Article: Matrix X-SABRE Pro (MQA) DAC Review

[Foggie]

23 minutes ago, MPA1 said:

 

same can be said for this forum.. lets just be happy there are different flavours.

 

Thus my statement "Every Forum"  Don't read too much into it

[MPA1]

2 hours ago, Foggie said:

Thus my statement "Every Forum"  Don't read too much into it

 

I meant this forum, don't get exited😀

[57gold]

Thanks for this review.  Wondered on these pages why there were no reviews of this and other high value/high feature DACs like this and Topping and Yulong...

 

Unless I missed it, no mention on how this sounds with CA approved software like HQ Player or A+ taking advantage of this unit's ability to play DSD256+ up converted files like I do every day on my Mytek B+? My experience is that these software players take the performance of the B+ to a much higher level.  Comparing the Schitt unit at its top resolution versus the XSP at its top available resolution would be a more realistic display of how it would be best employed by a CA member.

 

As a 100% CA music player, I have sold my 8 tube pre amp (expensive attenuator) and run my power amp from my B+ DAC straight up.  Some comparison of the XSP in preamp mode versus a B+ or other product like the RME would also be informative for those of us who believe that pre amps are boat anchors if you are 100% CA.

[spacexpert]

I figure I might as well share my experience...

 

I owned the XSP early on, however I personally didn't like the "glossy" 9038 Pro sound, a little too much sparkle in the top octave and not the deepest sound stage either.  I then tried an ADI-2, which had a more "unprocessed" sound with great precision.  However it's sound stage was compact and it lacked dynamic punch.  Eventually I settled on two DAC's.  A Khadas Tone Board, that does much of what the XSP does but with a darker lusher sound.  And a Topping D90, which brings all the air and micro detail of the XSP, but with greater depth / layering. 

 

I break out the TB for all my albums recorded by deaf gentleman, there's a lot unfortunately   

 

 

[KDinsmore]

On 2/6/2020 at 10:50 AM, KDinsmore said:

I just read what I typed. Of course I worded it wrong. Only the Matrix is on the list. Still on the fence. An audio buddy of mine tells me that I do this every two years or so and I always am disappointed with the results. Unfortunately I’m not listening to him.

I am full of Audio GAS!! I bought a Chord Qutest and it is superb!!

[barrows]

Josh, I believe the synchronous/asynchronus mode settings refers to the ESS 9038, and not the USB interface?  The ESS chips can be run either "synchronous" in which case the oversampling does in the DAC chip is synchronous, (they are referring to a case where master clock and bit clock are derived form he same source), which results (again, inside the ESS chip) any oversampling being done in integer fashion, which is easier math, and theoretically will result in more precision (less artifacts) in the oversampling process.

The Asynchronous setting with the ESS chip means the master clock is unrelated to the bit clock, and the DAC resamples all incoming data based on a separate master clock frequency (often 100 MHz is used, but it can be many different frequencies).  The Asynchronus sample rate converter of the ESS chip makes it "immune" to any jitter coming from the source, but with USB input jitter is unlikely to be a problem anyway.

I build DIY DACs with ESS chips, so I am quite well versed in different ways of running the ESS chips.  I find the synchronous mode to sound more natural: defeating the ASRC and only allowing integer based oversampling appears to avoid some artifacts.

There are not a lot of DACs which allow the ESS chip to be used in this mode, if the Matrix really does, that is very interesting to me.  BTW, Ayre only uses this mode on their DACs: running the ESS 9038 synchronously, with the OSF (aka "jitter eliminator") off, and doing the first step of oversampling in an FPGA (to 705.6 or 768 kHz).  I find the less the ESS chips do themselves, the better they sound (more natural tone/timbre, better depth as well).  Even better can be sending the chip DSD 256, with sync clocking-I always run DSD 256 into my DIY ESS 9038 DAC.

If you still have the Matrix around, give the synchronous mode a try, and see if you experience all the same details, but with better tone and timbre.

[kelvinwsy]

Hi there Barrows

Thanks for the info above. 

1. I run a SMSL VMV D1 which uses dual ESS 9038 Pro DAC chips

2. It has been my standard practice to just set the Clock at Asynchronous mode

3. I just tried the Synchronous mode for the last 1 hour. 

4. System all warmed up and same songs, same volume setting. DSD256 direct input from HQPlayer 3.

 

I can say there is a clear difference in sound. Let me say Asynchronous Mode gives a bit more sparkle and edge to the treble, while Synchronous is a bit more natural , say lesss exciting. 

