ESS Sabre ES9218P vs ES9219C vs ES9069Q: DAC Specs

The trajectory of mobile audio reproduction changed over the last decade. It moved from a utilitarian function to a sophisticated industry that demands performance rivalry with desktop systems. ESS Technology leads this space with its SABRE architecture. This report analyzes three critical points in their product line; the ES9218P, the ES9219C, and the recently introduced ES9069Q.

These components represent a philosophical split in design. The ES9218P and ES9219C utilize a “System-on-Chip” (SoC) approach. They integrate conversion and amplification into one die. The ES9069Q represents a pivot to component specialization. It introduces HyperStream IV architecture and decouples the amplification stage.

1. Visualizing the Performance Gap

The chart below visualizes the leap in Dynamic Range (DNR) and the reduction in Total Harmonic Distortion (THD+N) across the three generations. The jump to HyperStream IV in the 9069Q allows for a significantly lower noise floor.

Dynamic Range & THD Analysis

ES9218P (Legacy)

ES9219C (Efficiency)

ES9069Q (Flagship)

2. Signal Topology Differences

The primary difference between these chips is how they handle the analog signal after conversion. This dictates the size, cost, and power of the final device.

ES9218P / ES9219C Topology

Integrated SoC

USB Input

DAC Core

Internal Amp

Headphone

Pros: Small footprint, low power, low cost.
Cons: Limited voltage swing (2V), higher crosstalk.

ES9069Q Topology

Discrete Chain

USB Input

DAC Core

External Amp

Headphone

Pros: Massive power potential, lower noise floor.
Cons: High BOM cost, heat generation, PCB size.

3. Technical Specification Matrix

Use the filters below to highlight specific use-cases for each chip architecture.

Feature	ES9218P	ES9219C	ES9069Q

4. The “ESS Hump” & IMD Artifacts

A notorious characteristic of early ESS Mobile implementations was a rise in Intermodulation Distortion (IMD) centered around -20dB to -40dB volume levels. This became colloquially known as the “ESS Hump” in audio engineering circles.

The Legacy Issue (ES9218P)

In the 9218P; the hump was often visible in measurement sweeps. While debated if audible; it represented non-linearity in the modulator.

Mid-level Distortion Spike

The HyperStream IV Fix (ES9069Q)

The 9069Q utilizes a new modulator design that completely flattens this region. Measurements show a linear progression of distortion relative to signal amplitude.

Linear Performance

5. MQA & Hardware Rendering

The transition from ES9218P to ES9219C brought native MQA support. This is a critical distinction for users of Tidal or local MQA files.

Software Only

ES9218P

Relying on the host CPU for the “First Unfold” (typically up to 96kHz). It cannot address the time-domain blurring corrections inherent in the full MQA process.

Hardware Renderer

ES9219C / ES9069Q

These chips contain custom DSP blocks. They perform the final unfold (up to 16x) directly on silicon. This reduces CPU load on the smartphone and allows for correct DAC filter selection.

6. Subjective Sound Analysis

While measurements tell one story, the listening experience often varies. The “Sabre Glare”—a tendency toward brightness—has evolved.

ES9218P: The Clinical Analyst

Characterized by extreme detail retrieval but often described as “thin” in the lower mids. High-frequency transients can feel sharp, leading to listener fatigue over long sessions with bright headphones.

ES9219C: The Balanced Iteration

Retains the detail but smooths the treble peaks. The introduction of Analog Low Power (ALP) mode seems to correlate with a slightly softer transient response, making it more forgiving with compressed pop music.

ES9069Q: Organic Density

The HyperStream IV architecture produces a denser soundstage. It lacks the artificial “edge” of previous generations. Because the amplification is external, the final sound is heavily dependent on the op-amps chosen by the manufacturer (e.g., Ricore vs. THX).

7. Implementation Ecosystem

Understanding where these chips appear in the wild helps contextualize their performance classes.

Legacy (ES9218P)

LG V30 / V40

The Quad-DAC era of smartphones used this exclusively. High output impedance was occasionally an issue.

Efficiency (ES9219C)

Fiio BTR15 / Qudelix 5K

Used in Bluetooth receivers where battery life is critical. The integrated amp saves PCB space.

Flagship (ES9069Q)

Fiio KA17 / Shanling UA4

Desktop-class performance in a dongle. Requires high current draw; often needs “Desktop Mode” power supply.

Which Chip Fits Your Needs?

Select your primary priority to see our recommendation.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can the ES9219C drive planar magnetic headphones?

It depends on the sensitivity. While capable of 2.0 Vrms; the ES9219C is current-limited compared to discrete amplifiers. It struggles with low-sensitivity planars but handles efficient models adequately.

What is the Time Domain Jitter Eliminator?

Both the ES9219C and ES9069Q feature an advanced “Time Domain Jitter Eliminator”. This allows the DAC to use its own internal clock reference rather than relying on the noisy clock signal from the USB source, reducing digital artifacts.

Why does the ES9069Q use more power if it has no amp?

The chip itself is optimized; however, the mandatory external amplifiers (like THX or Ricore modules) required to produce sound draw significant current from the host device.

What is the “Crosstalk” advantage of the ES9069Q?

The ES9218P/9219C are single-chip solutions where L/R channels sit millimetres apart on the same die. The ES9069Q, often implemented in Dual-DAC configurations, physically separates the channels. This results in superior stereo imaging and separation.