advertisement


Soncoz SGD1 User experience

Just curious, but how are the user ergonomics with an SGD1 plugged into a pre-amp, with regards to volume? As I understand it, you cannot set it to have a fixed line-level output and the device defaults to -64dB. Is the volume control in the digital domain? If you set the volume to max, is that equivalent, then, to no digital attenuation? And does the device remember that setting, so you can just set and forget?

I feel like this was covered somewhere in the ASR thread, but at 51 pages, I'm not about to start searching for it. Also, I know that the device can receive OTA firmware updates so I have no idea if things will have changed.
Yes, that is correct. I have mine running into a pre amp. I set the volume to max and haven't moved it since. It remembers the setting each time I switch it on.
 
Just curious, but how are the user ergonomics with an SGD1 plugged into a pre-amp, with regards to volume? As I understand it, you cannot set it to have a fixed line-level output and the device defaults to -64dB. Is the volume control in the digital domain?

The volume control is in the digital domain. To get full output voltage you set the volume control to the maximum.

Each of the inputs can have a different volume setting and the DAC remembers the volume setting for every input at switch off, so very useful if you want a different volume setting for each input.

No real need for a fixed volume output IMO.
 
I bought a used one recently from @Amber Audio that he got from Keith. I was planning on getting mine from Purite anyway when it popped up in classifieds.
My reasons for choosing it were fairly pragmatic, if approached from the direction that all dacs sound the same. I'm pretty sure that a dCs or a Mola Mola might have a bit more 'something' than your average £500 dac that measures well, but not having heard any high level dacs, I cannot comment.
When I did an initial comparison between the Soncoz and my existing 30 year old Meridian 203 bitstream dac, I could not detect an audible difference. Either the 203 is an excellent unit, dacs have not improved over the last few decades, or my system resolves no better than a Fisher Price all in one? Whichever it may be, I think it sounds superb using CD via rca, TV via optical, computer via USB B, and RPi4 via USB C. And here's the thing, it has multiple varied inputs, each one can have it's gain level set independently, which allows me to reduce the output level for digital sources into my ancient Naim preamp and have more range on its volume control, plus it adds a remote capability to said prehistoric amp, so I don't have to keep leaping up to turn it down when the advert breaks come in louder than programme material.
All in all, what's not to like? (For me, anyway)
Glad you’re liking the SONCOZ, for the record I moved it on cos I fancied trying something else, COVID free time box swapping syndrome, not because I was disappointed. There are a couple things I didn’t like about it, nothing to do with sound quality. I replaced it with a Topping D90, couldn’t tell them apart sound wise in my office system. The D90 has a nice screen and I prefer using it to the SONCOZ, it is dearer though.

A top end DAC in a decent system will sound better, whether it is worth paying the difference I can’t speak for anyone else. I have had a dCS Bartok on loan over Xmas in my main system and did a comparison with the D90, both as DACs and Pre/DACs, there is a difference and to my ears a considerable one, it is a lot of £wedge though. Usual law of diminishing returns, much more obvious with digital, the Bartok sounds absolutely fantastic.

Dropping one of the ChiFi DACs into an old style system does give you much more than just a sound boost as you say the remote and per input variable sensitivity is a bonus. Topping have a Pre90 amp and expansion box Ext90 coming out, looks interesting as a match to the D90. Maybe a matching power amp will appear.
https://www.tpdz.net/productinfo/551297.html
 
Topping have a Pre90 amp and expansion box Ext90 coming out, looks interesting as a match to the D90. Maybe a matching power amp will appear.
https://www.tpdz.net/productinfo/551297.html

Some quite impressive noise and distortion figures there that seem to have been achieved with very high open loop gain and a massive amount of negative feedback.

“Nested feedback composite amplifier”
“Voltage current hybrid feedback”
“Ultra high feedback architecture”

It also seems to have a very low input impedance, less than 2K ohms.

I wonder what it sounds like.
 
Last edited:
Some quite impressive noise and distortion figures there that seem to have been achieved with very high open loop gain and a massive amount of feedback.

“Nested feedback composite amplifier”
“Voltage current hybrid feedback”
“Ultra high feedback architecture”

It also seems to have a very low input impedance, less than 2K ohms.

I wonder what it sounds like.

Nothing apparently, it’s transparent:)
 
With only a turntable and DAC (SMSL M400) it's inputs are just what I need./

It might be worth checking on the output impedance of your phono preamp. Unusually the Pre90 preamp has a very low input impedance, apparently around 1.4K ohms. It could possibly have some impact on the frequency response if your phono preamp has a relatively high output impedance.

Quote below from post #55 of the ASR review thread:-

“Based on @amirm measurement, voltage drop from 4V to 3.6V when AP output impedance changed from 40 ohm to 200 ohm - results in Topping input impedance of 1.44 kohm - simple circuit maths.

This is very small input impedance. I would recommend nothing below 10 kohm. It affects distortion, and the low frequency corner, if the sound source has output coupling capacitor, which is very usual.

