Has any inexpensive Asian DAC manufacturer harnessed the ESS Sabre ES9038PRO Chip?


Many Asian manufacturers of inexpensive (sub-$500 USD) DAC’s have successfully implemented the now second tier ESS Sabre ES9038Q2M chip. Anyone have reports of an inexpensive DAC with decent implementation of the ESS’s newest flagship chip, ES9038PRO?
PreviewAg insider logo xs@2xcelander
@kot 

I certainly hope so and I have a Pass/Revel setup that should be fair enough display a change in the chain. It has been when I first put the M51 though its paces and found improvement over the Marantz I had and the Wadia it was directly compared to. The sound signature is expected to be different to my current setup and hopefully a step in the direction I purchased the unit for.


@nmeysarosh
Make sure your USB cable is up to the task, as USB cable makes a tremendous differences with the D`1 .... The extra level of dimensionaliity lost with inferior USB cable is akin to using crappy sony receiver as a preamp in the hi end chain.... Also the unit needs at least 400 to 500 hours to break in fully...And needs robust power cable as well.. I Use a legacy cardas golden power cord with it.

@doak 

https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-and-measurements-of-audio-gd-nfb-2...

Everything you asked in terms of data requested. Understand that a number of companies have resulted in results from all over the spectrum and Amir has shown to be very amicable and willing to further investigate issues with manufactures. This is if they feel the measurements are not respective of the product.
Thanks.
After years of exposure I make it a point to disregard that particular source, a point I will not argue.
@doak 

As you wish. I found the secondary commentary of Amir and the general candor of Amir to be respectful. I didn't care for your response as being accusatory, which is entirely unnecessary at that juncture.

I can understand why you may feel not obliged or uncomfortable to engage in open discussion, there are many around that can be challenging and even obtuse at times, but its certainly shouldn't be a cause for complete disengagement since it allows the proverbial troll to succeed when one should not.

I do find their products the be interesting as they subscribe to highly limited use of negative feedback (no feedback in their view), but this is a rather challenging engineering path as many designers would attest. My own Pass stuff is built upon this, but is limited feedback design over none where measured use over excess use.

This obviously impacted the measured results as one might expect. Subjectively, the perceived differences were notably less than one might expect, but isn't surprising considering the excess use of NFB during the distortion wars and its resulting of sterile sound in the past. Still, I have seen controlled use of technique can be beneficial, but each designer has the ability to choose their own topology.

Never the less, a better measured result in conjunction would have been preferable. For the time being, it  becomes rather curios.