Eversolo DMP-A6.

[Jasonovich]

New !!! Gen 2 eversolo DMP-A6 Streamer (Shipping Jan) Order Today

DMP-A6 GEN2 Color: Black 6" LCD touchscreen 4GDDR4 +32GeMMC ES 9038Q2M*2 XMOS XU316 Music streaming services OPA1462 op-amps Linear Power Supply HDMI ARC DC trigger MSRP: $859 Description: Functional Overview: Solid aluminum alloy chassis, brushed panel. Quad-core ARM Cortex-A55...

summithifiusa.com

This is getting a bit silly now. Sadly, Eversolo are now doing what many other companies are doing and adding more devices to confuse people even more. The DMP-A6 is still available in its original version, but now has a gen 2 version to be available very soon. Then there's the DMP-A6 Master Edition to consider. Will they sell any gen 2 DMP-A6 units, when many potential buyers will be hoping to see a DMP-A6 Master Edition gen 2 to arrive soon? There's still the DMP-A8 on sale and will there be a gen 2 release of this model? The flagship DMP-A10 has just been released, along with the matching AMP-F10 and the model ranges are getting a bit complicated now, much like Cyrus and Audiolab model ranges. Too much choice I think. I would like models to be replaced when sales begin to fall. If you're selling loads, you don't need to keep updating the devices. There will be many out there waiting to see what else gets updated. I think this is a bad decision having 5 streamers to choose from and I think sales will stall as people wait for a possible gen 2 of the other models.

Gen 2, might mean the prices for the original dmp-a6 coming down but I guess it might be wishful thinking on my part

 

[podknocker]

The release of a DMP-A6 Gen2 and DMP-A6 Master Edition Gen2 casts doubts over the point of the DMP-A8 and even the top tier model. Eversolo could get by with just a single DMP-A6 model, with a matching amp and then the DMP-A10 / AMP-F10 combo for ultimate performance, features and status. I bet the specs aren't much different between all their streamers and the resulting sound quality won't be noticably different to many buyers. It all seems a bit chaotic like many HIFI ranges these days.

 

[Jasonovich]

The release of a DMP-A6 Gen2 and DMP-A6 Master Edition Gen2 casts doubts over the point of the DMP-A8 and even the top tier model. Eversolo could get by with just a single DMP-A6 model, with a matching amp and then the DMP-A10 / AMP-F10 combo for ultimate performance, features and status. I bet the specs aren't much different between all their streamers and the resulting sound quality won't be noticably different to many buyers. It all seems a but chaotic like many HIFI ranges these days.

Ah capitalism!
I suspect, they'll be a gen 2 DMP-A8.
R2R ladder DACs are gaining some traction these days, it'll be nice, if brands like Eversolo can offer this option as well as the Delta Sigma chipsets.
It'll be nice to give people the options to choose between the different DAC technologies i.e. chipsets ESS, AKM, or Ladder R2R etc. rather than incrementally updating their product line.
Topping in collaboration with Holo has brought out a Ladder DAC, why don't they make Streamers!
Topping and also SMSL, so much overlap with their product line, it almost seems they have a new DAC or amp every six months.
When you compare to these two, Eversolo isn't so bad.

 

[manicm]

Ah capitalism!
I suspect, they'll be a gen 2 DMP-A8.
R2R ladder DACs are gaining some traction these days, it'll be nice, if brands like Eversolo can offer this option as well as the Delta Sigma chipsets.
It'll be nice to give people the options to choose between the different DAC technologies i.e. chipsets ESS, AKM, or Ladder R2R etc. rather than incrementally updating their product line.
Topping in collaboration with Holo has brought out a Ladder DAC, why don't they make Streamers!
Topping and also SMSL, so much overlap with their product line, it almost seems they have a new DAC or amp every six months.
When you compare to these two, Eversolo isn't so bad.

It seems everyone is going for ESS chips, including the new Cyrus amps and streamers. I wonder why.

