or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by AnakChan

 M-100 283gWireless 294g
"I'm ok!" (From post: http://www.head-fi.org/t/592389/v-moda-m-100-discussion-feedback-reviews-pics-etc/11970#post_9110901)
I've actually not weighed the difference between the two. I do feel that it is a little heavier but no figures. I'll do that tonight and will share it with the audience here. I think I've been spoilt by the wireless. I used to listen to my headphones based on various criteria - (e..g TH-900's for some of my 80/90's and vocal jazz easy listening, SR-007Mk1/SR-009 for a little more "detailed" listening on my jazz and classical), M-100 for my more R&B & hiphop moods, etc....
Not stated on iRiver's website but is easily tested so a little more than wishful thinking (plenty of AK380's around to test) :-  And just for sanity, checking against another AK380 with v1.11 And for fun, comparing against the AK240SS. This AK240SS has f/w 1.25. I have to give to @Mimouille, the difference of the AK240SS f/w 1.25 and AK380 is slight. And oh, the AK240SS still feels so nice in the hand. The AK380 still has the edge (slight!) over the AK240SS - am I allowed...
Solo 2 :- Just my preference :-
 Before this gets out of hand that this is iRiver specific - any maker can and have done their same for their respective DAPs. That's why I said rather generically of how the Calyx M firmware from mid 2014 to now 2015 have done made me change my opinion 180 of that device whilst the AK380 firmware upgrades have made my comparisons with the Calyx M v1.01 more difficult of which way I swing. It may not be so much as EQ as it is about filters actually.
 [OT]The Hugo is a component. I still fail to see the continual comparison. But whilst we insist on doing oranges to apple toffee comparisons, I actually preferred the Flow to the Hugo and the Flow is even cheaper.[/OT]I've not found my demo AK380 to "sing" 20 minutes later. Probably my ears are not as sensitive or my memory as reliable as piercer's, I've found it to be pretty much the same from power up. The only thing that I find troubling with any DAP is how the...
It's probably best to be able to listen first hand. In your paraphrase it sounds like you're expecting a big difference in signature. Let's just say if one had the M-100 & the XS side by side and is determined they have very different signatures, then the CrossFade Wireless is more like a further tuned M-100. It doesn't have a completely different signature. It has the same drivers as the M-100 and the cups (looks?) the same. But naturally internally (the dampening, etc.)...
 To me the improved quality primarily comes from the trebles. Where I felt the M-100 had more neutral treble range, there was more sparkle in the CrossFade Wireless which to me felt also brought more clarity. Side-by-side, I feel the CrossFade Wireless signature is more appealing to my tastes but it's hard to quantify "how much" the boost is.
New Posts  All Forums: