Anybody else using the S.M.S.L M200?

[Sonic Defender]

I'm pretty active over at ASR these last four months or so. The measurements done for the M200 were done by Wolf and not Amir, but really they seem like they were conducted well. Regardless, the M200 performed great right past the point of audibility so even the few measures that were less than class leading would have zero chance of being audible. Given what you get for the pretty reasonable price of the M200 I am still 100% satisfied and have no regrets at all. It is audibly transparent and it has very good Bluetooth and balanced out which are both important to me.

 

[StarTreker]

I whole heartedly agree sir, very well said. There is no need to dump another 500 dollars into the M400, unless you absolutely and positively require the added feature sets. Because at the end of the day, the M200 is a real champ, that would impress even audiophiles who normally only run amps that cost 5-grand!

 

[Dannemand]

I'm pretty active over at ASR these last four months or so. The measurements done for the M200 were done by Wolf and not Amir, but really they seem like they were conducted well. Regardless, the M200 performed great right past the point of audibility so even the few measures that were less than class leading would have zero chance of being audible. Given what you get for the pretty reasonable price of the M200 I am still 100% satisfied and have no regrets at all. It is audibly transparent and it has very good Bluetooth and balanced out which are both important to me.

I am sure Wolf did a good job, and his measurements in isolation were not a cause for great concern. What is puzzling is WHY they were so different from SMSL's own measurements. Explanations could be (A) that SMSL "polished" their own measurements one way or the other, (B) that SMSL measures using different settings from those of Wolf and Amir, or (C) that there is significant variation in production units, which might point to QA issues. I think (C) is the most likely, which is cause for some concern: Since I don't have an AP Analyzer, I don't know whether I am getting a good unit (like the one SMSL measured) or potentially one that's worse than Wolf's unit.

Wolf's M200 measurements were also worse across the board than his earlier measurements of SMSL M300 MkII (a lower priced DAC using the same AK4497 chip) with SINAD 3dB lower, and Linearity and Multitone somewhat cleaner on the M300 MkII. Of course one can hope that that's a sign that his M200 unit was a bit off. SMSL obviously do know how to make DACs that measure well -- and care about it's impact on sales.

I would love to see new measurements from Amir; not because I don't trust Wolf's measurements, but because it would be a different unit. He'd be the umpire, as someone posted in the M200 thread on ASR.

But as I first posted here, I am resigned to that situation, and trust that M200 units are generally transparent. And I think it is the DAC for me!

My questions here are about the output stage, again M200 as a digital preamp. While I absolutely pay attention to measurements, I also believe that you have to LISTEN (as Amir himself stated here, in the context of speakers). I do not believe that all DACs that measure well sound the same. And certainly not all preamps and amps. It is particularly the analog parts of DACs (output stage, power supply etc) that most separate them.

Thanks again for the great response here!

 

[Sonic Defender]

I am sure Wolf did a good job, and his measurements in isolation were not a cause for great concern. What is puzzling is WHY they were so different from SMSL's own measurements. Explanations could be (A) that SMSL "polished" their own measurements one way or the other, (B) that SMSL measures using different settings from those of Wolf and Amir, or (C) that there is significant variation in production units, which might point to QA issues. I think (C) is the most likely, which is cause for some concern: Since I don't have an AP Analyzer, I don't know whether I am getting a good unit (like the one SMSL measured) or potentially one that's worse than Wolf's unit.

Wolf's M200 measurements were also worse across the board than his earlier measurements of SMSL M300 MkII (a lower priced DAC using the same AK4497 chip) with SINAD 3dB lower, and Linearity and Multitone somewhat cleaner on the M300 MkII. Of course one can hope that that's a sign that his M200 unit was a bit off. SMSL obviously do know how to make DACs that measure well -- and care about it's impact on sales.

I would love to see new measurements from Amir; not because I don't trust Wolf's measurements, but because it would be a different unit. He'd be the umpire, as someone posted in the M200 thread on ASR.

But as I first posted here, I am resigned to that situation, and trust that M200 units are generally transparent. And I think it is the DAC for me!

My questions here are about the output stage, again M200 as a digital preamp. While I absolutely pay attention to measurements, I also believe that you have to LISTEN (as Amir himself stated here, in the context of speakers). I do not believe that all DACs that measure well sound the same. And certainly not all preamps and amps. It is particularly the analog parts of DACs (output stage, power supply etc) that most separate them.

Thanks again for the great response here!

If I'm to be honest, I rather doubt C is the reason for the measurement discrepancies' you are noting. Certainly it is a possibility, but I would think that B is far more likely. Despite what it may intuitively feel like, measuring even using calibrated hardware and software is very complex. There is a little bit of alchemy required and you can see it developing even in Amir reviews. Consider the polish and process of newer versus first attempts. I don't know this, but I still think Wolf is learning and I just feel that B is the more plausible explanation, but that is simply an opinion, nothing more. However it shakes out, the M200 is a fantastic piece of kit as the British would say and even 5 years ago this level of performance would have been relatively speaking thousands of dollars not a few hundred. And that would even preclude a wireless input capacity!

 

[Dannemand]

However it shakes out, the M200 is a fantastic piece of kit as the British would say and even 5 years ago this level of performance would have been relatively speaking thousands of dollars not a few hundred. And that would even preclude a wireless input capacity!

Absolutely no doubt about that! When you think about it, it is odd that it would take almost 4 decades after the CD for DACs to become a true commodity, and for the $5000 DAC bluff to get called. We owe these Chi-Fi vendors much gratitude in that regard.

If I'm to be honest, I rather doubt C is the reason for the measurement discrepancies' you are noting. Certainly it is a possibility, but I would think that B is far more likely. Despite what it may intuitively feel like, measuring even using calibrated hardware and software is very complex. There is a little bit of alchemy required and you can see it developing even in Amir reviews. Consider the polish and process of newer versus first attempts. I don't know this, but I still think Wolf is learning and I just feel that B is the more plausible explanation, but that is simply an opinion, nothing more.

I am sure there is something to learn when it comes to using the APx555 and performing these measurements. But again, Wolf performed the same measurements on the M300 MkII 5 months earlier, and that one came out clean, with none of the issues found in the M200 measurements. And the whole point with AP Analyzers is that the measurements are standardized and comparable between different units and different products. Those analyzers are quite impressive (and expensive).

If B (different settings) is the reason for the discrepancy, you'd think SMSL would be eager to clear up the confusion. Yet they've been completely silent about it in that ASR thread. I've asked @smsl mandy about it twice here on head-fi (here and here) and received no response either. If they had confidence in their own measurements, they should have sent another M200 to Amir the moment they saw Wolf's measurements.

QA and maintaining unit consistency is hard and expensive, so I do think C is more likely. And in some ways preferable, since one would expect unit consistency to be better after a few months of production. We sure must hope it isn't A (polished measurements)

Anyways, thanks again for your response. It is much appreciated. And it is indeed encouraging to hear from enthusiastic owners like yourself and @StarTreker.

Again, what I am looking for here before pulling the trigger myself is to (hopefully) hear observations from users who have fed M200 directly into a power amp with floor speakers. I get the impression that most are using it with SP200 or other headphone amps, but I am hoping it has the oomph for power amps as well.

 

[Sonic Defender]

@Dannemand I have to agree with you that we really do owe a debt of gratitude to new Chinese players in the marketplace. Even though domestic producers will be suffering they also still owe a debt of gratitude themselves. Much like when the Japanese auto companies really put the boots to North American companies on pretty much every metric worth considering as important. Suddenly those companies that once scoffed at competition and took domestic consumers for granted as a sure thing really had a rude awakening when they were fighting for survival as market-share was eroding. Now the quality gap has been closed or greatly reduced and innovation was spurred on. Competition is a great thing and the M200 is to my mind a great example of that.

 

[StarTreker]

Harmon Kardon, Bang Olluffson, Bose, are just some examples of companies that make products for the rich. They sell their product because they know, that most don't know what quality sound is. So they show you this 300 to 20,000 dollar price tag, and it makes rich people think their getting some real quality hardware. Truth is, most of that quality, is in the form of the units. Ohhhhh, they look all stylish, sexy, and beautiful. But all form and no function makes a dull product.

They got away with selling their crap for many years, until China went knock knock, and said, hold my beer. I agree 100%, what sparks innovation is competition, without that, companies have no motivation to innovate. Another thing that competition does, is help to bring prices down. But nothing really strikes fear into the hearts of corporations more, then the knowledge that your little trick isn't working anymore, and people are actually buying the competitions product.

I am sure those companies would think that someone poisoned the water hole. I however, believe that someone finally cleansed the waters from the stench of unrelenting greed. Say what you want about the Chinese, but you can't deny that they have made our audiophile hobby, a little sweeter. And I tell you what, listening to my S.M.S.L SP200 and S.M.S.L M200, sounds as sweet as honey from the bee. I hope that these Chinese made units continue to do what they do, innovate, improve, bring costs down.

 

[Sonic Defender]

Harmon Kardon, Bang Olluffson, Bose, are just some examples of companies that make products for the rich. They sell their product because they know, that most don't know what quality sound is. So they show you this 300 to 20,000 dollar price tag, and it makes rich people think their getting some real quality hardware. Truth is, most of that quality, is in the form of the units. Ohhhhh, they look all stylish, sexy, and beautiful. But all form and no function makes a dull product.

They got away with selling their crap for many years, until China went knock knock, and said, hold my beer. I agree 100%, what sparks innovation is competition, without that, companies have no motivation to innovate. Another thing that competition does, is help to bring prices down. But nothing really strikes fear into the hearts of corporations more, then the knowledge that your little trick isn't working anymore, and people are actually buying the competitions product.

I am sure those companies would think that someone poisoned the water hole. I however, believe that someone finally cleansed the waters from the stench of unrelenting greed. Say what you want about the Chinese, but you can't deny that they have made our audiophile hobby, a little sweeter. And I tell you what, listening to my S.M.S.L SP200 and S.M.S.L M200, sounds as sweet as honey from the bee. I hope that these Chinese made units continue to do what they do, innovate, improve, bring costs down.

Absolutely.

 

[Dannemand]

Of course we also owe a debt of gratitude to some of those big old companies for the research and innovation they have done over the years: While they've all been busy charging too much for their products -- and some have indeed never done much beyond packaging existing technology in beautiful enclosures and convincing buyers to overpay for them -- some others have been driven by genuine innovation and engineering.

@StarTreker mentioned Bang & Olufsen, who is known for their design and usability, some of which has truly been astonishing, and been applied to audio systems, TVs, headphones, IEMs, telephones and more. They were very much a small Apple, long before Apple became Apple. Their products became high-end decoration in many homes, including among the world's wealthiest. And yes, they charged big bucks for that.

But they have also done groundbreaking research and innovation in audio technology over the years, such as turntables and pickups in the 1970s (check Beogram 4000) and class D amps and speakers in the 1990s (check ICEpower, which is in a lot of places people don't know).

And similar can be said for several other western and Japanese manufacturers. Much of the technology we rely on today came out of their research efforts.

So while (again) I am grateful to the Chi-Fi vendors who bring much needed competition to this industry, I am also grateful to those... well, dinosaurs in some cases, who laid the groundwork that today allow Chi-Fi vendors to put together low cost products with excellent performance.

I think we may some day see similar levels of innovation from Chi-Fi vendors: While Japanese auto companies mostly copied American and European companies in their early days, they later came to be the innovators in many categories: Toyota revolutionized auto manufacturing (creating price and reliability competition), Honda revolutionized Variable Valve Timing with VTEC (upping performance and fuel efficiency), and Mazda proved with SkyActiv-X that they are the current leaders when it comes to internal combustion engine development. Meanwhile, US auto manufacturers were busy coming up with heating/cooling cup holders and ways of monetizing their entertainment systems

Of course Tesla changes that picture!

I think something similar could happen in Chi-Fi, and some of these companies could become the technology innovators. Particularly in DACs, Class D amplification and IEMs/headphones (already happening). Speakers will probably take longer. Consumers are there winners, regardless of whether they buy from Chi-Fi vendors or from western/Japanese vendors who are now forced to compete

 

[gimmeheadroom]

Harmon Kardon, Bang Olluffson, Bose, are just some examples of companies that make products for the rich. They sell their product because they know, that most don't know what quality sound is. So they show you this 300 to 20,000 dollar price tag, and it makes rich people think their getting some real quality hardware. Truth is, most of that quality, is in the form of the units. Ohhhhh, they look all stylish, sexy, and beautiful. But all form and no function makes a dull product.

They got away with selling their crap for many years, until China went knock knock, and said, hold my beer. I agree 100%, what sparks innovation is competition, without that, companies have no motivation to innovate. Another thing that competition does, is help to bring prices down. But nothing really strikes fear into the hearts of corporations more, then the knowledge that your little trick isn't working anymore, and people are actually buying the competitions product.

I am sure those companies would think that someone poisoned the water hole. I however, believe that someone finally cleansed the waters from the stench of unrelenting greed. Say what you want about the Chinese, but you can't deny that they have made our audiophile hobby, a little sweeter. And I tell you what, listening to my S.M.S.L SP200 and S.M.S.L M200, sounds as sweet as honey from the bee. I hope that these Chinese made units continue to do what they do, innovate, improve, bring costs down.

Harmon Kardon used to be a real audiophile company. The other two not really.

 

[Dannemand]

Harmon Kardon used to be a real audiophile company. The other two not really.

I agree, Harman Kardon also did a lot of research R&D over the years from which we benefit today. Bose not so much. B&O you need to read up on

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I agree, Harman Kardon also did a lot of research R&D over the years from which we benefit today. Bose not so much. B&O you need to read up on

I was around in the 1970s and I was familiar with B&O's offerings in the 1970s and 1980s. I remain hugely umimpressed

 

[StarTreker]

Agreed! And I am also very unimpressed with Bose as well. You pay what 300 dollars for a pair headphones, that sound like any 20 to 50 dollar pair of Chi-fy headphones that anyone could afford to buy. And Beats has the same exact issue, overpriced headphones that sound like crap. I can take my V-Moda LP2's and put them up against a Bose or a Beats any day, any time, anywhere. My V-Moda's will win the competition every single time.

And keep in mind, V-Moda's are the low end of the audiophile spectrum when it comes to hardware, you can get a pair for like 100 or so, and they will always and easily beat both of those companies. Or if you want to kick it up a notch, pin some Sennheizers up against them like the HD600's which are known to be a headphone that many people like, Bose and Beats don't even have a chance, the HD600's will win by a landslide!

At the end of the day, if somebody really wants to get into this audiophile hobby for real, do your research, find out what audiophiles like to listen to, and use those opinions as the base for your research. Then begin looking at what you would enjoy for your listening purposes, weigh in the pro's and the con's, and choose from there. There is a radio show forget which one its called, but the host bought a pair of Beats and regretted it. LOL

 

[Dannemand]

I was around in the 1970s and I was familiar with B&O's offerings in the 1970s and 1980s. I remain hugely umimpressed

LOL I understand

I grew up and lived most of my life close to their factory and headquarters, so I had the benefit of direct observation and plenty of comparison of their products to others. Just like American audiophiles are aware of the accomplishments of Harman Kardon, and aware of the limitations and litigation practices of Bose, Danes are aware of the accomplishments -- and limitations -- of B&O. Danish audiophiles are probably the most critical of their SQ shortcomings; but they also know where they deserve respect.

Audiophiles were obviously never their audience. Their turntables from that era were indeed competitive in terms of SQ, thanks to their tangential tracking and certain aspects of their pickup design. Some of their speakers were decent too. OTOH their amps were never quite up to snuff SQ wise, always compromised by their design choices. Again, they were Apple long before Apple became Apple.

And that focus on design in itself made them even more unpalatable to audiophiles: No self-conscious audiophile or reviewer could endorse products with this much focus on appearance and user interface. It would be suicide. Besides, their stubbornly flat response curves were always more appreciated in the living rooms of middle class homes than in the man caves of the basement.

Very different when it comes to their accomplishments in class D a generation later: ICE and ICEpower truly were groundbreaking. Anybody I know who understands it, respects it. But it is a technology, not a consumer product, so not as broadly known.

We're getting way off topic here. And I began it by saying we owe Chi-Fi vendors gratitude

 

[StarTreker]

And I shared my gratitude far and wide when I purchased my S.M.S.L combo.