I run three DACs in my system.
The Sabre ES9018 is found in SMSL superb little M100 and is dedicated to my subwoofer. The Sabre ES9038 is in Toppings D10S. It's supposed to be the improved version of ES9018 but I don't like the sound from ES9038 and I've heard distortion which makes it untrustworthy. I use this DAC just to convert USB to Toslink bypassing the actual DAC function.
The Wolfson WM8742 is in Cambridge Audio's DacMagic 100 and this runs my full range speakers.
Out of these three Sabre ES9018 has the best sound, which is strange because it's my least expensive component 😱
Agreements or disagreements? How do Burr Brown chips sound?
The Sabre ES9018 is found in SMSL superb little M100 and is dedicated to my subwoofer. The Sabre ES9038 is in Toppings D10S. It's supposed to be the improved version of ES9018 but I don't like the sound from ES9038 and I've heard distortion which makes it untrustworthy. I use this DAC just to convert USB to Toslink bypassing the actual DAC function.
The Wolfson WM8742 is in Cambridge Audio's DacMagic 100 and this runs my full range speakers.
Out of these three Sabre ES9018 has the best sound, which is strange because it's my least expensive component 😱
Agreements or disagreements? How do Burr Brown chips sound?
Yes, it will be, in terms of objective specifications. That's the nature of technological progress. Subjective sound, is a different kettle of fish, which involves many implementation factors residing outside of the DAC chip itself.
Yes, it's mark 2. I almost sold it because it only has mini USB input but using the optical input makes it sound much better.
Make sure it's the DAC ICs that are responsible for your preferences. In a DAC system, the analog output stage is every bit (pun?) as important as the DAC IC.
And so is the digital input stage 🙂
And the power supply. And the clock. And the pcb layout. And just about everything else too.
Very hard to draw any sensible conclusions about dac chips when comparing complete systems.
Easily by a good R-2R DAC (AD1862, AD1865, PCM1702, PCM1704 without digital filter or with a very good one - like PMD100 or 200) 🙂
If you can hear distortion of D10S/9038, either your unit is faulty, or the problem lies somewhere else in your chain, maybe the output is hotter and its clipping the input of your power amp?. BTW, there really isnt anything much to say that 9038Q2M, which is what is in your D10, is superior to 9018pro. a couple marginal improvements in operation, but has more issues with the ESS IMD hump (which I believe the D10S hasn't solved yet, from memory, but I could be wrong there), but it also loses out in most specifications. THD+N is roughly the same, both state -120dB for the chip alone if implemented correctly, but both parts are capable of exceeding that number n the right design. DNR is 'quite a bit' better in the older ES9018S at 133dB DNR (and it will actually reach 135), vs 128dB . I remind you, you have the ES9038Q2M, which is a mobile phone part (a very capable one), but the D10 is at the very bottom of Topping's lineup and the q2m is currently at the bottom of ESS dac range (among 'new' offerings). Topping are a reasonably well executed, but still made to a price-point brand, but there are better DACs and better ES9038q2m designs.
I gather you thought you had ES9038PRO?
I gather you thought you had ES9038PRO?
Last edited:
I agree with what others have said about implementation/layout being more meaningful at this level, but I think the above is worth mentioning 🙂 the ES9018S part, still today, costs more than twice as much as the ES9038q2m
Informative post, thanks! I didn't actually research any further than the model number. I listened to the Topping D10S for several months, and noticed distortion in a very few parts of selected music, repeatable too, that just isn't there with my SMSL and Cambridge Audio DACs. Admittedly is not noticeable 99.9% of the time, but the biggest problem with Topping's DAC is no optical input. Weirdly this digital to analogue converter has a digital output