 

[Jasonovich]

It seems everyone is going for ESS chips, including the new Cyrus amps and streamers. I wonder why.

The AKMs sound smoother I think but ESS Sabre chipsets resolve more detail?
Or maybe from a manufacturing perspective, they're easier to design and produce?

 

[davidf]

The AKMs sound smoother I think but ESS Sabre chipsets resolve more detail?

I used to think that, but I think it's all down to implementation as I've heard some ESS based products sound quite smooth and unlike typical ESS.

 

[podknocker]

I used to think that, but I think it's all down to implementation as I've heard some ESS based products sound quite smooth and unlike typical ESS.

I agree. I don't think you can hear a DAC. It's just one component in the signal path. All things being equal, I doubt anyone could tell the difference between ESS and AKM silicon.

 

[matt49]

I agree. I don't think you can hear a DAC. It's just one component in the signal path. All things being equal, I doubt anyone could tell the difference between ESS and AKM silicon.

I doubt it too. There's been a lot of talk over the years about ESS DACs suffering from a bit of IM distortion -- the so-called "ESS hump" -- but the general view seems to be that it's below the analog sound floor and so it's inaudible.

 

[davidf]

I'm not necessarily saying there's no difference between DACs, just that not all products using ESS DACs sound bright. But, generally speaking, more ESS products do tend to be a little on the brighter side (or however you perceive it - bright/thin/harsh/uninvolving etc).

 

[podknocker]

I'm not necessarily saying there's no difference between DACs, just that not all products using ESS DACs sound bright. But, generally speaking, more ESS products do tend to be a little on the brighter side (or however you perceive it - bright/thin/harsh/uninvolving etc).

The peripheral circuits around the DAC and all the PSU components will play a part in the sound. What I'm suggesting, without hearing several DACs to compare, but knowing how they work, is that if you swapped the DACs and kept everything the same, the sound produced would be the same. I'm not convinced a DAC has a certain sound and that it simply passes on data from the digital domain to the analog circuits and it's the supporting electronics actually creating the sound.

 

[Witterings]

I agree. I don't think you can hear a DAC. It's just one component in the signal path.

I thought that 4 weeks ago .... I now know how completely wrong I was .

You can continue believing that or you can try some for yourself and you may make one of the best changes to your system you've ever made.

 

[podknocker]

I thought that 4 weeks ago .... I now know how completely wrong I was .

You can continue believing that or you can try some for yourself and you may make one of the best changes to your system you've ever made.

Your comment still doesn't prove DACs sound different. I'm guessing you've just bought a device and it contains a DAC, but how do you know it sounds different to the same device containing a different DAC? As I said above, a DAC handles digital data and then passes this data to another circuit to build a signal an amplifier can understand. I'm not convinced any DAC has a particular sound. It just feeds data to other things that can influence sound. The most expensive DACs from ESS and AKM cost around £50 in bulk and they are nearly identical in their specs and how they handle data. As I mentioned in another thread, CD through a modern DAC probably won't sound different to CD through a DAC released in the early 80s, such as the Philips TDA1541 for example. These DACs are still available and are still revered. My Audiolab Omnia uses an ESS9038 Q2M SABRE and this can handle every sound format currently available. I very much doubt a new sound format is on the way that my Omnia couldn't support. Where are the 32 bit, 768kHz sound formats? Never going to happen. All modern DACs are overkill for any signal they are fed and I still insist they have no fundamental sound signature and are just an interface between signal and other circuits. The DAC in my Omnia costs £15

https://www.mouser.co.uk/ProductDetail/ESS-Technology/ES9038Q2M?qs=sPbYRqrBIVmdeUedURuuOw%3D%3D

AKM has released a 64bit DAC and costs just £9 apiece.. I would love to know how this benefits current sound formats.

https://www.mouser.co.uk/ProductDetail/Asahi-Kasei-Microdevices/AK4191EQ?qs=Jm2GQyTW%2Fbg3VxWa8PxIaQ%3D%3D

 

[davidf]

So why do some manufacturers seek out 1541s to use instead of just buying anything that's available, and likely for a cheaper price?

