And this SU-9 unit has the advantage of using the (latest?) ESS SABRE9038Pro chip, if I’m taking @wklie ‘s kind advice.
Peter, thank you for sharing what you can. I appreciate you taking the time to lay out your expertise, and I can imagine why you’re conflicted to say more. The concept of non-MQA content going through MQA processing sounds (no pun intended) to be undesirable.
Here are a few other considerations. If you want a Roon endpoint and MQA decoder/renderer then your choices narrow based upon your price range and I think you have already identified the most popular (ifi Audio, SMSL) If you spend a bit more then you can add Ethernet which I would recommend which gives you more flexibility on positioning your DAC away from your Roon Core.
In terms of audio quality I can’t add too much because I have not personally listened to these DACs. However, based upon CD/SACD players I have owned (Classe, Oppo) I generally prefer Burr Brown vs. ES implementations. One isn’t better than the other, it usually just comes down to subjective taste (warmer sound vs. accuracy).
When I upgraded my system I went a completely different route and went with the FPGA philosophy based upon a friends experience with the PS Audio DirectStream Junior. I ended up getting the higher model PS Audio DirectStream which provided the best balance of warmth and detail that I have heard. It’s not cheap by any means but you can get them way under list and they have a no hassle trial policy.
Whatever you decide try and audition the unit in your system if you can.
Good luck.
Tried that one and returned it. Not because I did not like it (which I did, a lot), but mostly because of QC issues (in 2 units). Bought a Matrix Element X instead. It uses the ES9038PRO DAC chip. After using it as both a USB DAC and as a network-attached DAC, I probably wouldn’t want any replacement/upgrade without an ethernet input.
I’ve had an integrated amp with the ES9028 (as in the Mytek). The 9038 does seem to be a step-up in SQ but not by enough that I’d necessarily decide on that basis alone.
For a lower-priced MQA DAC, IMO the Bluesound Node 2i is hard to beat, as long as you use it in wired (ethernet) not WiFi mode. No balanced out. Versatile enough that it can be put to good use in a 2nd system if you ever upgrade.
You may want to consider a Project Pre Box S2.
It’s around $500, does MQA and DSD, USB, optical, coax, and remote.
I tried the ifi I dsd pro, while the sound was as good as my ps audio dsd sr(different but very good) I could not get it to correctly process MQA. After a week of unhelpful chatting with ifi’s tech team it went back. More recently I have acquired the audio quest cobalt dac/headphone amp. $300 , you won’t need help carrying it into your home and even if not perfect it fits in your pocket for when ever we travel again.
I have an Altair G1 and love it. While it doesn’t have the official licensed version of MQA it does have Auralics version of MQA which to my ears sounds as good as, if not better, than units with the official version.
I have a Project Pre Box S2 Dac, Does MQA, lots of inputs, can be used as a preamplifier, does DSD, remote… it’s pretty great.
Look for a used Mytek Liberty. I had one for a while in my office. It’s quite good.
I suggest you surf audiogon, usaudiomart, or canuckaudiomart for something used.
Good luck!
I use both a SMSL M500 and a Topping D90 MQA in different Roon zones, and really like both. I’d describe their sound as no-sound, just absolutely neutral - which is what I prefer personally.
I have the SMSL SU-9, and I am very pleased with it. Sounds great, lots of filters and other options, reasonably priced, and balanced outputs. No ethernet input though. I bought it specifically for MQA decoding, which I do like and hear some benefit. I run Tidal via Roon through my PC with a Matrix Element H, audioquest usb cable to the SMSL, balanced outputs to Cambridge Audio CXA81, so very much a mid-fi approach. Very happy with the whole set up.
The vast majority of MQA DACs force the use of MQA filters - even on non MQA tracks (they do this b/c it’s the cheapest,easiest way to incorporate MQA). This gives you optimal playback for MQA, but not for everything else. Obviously makes comparisons hard.
So if it was me, I’d look for a DAC that plays MQA, but uses the non-MQA filters on non-MQA tracks, and only uses the MQA filters on MQA tracks.
Is that actually true. Not the practice of using MQA filters, but the ‘vast majority’ statement. All of the present generation of DAC chips have been designed to be MQA capable and I think with my AK4497 the filter choices change as the program material changes.
AFAIK it’s true, I’d be happy to be proven wrong. You can only know for sure by asking the manufacturer about how it’s implemented on your DAC.
I think AK are doing it properly. Hence the arrival of the MQA capable AK4497 so soon after the AK4493. The main difference between the two are the available filters.
Available doesn’t mean it automatically switches. You’d have to know about the specific implementation.
So this is pretty important to me… If you read up to @wklie 's comments about a week ago, Peter is saying that there are certain chips that send non-MQA PCM content through MQA processing. So we’re looking for chips that have an MQA on/off switch, and manufacturers who have implemented those switches in a way that is automatic, or at least user configurable. @danny2 and others, do you know which manufacturers have implemented this ‘correctly’? I’m reading the posts above to mean that the most recent ESS chips have the capability to be well-implemented, but not necessarily so, while the AKM chips do not have this ability. But perhaps I’m misreading the somewhat (intentionally) elliptical statements. Anyone know?
That’s done in the network processor in your NT-505, and is therefore unrelated to AK4497. If you got the UD-505 version (the same product without the network board) you don’t get MQA full decoding.
AK4497 does not natively provide MQA. Your NT-505 has MQA Ltd. profiled it and had a MQA rendering done for it and integrated into the network processor. Another manufacturer could have submitted an AK4493 DAC to do the same.
The Esoteric N-05 with AK4490 also has MQA decoding, and is based on a similar architecture with your NT-505.
This ability is usually not in the DAC chip. It can be the network processor or the USB processor like XMOS.
Thank you Peter. As usual you are a mine of (accurate) information and I for one am grateful that you take the time to come here and share your knowledge with us.
So I don’t want to lean on you too hard Peter, but I’m struggling with exactly what question I should pose to manufacturers. Is there a technical implementation question, or am I asking simply: “Do I have the ability in your DAC to turn off MQA processing entirely, so that non-MQA content does not pass through MQA processing? Is that a user choice / configuration or is it automated that non-MQA content does not pass through MQA processeing?” Want to make sure I get the right answer to the right question.
Thank you, thank you.