I’m interested in what you consider a “small converter box…” means, in the context of other S.M.S.L DAC’s that are far more expensive and following design dogma that are far more advanced in applied platform topologies…? Why do you see S.M.S.L producing more sophisticated DAC’s like the D400 EX, if the little SU-1 is delivering the entire gamut of appreciable nuances imbued in a digital-audio file, as you allude to?
A small box that converts digital to analogue… Obvs.
Yep… pretty simple rationalization… I guess we all should be so naïve and/or unconcerned about the details… Ignorance is bliss… there are all levels of audiophiles… However, the OP already set a benchmark in his post regarding the Denefrips 12th-1…
Depends what the money is for. If the expense of the DAC is bound up in large part in circuitry and parts that perform internal conversion of lower rate PCM to high rate DSD, then you can already do the same with Audirvāna, so why spend the money? If you’re paying for other things - good galvanic isolation and clocking, good final analog reconstruction filter and output circuitry - then that’s worthwhile. But it’s often rather difficult to tell where the money’s gone in a particular DAC.
I’ll give you more food for thought…
If you do not include the non-linearities of the real-world application that produce tangibly audible differences in playback resolution, etc, in any given playback scenario, and all you do is look at test-level specs and do not consider the non-linearities, then on paper the SU-1 looks great for the money…
The salient question is why does S.M.S.L design more expensive DAC’s like the D400 EX using the same chipset in a dual-mono design, in concert with the AKM filter chipset, that does not perform internal up-sampling beyond the functional SDM in the chipset?
Other factors…
Board quality and component layout (Quality Control consistency)
Power and Ground plane topology
Power-supply (your favorite element)
RF and EMF mitigation (real-world) / Balanced design
Most importantly the OP is looking to move beyond the Shiit Audio MODI3 an inexpensive DAC that is a “small converter box”.
We have come to a point where these questions regarding performance must be put to more than objective measurement and beyond the subjective assessment done in isolation on any given system, with no qualitative juxtaposition other than the cognitive biases of the observer.
I used usb dac Audioquest Dragonfly cobalt, it works well and give interesting improvements of my sound. Price is honest.
Oh, to mess with DSD would be sacrilege… Bad on those that want to EQ or use other dirty plugins with DSD… What can be, unburdened by what has been… 
It’s a matter of subjective experience… There is no burden… it is the weight of the value assessed in the juxtaposition that defines the interpretation… It is this bias that drives the hubris imbued in the perspective that evokes the emotional attachments we find as affirmations and confirmations of those interpretations… If DAVE could only hold a candle to PGGB… life would be beautiful for those arrogant enough to rationalize in such myopic terms as DAVE espouses… To EQ? or not to EQ? that is the question… Is it such that the ego is nothing but a form of equalization?.. I think so…
My ego is more a convolution.
Again… a subjective interpretation as a product of the ego bias (equalization).
Oh no, purely objective… I have it on good authority that I am measurably convoluted…
What can be, juxtaposed by what has been…
I can’t do that Dave… Don’t know your issue with DAVE… PGGB is too expensive compared to some simple and free mods to SOX…
You can EQ your room, you can EQ your headphones and you can EQ your mind…
Some of the best digital EQs are convolution based… And then there are some pretty crapy convolution EQs too… Just a juxtaposition based on my purely subjective opinion… My ears and brain, many rooms, studios and kits in film, video, FX and audio production and post production…
So… your point? Is it that multi-bit PCM is king and the science of acoustics is the domain of multi-bit PCM? Or.… is multi-bit PCM just a rationalization for pragmatic application? I have acquiesced to the domain of PCM by virtue of decimation of native DSD signals to 24/352.8kHz for application of DSP, as is the case for some DSD recordings where DSP is necessarily applied… So, what is the point of this sarcasm?
Why do we look at 1-bit PDM as the de-facto digital-audio archival medium benchmark outside of modern analog tape formulation… Is it just pragmatic? … How many multi-bit PCM 32/768kHz recordings are made? And why?
Again… a subjective interpretation as a product of the ego bias (equalization) by those who assert their hubristic opinion… 
That perceptual interpretation of real-world, real-time experience… intrinsically tied to contextually relevant near-term temporal memory.… We are not talking about artistic prerogative in a musical production or in the subjective assertion of EQ, etc by the individual in any given playback scenario in the process of mutating a codified artistic product to make it fit some subjective rationalization for any given reason or condition.
I’ve had several DACs, and I still have a few, but for me the definitive DAC is the NEO iDSD 2 from iFi.
After that I don’t think about DACs anymore.
Hi @speedymoonman, did you go ahead and get the Ares or are you still deciding? If you did get the Ares, how do you like it? 
not yet but i’ll be getting the Ares 12-1… I’ll let you know it goes.
It is just word salad in response to your word salad… Sometimes you guys, plural, just don’t know when to stop…
Good luck with your Ares 12-1 @speedymoonman…
The soup d’jour prepared by @Ddude003…