Why would anyone pay 1500+ $ for a DAC? featuring Gustard X26 III review

So you read the title, and I guess at least once in your life you asked yourself that question. Why would I spend xyz money on the DAC. And I have seen on internet and among reviewers a lot of confusion around DAC features, materials, build, components etc. And I want to clarify a lot of things, with a bit of technical review of Gustard X26III.

Why would I spend so much money on DAC?

To start I know that in world of HIFI numbers can go to ludicrous heights. And there are people buying stuff like that. For example a 2m of cables for 10000 dollars. But as someone who comes from regular income house, and with regular job after that, money and value of anything I buy plays a significant role.

If someone asked me please recommend me a great dac. I would not go into some really big numbers, but I think to get really great dac that can last a long time, you need to add some money. Somewhere in range of 500 to 700 dollars. With that even if you are an audiophile head, you can be satisfied for a long time.

I recommend SMSL RAW DAC 1 PRO which is 700 dollars, or SMSL RAW DAC 1 which is 500 dollars. As examples of peak of value and quality in DACs. Of course there are similarly priced Toppings, Fiios etc. That might bring similar things. But this is the one I recommend.

So if you would 2 years ago told me to spend 1500 dollars on a DAC, I would probably say that it is not a great decision. As I would always say that buying a speaker or an amp, would be more beneficial to sound, or even sound treatment.

DAC is important, DAC is great, but it always is in my opinion maybe a bronze medal in ranking of importance of devices in HIFI. But that was 2 years ago, now the more I spend constantly changing gear, acquiring gear I start to consider DAC as a corner stone to HIFI synergy. I started learning more about ins and outs of components that makes a great DAC. And just what makes one DAC great and better than others.

So I want to demystify, and put my thought into what makes a DAC worth this much money and after that a bit of subjective thoughts about this dac.

Using Gustard X 26 III for example

So what is Gustard X26 III. Gustard X26III is a dac, that is its main purpose, but also with preamp and integrated some streamer capabilities. It uses two ESS ES9039SPRO DAC chips, one for every channel. It includes a digital filter/DSP built on an Analog Devices SHARC DSP platform. Also Gustard implements careful clock management and independent power supply for this device.

This was small introduction, an introduction on a party. But what does this emperor looks without its clothes.

The benefits of 2 or more DACs inside one box

Firstly off two DACs, not one. Why? Well this is unless you go with R2R ladder, a standard thing among expensive DACs. If DAC uses two chips, it’s usually configured in a dual-mono architecture. One for right channel, and other for a left channel. This separates the stereo signal into two physically independent conversion paths, which can reduce interference, crosstalk, and shared electrical noise between channels.

In theory it creates a better cleaner path, with higher more dynamic range. In single-chip stereo DACs, both channels share internal reference circuits, digital processing, and sometimes output stages.

In dual-mono setups, each chip runs completely independently, so the left and right signals don’t interact electrically.

This improves channel crosstalk performance (measured in dB) — often going from about −115 dB (good) to −130 dB or better (excellent).

Beside clarity, stereo imagining massively benefits from this. Lower noise floor and higher dynamic range. Theoretically: combining two identical DAC channels can give you +3 dB SNR improvement per summation, or even +6 dB in perfectly matched balanced summing.

This means quieter background, higher headroom, and more “blackness” between notes. Music feels more open, with finer low-level detail, deeper dynamic contrast, and a sense of effortlessness on complex passages.

High-end dual-DAC designs often power each chip separately to avoid modulation between left/right loads.

This reduces power-supply induced noise and jitter coupling, especially when each chip runs its own local regulators.

Sonic result:

Cleaner transients, tighter bass definition, and more stable high-frequency texture (less “grain”).

Using two DAC chips doesn’t magically double performance, but when executed properly it yields audibly blacker backgrounds, wider imaging, and more effortless microdetail. The biggest perceptual difference is often in the stereo image precision and sense of depth, not raw tonal balance.

But it’s important to note that just adding a second chip doesn’t guarantee better sound. The supporting design matters even more:

Poor power regulation, clock synchronization, or PCB layout can negate all benefits.

If the DAC designer doesn’t fully isolate digital/analog domains, two chips might just add complexity without gain.

Conversely, an excellent single-chip design (e.g., RME ADI-2 DAC, Topping D90LE) can easily outperform a sloppy dual-DAC build.

So dual DAC chips are a potential advantage, not a guarantee.

 Explaining the DAC signal chain

I’ll list components in the order the digital audio takes through the device.

Digital inputs

So we start at the digital inputs, you know your USB, Coaxials, opticals, AES EBU, LAN etc. So what do they do: accept digital audio from sources (PC, streamer, CD transport, network). They parse different protocols and hand off PCM/DSD data to the next stage.

Quality of the receiver and its firmware affects compatibility, jitter handling and USB/driver behaviour. A poor USB implementation can introduce timing errors or noise; a good one reduces jitter and USB-related interference. XMOS implementations are typically robust and widely supported, while cheap/poorly implemented receivers might show dropouts or noise.

So quality device should invest in quality connectors as is the beginning of every signal chain, bad connection causes problems that can negatively affect sound, no matter how good other components are inside.

Clocks

After that signal goes to clock. Easily the most important component of DAC chain. And most underrated. If you have like 8 flagship dacs working great together, if clock sends bad timing it cuts the transients, it smears the micro details, and you want your super expensive dac to have maximum control over that small details.

Every digital audio system — DAC, CD player, streamer — relies on a master clock to determine when each digital sample is converted to analog. You know every sample needs to be converted 44,100 times per second or 96000 times per second. If the timing of those pulses varies, you get timing errors — which is what we call jitter.

You know back in the day, these numbers used to really mean something. As only a top of the line dacs could convert 96 or up or 24 bit or up etc. Now most of dacs do so, and this numbers are currently not indicators of much things.

But quality of clock is, and people should look at spec sheets for this. There are couple of types of clock, but the best one you can find in quality dacs are Crystal oscillator clocks and Femto clock.

FIFO Buffer and PLL

Now to not go in super details, there are two more important things you need to know and that is FIFO Buffer and PLL.

All those things help to remain low noise coming with crosstalk of components, less jitter, more stable neutral flow of sound and consistent tonal balance and stage depth.

DSP

After that signal goes to Digital pre-processing: FPGA / DSP.

Perform tasks like upsampling, digital filtering, DSD/DoP conversion, MQA rendering (if supported), and manage routing. This can be inside the DAC chip, in a SHARC/FPGA, or both. The X26III uses an Analog Devices SHARC DSP for digital filtering.

(brickwall, linear phase, minimum phase, NOS) change impulse response and phase behavior. Subjectively: some filters sound “sharper”/more detailed (linear phase), others sound “warmer”/less edgy (minimum phase or NOS). Upsampling can change texture and timing. The SHARC-based filters are commonly used for high-quality digital filtering and give designers custom filter options.

And also my favourite is analog SHARC DSP. And this is a middle ground between clock and DAC. You see how much signal goes to until it reaches the convertor.

DAC Chip

And now here comes the DAC chip a heart of device, something all of us are talking about. You know your ESS, your AKM, Burr Brown Cirrus Logic etc.

The chip defines the core linearity, noise floor, channel separation, and distortion character. Two designs implementing the exact same DAC chip can still sound different because of power, clocking, analog stage and PCB layout — but the chip sets the baseline.

So yeah two dacs with same chipset can easily sound different if their internal components work differently. But what gets inside the chip is that it needs to convert current to voltage.

I/V Stage

Most high-resolution DAC chips produce current outputs that must be converted to voltage (I/V stage) and then filtered into a smooth analog waveform. This stage often includes op-amps or discrete Class-A transistor stages and can be single-ended (RCA) or fully balanced (XLR). Gustard documents a hybrid IV conversion with discrete Class-A elements and an LPF that uses a discrete JFET-style module in some descriptions of the X26II.

The analog stage is where much of what people hear as “tone”, warmth, drive and emotional character is shaped. Op-amps impart their own sonic signatures (e.g., OPA1612 perceived neutral and fast; older bipolar op-amps may sound warmer). Discrete Class-A stages are often chosen to add richness and a more organic midrange, at the cost of complexity and heat. Output impedance and max level determine how the DAC interfaces with preamps/power amps.

And more

And after that there is a lot more things that affect sound like power supply, preamp volume control, connectors, grounding, firmware, software etc. But I think I touched enough of the most important things.