 

[podknocker]

So why do some manufacturers seek out 1541s to use instead of just buying anything that's available, and likely for a cheaper price?

The TDA1541 DAC was and still is a great design and because of this there is now more demand. The price of a TDA1541 is around £60 which I think is more than any new DAC you can buy. I don't know if they have been made new on an existing line capable of producing them, or they just found a few thousand in a box somewhere. I can't see global demand being very high and it's probably just nerds wanting to extract as much as they can out of an old chip. I've read a few articles where people refurb the Philips CD473 from 1988 (the one I bought) and with a few tweaks to the transport and a recapped board, they seem to get amazing results. If you think about it, a 16 bit signal from a CDcan't gain more resolution or quality passing through a new 24 bit DAC. If you don't care about higher than CD quality, then a new DAC is overkill really.

 

[Witterings]

What I'm suggesting, without hearing several DACs to compare, but knowing how they work, is that if you swapped the DACs and kept everything the same, the sound produced would be the same.

So lets just clarify this point, you've never compared DACs but with your infinite wisdom you can clearly state there'd be no difference in sound .... despite many, many reports of people, that have actually tried different DACs there is .... and with no experience at all, you know better than them?
Please appreciate the question mark, it's not conflictionary but trying to understand what you inexperienced comments are based on vs those that do have experience?

Your comment still doesn't prove DACs sound different. I'm guessing you've just bought a device and it contains a DAC, but how do you know it sounds different to the same device containing a different DAC?

All of my following comments are using the same Amp and speakers.

I've been through 3 weeks of testing various DACs .... I was using a WiiM Pro with coax out into my Arcam SA 30 using it's onboard DAC ... I have also compared that to using a Topping E30 DAC with analogue out to the Arcam.
I then bought a Chord Qutest and initially tested optical / coax out to the Chord and instantly heard a huge difference.
I also tried a WiiM Pro Plus that maybe has the same "guts" as the Pro but a better DAC and heard a difference again.
I then got a Bluesound Nano to compare it to, the Nano, using it's DAC was better than the WiiM sing the Arcam's DAC, the Nano using it's own DAC into the Arcam via analogue was a step up again.
The Nano using optical or coax into the Chord, again was better than the WiiM but another big step up was then using USB ut from the Nano into the Chord.

Every one of thesee scenarios sounds different, some more than others, but with all due respect your comments of "they won't sound different" without ever having tried it is complete naivety.
If you do and can't hear any differemce I'd get yourself booked in for a hearing check because you have a serious issue.

 

[podknocker]

I don't have any hearing issues and you still haven't proved that DACs, not the devices containing them, sound different. There are a handful of DACs in use these days, but as you can't unplug one and try another in your device, you can't say if they sound different. I don't think thay can sound different, due to the nature of what a DAC is. There are many other components inside these devices and I think they are more likely to have an impact on sound quality. Clean power supplies and high quality capacitors able to charge and discharge quickly etc. If I could remove the DAC in my Audiolab Omnia and replace it with another one costing £15 or so, then I could compare, but these things are not designed to be swapped out. There are dozens of electronic components inside my Omnia which contribute to the overall sound quality, but. I don't think the £15 ESS DAC is such an important one. I just don't think different slices of DAC silicon can have different sonic signatures, in a similar way to running Windows on an Intel or AMD chip. Unless you're told what CPU you have, you can't tell sat running your O/S of choice.

 

[Witterings]

I don't have any hearing issues and you still haven't proved that DACs, not the devices containing them, sound different. There are a handful of DACs in use these days, but as you can't unplug one and try another in your device, you can't say if they sound different. I don't think thay can sound different, due to the nature of what a DAC is.

Have you actually tried them or not ... if you haven't you're not qualified to comment!

