Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Review : AUDINST HUD-MX1 DAC/amp - a promising newcomer (compared to Audio-gd FUN, AMB Gamma2)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Review : AUDINST HUD-MX1 DAC/amp - a promising newcomer (compared to Audio-gd FUN, AMB Gamma2) - Page 21

post #301 of 408

.


Edited by Mormonsloot - 9/3/13 at 2:08pm
post #302 of 408

@Mormonsloot

 

Are you aware that problems with USB audio streaming are very common among PCs and most, if not all of the time, are caused by software or hardware interrupts that has nothing to do with the DAC itself?

 

I used to have the exact same issues as you listed above. Eventually I managed to fix it by updating my chipset drivers and switching off my WLAN card while streaming music into the Audinst, as well as lowering the buffer size on WASAPI in foobar2000. Voila, now playback is completely free from any form of glitches/pops.

 

Lastly, don't put down a company just because 'they barely speak English'. That is borderline racism.

 

post #303 of 408

Well my unit which I've had for a while now has no such popping, no sound, etc. issues and works just fine. It also sounds much better than my on board sound.

post #304 of 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawrster View Post

Well my unit which I've had for a while now has no such popping, no sound, etc. issues and works just fine. It also sounds much better than my on board sound.



I have to completely agree. My HUD-MX1 is drastically better than the on board sound of my work PC. Now it can't compete with my Anedio D1 that I use at home but, for several hundred dollars less, I wouldn't expect it to. However, I have discovered that if you use the Audinst on Win7-64bit you have to keep the output buffer in foobar2000 to no more than 1000ms. When playing around with settings I found you could easily get the unit to skip/pop/drop out with a buffer larger than that. But, as far as I know, the default buffer length in foobar2000 is 1 second, so it's really a moot point.   

post #305 of 408

.


Edited by Mormonsloot - 9/3/13 at 2:08pm
post #306 of 408
Thread Starter 

Well, the point of using Foobar (and similar software) is to avoid signal alteration and achieve a bit-perfect-output (regardless of the DAC in use).

Most media players are actually doing the opposite.

This should have become common sense by now.

 


Edited by audiofil - 7/14/11 at 9:43am
post #307 of 408


Mama always said, "Don't feed the troll", but...

 

One, why does it matter that this product was the subject of my first post? I haven't been on Head-Fi all that long and this was the first thread I felt I could contribute to. I was just interested in sharing my experience with the DAC/amp in question. For me, it's been a very solid performer. Nothing earth shattering, but also NOT a buggy piece of garbage as you made it out to be.

 

And, two, if you aren't using a software player that can stream bit-perfect audio to your DAC, do you really care about sound quality all that much? Or do you just expect a sub-$200 product to magically make even a substandard audio signal path sound perfect? 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mormonsloot View Post

Foobar???  When you spend $200 on a product you should not have to alter your listening experience...I love when people make excuses for products.

 

Funny, this is your first post and you are defending the Audinst, thanks for proving my point about the suspicous pumping of this product.

 



 

post #308 of 408

This has nothing to do with 'altering your listening experience'. You have a problem with the Audinst, I suggested ways to troubleshoot it and shared my own experience in solving similar issues with the unit. Make excuses? You realise different PCs operate in wildly different hardware/software environments that can cause all kinds of compatibility issues? Did you even try out other USB DACs before pinpointing your problems on a defective unit?

 

Yes, it was my first post, but at least I was trying to be constructive and helpful there. You are the one making baseless accusations and spewing vitriol on everyone who did not share your opinion. Besides, I could just as easily claim that you are a business competitor to Audinst trying to put down the product on Head-fi by spreading negative opinions on it.

 

Anyway, 29 posts don't make you a better human being.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mormonsloot View Post

Foobar???  When you spend $200 on a product you should not have to alter your listening experience...I love when people make excuses for products.

 

Funny, this is your first post and you are defending the Audinst, thanks for proving my point about the suspicous pumping of this product.

 


 

 

post #309 of 408

I have been researching a more potent amp for my desktop system and all I have to say is Wow! I just plugged the MX1 into my office system for the first time and I am very impressed. The amp section is robust enough to drive my HD650 in a similar (not quite as refined) fashion as my Schiit Lyr in my main system. Great extension in the bass with solid mid, airy and extended top end indicating a respectable DAC stage to go with the powerful amp. And I can easily switch between HP and desktop speaker out with the RCA line out on the back panel. Overall I give it a 4 out of 5.

post #310 of 408

milosolo, thanks for your impression. Great to see this thread going on. I've sold my Audinst but I'm really missing it... Looks like it's the case when people come to appreciate stuff after they lose it ...

post #311 of 408

it comes very handy when i need something portable, and a good converter  beyersmile.png

post #312 of 408

Anyone have a HUD-MX1 and Asgard combo?? I would like to pick up an amp in the future once I have enough to get the HE-4 orthos! :)

post #313 of 408

Hi, I can't decide between mx1 and nfb-12. I've some experience with mx1, and it's a great little device. I've used it for one week

a few years back and it was superb in every aspect. But nfb-12 looks really good on paper and I can slip taxes if I order from China.

So the price will be the same as mx1 + taxes. The thing is that I've some experience with Sparrow-B too, and it wasn't too good.

Sparrow was kind of dull and simply lifeless. mx1 is much more portable too and I have a good wall wart to use with it (ripple <60mV).

So what would you buy?

post #314 of 408

Quote:

Originally Posted by spartan86 View Post

Hi, I can't decide between mx1 and nfb-12. I've some experience with mx1, and it's a great little device. I've used it for one week

a few years back and it was superb in every aspect. But nfb-12 looks really good on paper and I can slip taxes if I order from China.

So the price will be the same as mx1 + taxes. The thing is that I've some experience with Sparrow-B too, and it wasn't too good.

Sparrow was kind of dull and simply lifeless. mx1 is much more portable too and I have a good wall wart to use with it (ripple <60mV).

So what would you buy?

 

NFB12 is even duller then Sparrow. It has an artificial roll-of on highs. My clear suggestion is go for Audinst Hud MX1. Why ? I had this device for a year, and I also own an NFB11 (which is 280$ retail). On direct A/B comparison Audinst performed surprisingly well, had bigger soundstage, more 3D space, better bass kick. NFB11 brought better detail and rafinement, but it wasn't a clear upgrade over MX1. It was a side-grade. So, if even a Sabre32 NFB DAC could not outperform Audinst, I seriously doubt Wolfson DAC would. If you may accept a soundcard, go for Asus STX , E-Mu 1212 or even Creative Elite Pro (used), these would outperform both DAC_s for less money... 
 

 


Edited by AlexRoma - 8/19/11 at 3:01am
post #315 of 408

Thanks for your answer. I was afraid that NFB-12 is a lot like Sparrow...

So it'll be mx1 all the way for me :)

I'm using laptop, so soundcards are not for me right now.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Review : AUDINST HUD-MX1 DAC/amp - a promising newcomer (compared to Audio-gd FUN, AMB Gamma2)