Understanding why some companies ask more than others

But DC chip, Clock and I/V Stage is the most important thing in a DAC. Majority of the character (transparency, detail, noise floor, and treble texture) come from them. Example: X26III’s dual ES9039SPRO + dedicated crystal clocks + discrete I/V → high measured performance and a claimed “detailed, dynamic” presentation.

Now this is a sort of high level explanation, and is probably not perfect as it can only get more complicated to explain in more details types and variants, and most important brands like Infineon, XMOS, Xilinx, Accusilicon, Crystek etc. It is a big subject which I just don’t have time to explain.

But the DAC is a complex set of different chips, inputs, materials, clocks that need to work together perfectly in order that signal that gets out is world class. But it is not just that someone gets all this expensive materials together and connect them and voila here is the new best dac. For all of those to work, is not an easy thing, especially if you start adding more and more to be competitive on market, experience and expertise that requires to all this elements work together for you to be able to get less noise, distortion and jitter out of your components. It requires a lot of experimentation, and practice to get all of this to optimally mold the sound into what you want. Like for example how much noise flow is cut, but to not affect the dynamics, what kind of character of distortion is going to suit the overall sonic picture. Are the transients present with controlling the jitter etc.

In the end, the one chunk of price goes to material build quality, and to software builders, branding, designing of box etc. But the biggest chunk goes to expertise. It is how the engineers are capable to maximise what they have to build sonic signature they want, but still to remain top quality. Their years and years of experience building stuff like this, their seniority can provide results, that pushes the envelope just a little bit more can cost a lot of money. Even if in the ears of listeners it is just a small tiny sonic push forward.

Now some companies overcharge that, some company overcharge on the legacy and pedigree. It is hard to find where is the perfect balance of cheap, and company needs to cut even and company is now banking on their past successes.

Quality and cutting edge sound costs, and is it justified is always going to be subjective. But I think if you are informed enough, if you learn more about mechanics, components and measurements... if you know what makes some component great, and just learn more and more about it. You can start to perceive if someone did their homework and create a fantastic product or not. And everything else is just subjective, or objective sonic quality if it fits you and your pocket.

Gustard X26 III Review

And now we finally come to Gustard X26 the third. And what do I think about this device, if you followed the previous section you know that Gustard has been built from top notch components. It was engineered amazingly.

It uses an advanced PLL, it uses that amazing Analog Device SHARC and amazing GCLK 2 clock with two top of the line ESS saber chips. So its build is truly amazing, but how did Gustard engineers connect it for pristine sound?

I think ever since I created this channel 2 years ago, in all my review I always had cons section. There where a lot of things I like, but also dislike. I think this is a first time that I don’t have a cons in my review section. Okey, price might be the one, and maybe there is not like tremendous amount of inputs and outputs, but there is more than enough. You get AES EBU, I2S, optical, coaxial, XLR, USB, clock in etc. etc.

Beside those I can easily conclude that this is an amazing DAC, literally almost perfect. That will improve your sound, push it to next limits.

This is all the strengths of ESS Saber pushed enough to not be distorted and retain its clarity. While being superbly dynamic, and open.

You won’t believe how much more open your music is going to become. And I heavily recommend some talented speakers to go to truly feel it. Dali Rubikore, a Monitor Audio Gold, Focal Aria Evo 2. It will open them so much, and with pinpoint precision. Well unless your amp is a weakness in the chain, and enters bunch of artifacts to blur the transient and precision.

But never mind that, or if your sound acoustics is ruining the imaging. Ah never mind that let’s focus on Gustard.

So not just that it opens splendidly, it also creates an amazing imagining to your instruments and vocals. Vocals in center, cymbals at left and right, sound textures expanding from both ends. It is pure and true enjoyment that you search from day one you start to become an audiophile. Big, holographic, spatial soundstage.

And this DAC provides that with bonus of amazing precision and timing of instruments. While we are there I really enjoyed both male and female vocals with this DAC. Your weight might befall on your amp and speakers which are going to be more colored. But there is enough space and timbre in this vocals that it leaves nice room and breath around the vocals to be easily seen, heard and detailed.

It is just superbly dynamic, it gives enough definition in treble and bass. It is a bit forward presentation of both, and largely detailed and textured. Treble and bass response is really good, and depending on your pairing one or other is going to take a primary stance in color signature. But superbly nicely detailed presentation of both.

Detailed, yes, details. So we understand by now improving transients, and timing and working on micro details can help with clear, nice balanced picture. That has enough room to be transparent.

But for it to be vivid, it needs details. Details add texture with right production and mastering. And this is an amazingly detailed sound. But again it is not over-detailed, as it is not fatiguing, it will not blow out your bright speakers like Bowers etc. It is enough detailed to remain upfront and expressive, but this is sort of very premium feeling to it.

All the instruments are very well rounded on a soundstage, you can hear how they start, expand and decay very easily. Their shape remains clear and vivid and great for your sonic enjoyment.

As you want your DAC to remain neutral, and easy going as you can. While having great details, which is not an easy feat, it is super uncommon among cheaper DACs. The organics and place of instruments where they come from, is telling stories with details with this DAC. If the artist used specific organics, which means a certain type of mastering which is close to live production. You will feel and hear it. If the piano is recorded in grand hall or in production booth, you will hear it and feel it. That is details and texture.

And this is a premium feeling of details, allowing very luxurious experience, like the dac knows you spend a lot of money on it, it just shows off.

But we have not yet touched the probably best aspect of this dac. With all those dynamics, details, sound gets bit cramped sometimes. You know... but here it is clear and transparent. It works so well to present every instrument on its lane and give it room to breathe.

It is clear presentation. Which is a great thing with all the bells and whistle of sonic quality it has. To remain enough composed that you can sit and listen and in your head observe all the details and elements happening on soundstage. That dac allows your gear if they are also on a balanced side to remain this dynamic yet this clear is why this is a superb dac.

Review Conclusion/Pairing and synergy

So bunch of dynamics, great details, amazing transparency. That is this DAC in nutshell. And it is hard to think that it can get better than this. And if it can it probably would cost like double the price like X30 or R30 which I guess are tad better for a 1400 dollars more. And even after that to have even bit more better dac you would need like 3000 to 4000 dollars more to add.

It is a price of progress and it is what people call cutting edge. And if you want to be on that verge of cutting edge, well that costs, a lot hah. Will that be worth to you, is all how you perceive this hobby.

I think this DAC is easy to become part of your system and synergies. I feel like balanced systems work great. I felt Elac and KEF to be a great choice. But as this is dynamic dac, if you pair this with dark system you will have scales tip in that direction with bass and lower mids being the most prevalent. And of course if you pair this with a brighter system it will enhance upper mids and treble a bit. So it will play nice with well, but can color a bit too much if you already have systems that are too much tipped in one direction.

vs. SMSL SUX

I want to speak little bit about alternatives. And the first one that falls to my attention is SMSL SUX. It is a 1000 dollars dac from SMSL, maybe even their most expensive one. But the reason why this is a best alternative to this. Is that it is a 400 dollars cheaper DAC and it also comes with 2x top of the line ESS Sabers. This is an amazing dac in its own right. But I felt that Gustard is more dynamic sure footed, and have a better understanding into weaving components to remain visible and detailed and yet transparent.

Which does not mean that SMSL is bad, it is a detailed, dynamic and clear dac. And that is important as it cost significantly less money, and if you don’t have money to buy X26 this is an amazing alternative, with a lot of inputs and outputs. It is a must to check, and if you can pair with SMSL PAX, it is an amazing combo.

vs. Topping D900

There is also an alternative of Topping D90 iii discrete option. It is also as you might expect in this price range an amazing DAC, it is a bit more tame, and transparent. But many people want just that from their dac, as little as coloring as possible. But Topping have a new dac called Topping D900. It is more expensive than X26.

But let me tell you the architecture of D900 is out of this world. It is a DSM, a discrete sigma modulation. It is an amazingly open and clear sound, again it goes step up from Gustard to try to provide as much as jitter elimination, noise and distortion to have ultra pristine sound. I don’t want to go more into details, as I might sometimes in future review it. But go with this if you want outmost purity of sound, but if you want a bit more dynamic and colored sound with detail go with Gustard.

vs. Denafrip Aeres 15th

Other cheaper alternative is Denafrips Ares the 15th. Well after Delta sigma dac and discrete sigma dac, why not give one R2R alternative as well. And that is something I am very familiar with and that is Ares. It is around 200 dollars cheaper dac, but I found mine second hand much cheaper. It seems there is a lot of Denafrips on second hand market, with a great price.

And it is marvelous DAC. It uses all the strengths of R2R ladder into delivering smooth, balanced sound. Which is a type of sound that many want their DAC to be in their system. Very spacious and transparent sound, it leaves all the natural character of your system, while expanding the reach, and clarity of it. It does that like a really great dac it is.

But I prefer Gustard even though it is expensive, even though it is not as balanced, and clear and open. Because it is more engaging and just more detailed and rich dac. Bass sounds more forward and present, treble is detailed. While also being great into opening and clearing the sound. While a bit more expensive I think is just much more for me. While of course some might prefer the sound of Denafrips a bit more.

Overall Conclusion

Now if you are a guy who believes that outmost value in a DAC lies in its ability to offer as much as value it can in most cheapest device. This obviously is not for you. Not that is bad, I also always looking forward for those 100 or 200 dollars dac that just amazes. So it will not get any awards best value etc. But this is for someone who is ready to push beyond the sonic limit, and want outmost prestige and quality out of its dac, and is willing to invest in that.

With X26 you get build quality which is amazing, not in just dac, clocks, IV conversion. But also not skipping in any inputs and outputs as well. You get sound which is audiophile heaven with how much dynamic and open it is while also being amazingly clear. It gives your music adrenalin push, and clear it at same time, which is just beyond terrific. It is a perfect dac.

And you know if you want to get more from this you can, but it doubles the price. So this is to me after absolute end game DAC, and it is a perfect score recommendation from me.

Thanks for watching, hope you enjoyed this very detailed review.

If you can please like and subscribe, and keep daydreaming.

See you on a next video bye.

✅ Pros

Build, Engineering & Components

• Built from top-notch components with excellent engineering.

• Uses dual ESS ES9039SPRO chips in dual-mono configuration for lower noise, higher separation, and better imaging.

• Features advanced PLL, SHARC DSP, and the Gustard GCLK2 clock.

• Excellent clock implementation with high stability, low jitter.

• High-quality I/V stage, discrete Class-A elements, and strong analog output design.

• Independent power supplies per channel for reduced interference.

• Strong overall build quality, including connectors, inputs, outputs.

Sound Quality

• Extremely dynamic, energetic, and impactful sound.

• Very open, holographic, spatial soundstage.

• Outstanding stereo imaging with precise placement of vocals/instruments.

• Black background, excellent microdetail and microdynamics.

• Highly detailed without becoming bright, harsh, or fatiguing.

• Excellent clarity, transparency, instrument separation, and transient control.

• Vocals (male/female) sound detailed, spacious, and natural.

• Treble and bass are high-quality, textured, forward but not exaggerated.

• Presents premium, vivid, luxurious texture reproduction.

• Maintains neutrality while still being engaging and rich.

• Works well with high-resolution systems; reveals mastering and recording nuances.

System Synergy

• Works well with balanced systems like Elac, KEF, Dali Rubikore, Monitor Audio Gold, Focal Aria Evo 2.

• Clear improvements when paired with high-quality speakers/amps in transparent chains.

Value Positioning

• Considered almost perfect for its price class.

• Positioned as end-game or near–end-game DAC without needing to spend double.

• Better dynamics and musicality compared to alternatives like SMSL SU-X, Topping D90 III, Denafrips Ares 15th.

Inputs & Features

• Wide range of inputs/outputs: AES/EBU, I2S, optical, coaxial, USB, XLR, clock-in, etc.

• Comes with preamp functionality and some streaming capability.

Subjective Experience

• Feels premium and “knows it’s expensive.”

• Highly enjoyable, engaging, and musically satisfying.

• Offers adrenaline, excitement, and clarity simultaneously.

  
  

❌ Cons

Price

• Price is the main con—costly compared to midrange DACs.

Inputs/Outputs

• While sufficient, the number of inputs/outputs is not exceptional for the price—only “more than enough,” not extensive.

System Dependence

• Can color a system if paired with gear already too bright or too dark:

  • Bright systems → treble emphasis

  • Dark systems → bass/lower mids emphasis

For the Value-Focused Listener

• Not for users wanting maximum value at the lowest cost.

• Will not win "best value" awards compared to $100–200 DACs.