronics slapped together by low paid workers and expecting longevity and customer service of any type.

Want quality and service, buy an RME or an Okto or Benchmark or Aurilac or T+A...or buy the cheap flavor of the month and realize that you may be replacing it soon. If one can live with this cheap DAC's features, it can break 10+ times and be replaced for the same cost as the quality built stuff. If it doesn't fail, you will big economically.

For my part, having never had a sub $1,500 DAC in my system that drives the inputs of an amp with 4 meter long balanced interconnects. Not convinced that a quality variable output stage and supporting power supply can be inserted in a little box along with a digital receiver and quality DAC chips for $150? Sounds impossible. Was thinking of buying one of these bargain basement units like the Sabaj A20D, just to see if they work (make lifelike, dynamic music) in a real system like mine.

What is a "real system"? These DACs are just made by machines with hardly any human input during production. It's the same for something like the Benchmark or RME. What it comes down to for durability is the quality of the components and the design.

With regards to the technical design, it is clear these devices reproduce the source material at a higher accuracy than almost all $1500+ DACs. Unless you think the APx555 is not capable of measuring DACs properly.

I sort off agree on the warranty part, because that is an issue if you import it yourself. But for those of us in the EU it doesn't matter, since we can just buy it from a local retailer and get 2 years of warranty. If it breaks the retailer can sort it out.

All I'm reading in your post is some kind of bias towards Chinese manufacturers and designers. Like they are somehow less capable?