With reference to your switching from one to another have a look at KVM switches, I also have 3 Wiim Pros, one is plugged straight into my Arcam using it's DAC, the other's I've plugged into the Chord then into the Arcam via analogue and the 3rd into the E30 into the Arcam again via analogue.
As they're multiroom setup all I have to do is switch from one input on the amp to the other to get an immediate direct comparison.
Honestly ... you're making yourself look stupid, you don't actually know what you're talking about and commenting so strongly on something you have ZERO experience of kind of says it all.

 

[DougK1]

I'm a bit with Pod on this one. I've currently got about five units here containing different DACs and identical DACs, and they all sound very subtly different. Personally I believe it's the associated circuitry in the unit which makes the difference, not the DAC chip itself. As with everything it's the implementation we notice the most, the rest of it is just usual hifi shenanigans.

 

[Jasonovich]

It seems everyone is going for ESS chips, including the new Cyrus amps and streamers. I wonder why.

Yes that definitely appears to be the case (er, I think I just blurted out an oxymoron!)
Anyway, to buck the trend, Topping in collaboration with Holo, have produced their first Ladder DAC.
Topping having the reputation for giant killing, it'll be interesting to see how it compares to the competition, such as Denafrips Ares ll, T+A DAC 200, Holo etc.

TOPPING Centaurus Dac by TOPPING and HOLO AUDIO - Hifi Studio 79

TOPPING Centaurus Dac by TOPPING and HOLO AUDIO 8-channel R2R resistor USB, optical, coaxial, AES, IIS, and Bluetooth 5.1,

www.hifistudio79.nl

 

[Jasonovich]

I just don't think different slices of DAC silicon can have different sonic signatures, in a similar way to running Windows on an Intel or AMD chip. Unless you're told what CPU you have, you can't tell sat running your O/S of choice.

CPU's from AMD and Intel all run Windows seamlessly, however, there is a clear demarcation in terms of performance and productivity.
Granted, if you're just opening up emails and internet browsing, any CPU or APU will do.

For instance, if I want a gaming CPU, I'll choose the Ryzen 9800X3D or 7800X3D with the embedded V-Cache, or if I need productivity or content creation or video editing, I'll go for Intel Ultra 285 or AMD Ryzen 9850X.
Avoid Intel Raptor (Rapture) Lake 14th and 13th gen 14900/13900 these come with additional features like BSOD!

 

[Jasonovich]

I'm a bit with Pod on this one. I've currently got about five units here containing different DACs and identical DACs, and they all sound very subtly different. Personally I believe it's the associated circuitry in the unit which makes the difference, not the DAC chip itself. As with everything it's the implementation we notice the most, the rest of it is just usual hifi shenanigans.

You can have a great DAC but if the peripherals supporting it are not up to scratch, that could impact on the sound.
I think, not unless I'm not reading it correctly, I think @Witterings was alluding to DAC = Unit, rather than the DAC chipset per se.
Yes Einstein, I know I'm stating the obvious, there are a lot of factors, such as power supply, quality components, including the best implementation of the chipset. All these make a difference to the sound.

 

[nopiano]

Yes that definitely appears to be the case (er, I think I just blurted out an oxymoron!)
Anyway, to buck the trend, Topping in collaboration with Holo, have produced their first Ladder DAC.
Topping having the reputation for giant killing, it'll be interesting to see how it compares to the competition, such as Denafrips Ares ll, T+A DAC 200, Holo etc.

TOPPING Centaurus Dac by TOPPING and HOLO AUDIO - Hifi Studio 79

TOPPING Centaurus Dac by TOPPING and HOLO AUDIO 8-channel R2R resistor USB, optical, coaxial, AES, IIS, and Bluetooth 5.1,

www.hifistudio79.nl

View attachment 8179

It copes surprisingly well, according to a test in ASR. Obviously Holo have nailed the concept. Whether one believes this crude way of decoding digital makes any sense and sounds any better is another matter!

To me it’s a massively over-engineered way of achieving what chips costing a few dollars solved decades ago, but then the same contrast exists with transistors and valves!

 

[podknocker]

CPU's from AMD and Intel all run Windows seamlessly, however, there is a clear demarcation in terms of performance and productivity.
Granted, if you're just opening up emails and internet browsing, any CPU or APU will do.

For instance, if I want a gaming CPU, I'll choose the Ryzen 9800X3D or 7800X3D with the embedded V-Cache, or if I need productivity or content creation or video editing, I'll go for Intel Ultra 285 or AMD Ryzen 9850X.
Avoid Intel Raptor (Rapture) Lake 14th and 13th gen 14900/13900 these come with additional features like BSOD!

You're missing ther point entirely Jason. I'm not talking about performance. If you have an Intel chip and an AMD chip of equal power, you cound not know which chip you were running your programs on. This is the idea I'm trying to get across with the DACs. Many people on here think a DAC is a device in a box. You take it out of the box, you plug it into the mains and then plug it into the rest of your system. This is not a DAC. A DAC (and I cannot believe I'm saying this) is a Digital to Analag Converter. It's a small silicon chip with contact pins around it and it spits out bits of information to other circcuits. These circuits take the waveform and process this, via many components, until it can be passed to amplifer stages. My argument is that this slice of silicon, costing about ten quid, has no intrinsic sound quality, but only supplies data for another component to eventually turn into sound. I think there are many on here blinkered by bling and see their Topping device as just the chip inside. There's more to it than that. If this fancy Topping Centaurus (good grief) had the AKM DAC inside it, I very much doubt anyone would be jumping up and down complaining, or rejoicing in the fact that Topping were not using the ESS chip as advertised. If Topping made this product with both ESS and AKM chips on the production line, with EVERYTHING else the same, I doubt anyone would notice any difference.

 

[Jasonovich]

You're missing ther point entirely Jason. I'm not talking about performance. If you have an Intel chip and an AMD chip of equal power, you cound not know which chip you were running your programs on. This is the idea I'm trying to get across with the DACs. Many people on here think a DAC is a device in a box. You take it out of the box, you plug it into the mains and then plug it into the rest of your system. This is not a DAC. A DAC (and I cannot believe I'm saying this) is a Digital to Analag Converter. It's a small silicon chip with contact pins around it and it spits out bits of information to other circcuits. These circuits take the waveform and process this, via many components, until it can be passed to amplifer stages. My argument is that this slice of silicon, costing about ten quid, has no intrinsic sound quality, but only supplies data for another component to eventually turn into sound. I think there are many on here blinkered by bling and see their Topping device as just the chip inside. There's more to it than that. If this fancy Topping Centaurus (good grief) had the AKM DAC inside it, I very much doubt anyone would be jumping up and down complaining, or rejoicing in the fact that Topping were not using the ESS chip as advertised. If Topping made this product with both ESS and AKM chips on the production line, with EVERYTHING else the same, I doubt anyone would notice any difference.

Thanks for the clarification Pod, No; I did understand point you made, agree, you would not know from Windows if you were running AMD or Intel, I just drifted a bit from your point.
Mention anything PC and I'm like a bee diving into the pollen!

Sound quality in relation to DACs can be a contentious one, especially where there is a polarity of opinions. I keep an open mind on all aspects of HiFi, even cables!

I can say from my own experience, when I replaced the Topping E30 with it's bigger brother E50, I got a much fuller sound and when I subsequently replaced the Topping with the Eversolo DAC Z8, I got a much better sound still. This DAC has a better ESS chipset (8 times over sampling) processor than it's sibling DMP-A6.
The improvement in the sound was reflected in the cost, so I can assume, the peripherals supporting the chipset were of better quality, hence the better sound.

I welcome diversity of opinions, I can agree or disagree but collectively I think we can all learn something just by the exchange of ideas.

 

[DougK1]

I understood where you were coming from Jason, as I'm sure many others did too, it was a valid comparison. Some of us are very entrenched but it's always good to have an open mind, mix this with some wit and we all get along just fine