In my designs, I use 47 kohm or 100 kohm input impedance, very rarely 10k ohm”
 
There are plenty of people who criticise products for one reason or another.
Post 59 -
A shame it's mostly balanced

My current Pre is fully balanced, I just use the better XLR plugs (IMO) on my single ended phono stage.
My system has some 20 Metres of balanced interconnects, so I am more than happy that it is mostly
balanced.
I would prefer it were fully balanced, though I do not write criticism on forums to say such.

I asked John Yang (the designer) about the impedance with my M400. He says it will be fine.

The M400 is a good example of criticism, many people came on to ASR (many with new accounts !) to voice their criticism, including the colour of the box it is shipped in.
 
Based on @amirm measurement, voltage drop from 4V to 3.6V when AP output impedance changed from 40 ohm to 200 ohm - results in Topping input impedance of 1.44 kohm - simple circuit maths.

The reply from John.

2k for XLR, 10k for RCA.
Frequency response will not affected by high output impedance devices unless it's capacitor coupled or transformer coupled.

So simple circuit maths from an internet poster is not always correct.
 
There are plenty of people who criticise products for one reason or another.

I suppose it depends on your interpretation of post 55, you could view it as a criticism or just an observation.

The poster has a valid point. Of course it’s not an issue if the source component has a low output impedance, below 100ohms for example, and has plenty of current drive.

However if your planning to use valve phono preamp with a wimpy ECC83 cathode follower output stage capacitor coupled to the output with a 1K ohm output impedance, then that’s a different case.
 
Though the Topping Pre 90 is aimed mainly at the market which wishes to remove all noise and distortion from their system, not those who prefer to use valves.

Post 63
with an input impedance this low (~2K or less) is a faulty design.

Definitely not just an observation.
 
Though the Topping Pre 90 is aimed mainly at the market which wishes to remove all noise and distortion from their system, not those who prefer to use valves.

Post 63

Definitely not just an observation.

Yes, I'd consider that a criticism as well. It's not a faulty design. And despite what you think I'm not criticising the design either. My original comments were because you alluded to the fact that you were going to use it with a turntable, and thus a phono preamp of come sort I guess, hence a suggestion that you might like to check the specification of your phono preamp.

As you don't list your equipment in your profile I have no idea what phono preamp you intend to use with the Topping Pre 90. I thought my heads up to you might have been a little helpful, but reading your comments about valves, noise and distortion it appears not, so I'll not post anything else on the subject of the Pre 90. Carry on as you were.
 
Today we compared with one audiophile friend SGD1 vs Buffalo DAC. SGD1 is very good, but Buffalo is much better. Much more natural, warmer, bigger, thicker natural sound, deeper bass, much better music flow, better dynamic, great musicality. Most probably SGD1 measures better than other DACs, but numbers do not make music ...
 
I have few DACs at home now - DPA DX32 Enlightenment, Buffalo III, Khadas Tone Board, Soncoz LA-XD1, Soncoz SGD1, Hifiberry Pro Dac+, Focusrite Scarlett 2i2.
To me each DAC sounds completely different, or i am delusioned audiophile ... :)

did you find much difference between both the Soncoz? Is the SGD1 worth the premium price?
 
Today we compared with one audiophile friend SGD1 vs Buffalo DAC. SGD1 is very good, but Buffalo is much better. Much more natural, warmer, bigger, thicker natural sound, deeper bass, much better music flow, better dynamic, great musicality. Most probably SGD1 measures better than other DACs, but numbers do not make music ...

I am willing to bet that your so-called comparison was done sighted and without level matching.

My wife noticed it too, and she doesn't even exist!
 
...... but Buffalo is much better. Much more natural, warmer, bigger, thicker natural sound, deeper bass, much better music flow, better dynamic, great musicality.....
This is interesting Tomek and, of course, its the old debate. One might argue that the SGD1 produced the highest fidelity sound - the most accurate reproduction of the information on the recording (it produces, I think, less noise and distortion than the Buffalo) Yet you preferred the Buffalo sound.
So (not entirely seriously) I think you should come out: Are you seeking a high fidelity system or one that just sounds nice to you?
Are both possible?
 
What if high fidelity sounded like a piece of crud? Is the recording the truest representation of what you would hear in real life? We accept TVs that upscale lower resolution as a good thing, yet in hifi there is an obsession in some parts to bring ‘true’ to the recording, but what about being true to the artist?

Give me something that sounds like actual music all day over something that measures great. Hopefully they are one and the same thing, but if not, hey ho.
 
What if high fidelity sounded like a piece of crud? Is the recording the truest representation of what you would hear in real life? We accept TVs that upscale lower resolution as a good thing, yet in hifi there is an obsession in some parts to bring ‘true’ to the recording, but what about being true to the artist?

Give me something that sounds like actual music all day over something that measures great. Hopefully they are one and the same thing, but if not, hey ho.
As Steve Guttenburg often says: in many cases its not possible to replicate the original recording event as many recordings are made up of so many bits and pieces made at different times or even different studios.
 


advertisement


Back
Top