As for depth, and other soundscape effects, I guess more listening is needed. 

 

Happy Listening'

Kelvin

[Josh Mound]

3 hours ago, barrows said:

Josh, I believe the synchronous/asynchronus mode settings refers to the ESS 9038, and not the USB interface?  The ESS chips can be run either "synchronous" in which case the oversampling does in the DAC chip is synchronous, (they are referring to a case where master clock and bit clock are derived form he same source), which results (again, inside the ESS chip) any oversampling being done in integer fashion, which is easier math, and theoretically will result in more precision (less artifacts) in the oversampling process.

The Asynchronous setting with the ESS chip means the master clock is unrelated to the bit clock, and the DAC resamples all incoming data based on a separate master clock frequency (often 100 MHz is used, but it can be many different frequencies).  The Asynchronus sample rate converter of the ESS chip makes it "immune" to any jitter coming from the source, but with USB input jitter is unlikely to be a problem anyway.

I build DIY DACs with ESS chips, so I am quite well versed in different ways of running the ESS chips.  I find the synchronous mode to sound more natural: defeating the ASRC and only allowing integer based oversampling appears to avoid some artifacts.

There are not a lot of DACs which allow the ESS chip to be used in this mode, if the Matrix really does, that is very interesting to me.  BTW, Ayre only uses this mode on their DACs: running the ESS 9038 synchronously, with the OSF (aka "jitter eliminator") off, and doing the first step of oversampling in an FPGA (to 705.6 or 768 kHz).  I find the less the ESS chips do themselves, the better they sound (more natural tone/timbre, better depth as well).  Even better can be sending the chip DSD 256, with sync clocking-I always run DSD 256 into my DIY ESS 9038 DAC.

If you still have the Matrix around, give the synchronous mode a try, and see if you experience all the same details, but with better tone and timbre.

Good catch! You are correct. I need to update the article and try the synchronous mode. 
 

Are you behind Sonore? I *love* your two free SACD programs! I’ve used them for my TBVO columns. 
 

I’m also looking for a good new USB to SPDIF converter. If you’d like a review of the ultraDigital and @The Computer Audiophile gives the thumbs up (am I missing a previous review, Chris?), I’d be interested in reviewing it. 

[kelvinwsy]

8 hours ago, kelvinwsy said:

Hi there Barrows

Thanks for the info above. 

1. I run a SMSL VMV D1 which uses dual ESS 9038 Pro DAC chips

2. It has been my standard practice to just set the Clock at Asynchronous mode

3. I just tried the Synchronous mode for the last 1 hour. 

4. System all warmed up and same songs, same volume setting. DSD256 direct input from HQPlayer 3.

 

I can say there is a clear difference in sound. Let me say Asynchronous Mode gives a bit more sparkle and edge to the treble, while Synchronous is a bit more natural , say lesss exciting. 

As for depth, and other soundscape effects, I guess more listening is needed. 

 

Happy Listening'

Kelvin

Tested a lot more ! Asynch sounds way better in my system

[Dbglobal]

I currently have a Mytek Brooklyn DAC+.  I have been reading about the Matrix X SPIDF 2, however in order to achieve the best results you would want to use the IS2 output, however the Mytek does not have a IS2 input.

 

A dealer recommended getting the Matrix X Saber Pro (MQA).  I looked on YouTube to see if there were any video reviews and saw Steve Guttenberg's review which was posted a month ago.  He could not get the Matrix DAC to work with MQA files, has anyone else had this issue with the Matrix DAC and MQA files?

 

For those that do have the Martix DAC or even the Matrix SPIF 2, could you give me your opinions on the Matrix units?

 

Thanks

 

[audiobomber]

8 hours ago, Dbglobal said:

For those that do have the Martix DAC or even the Matrix SPIF 2, could you give me your opinions on the Matrix units?

This comparison may be of interest. https://soundnews.net/sources/dacs/benchmark-dac-3l-vs-mytek-brooklyn-dac-vs-matrix-audio-element-x-vs-matrix-audio-x-sabre-pro/

[Josh Mound]

I've posted an update to this DAC review (and several others) for those interested: