Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Let's Cut to the Chase- S:Flo2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Let's Cut to the Chase- S:Flo2 - Page 5

Poll Results: Is the S:Flo2 noticably better sounding than Cowon, Sony, Samsung, Apple, Zune, and Sansa products?

 
  • 55% (38)
    Yes
  • 44% (30)
    No
68 Total Votes  
post #61 of 84

No offense, mobbaddict. You're great because you are one of the few people that took the time to do a true blind test and post your results. To be honest, I just didn't phrase that section correctly. By saying "don't like the S:Flo's SQ" I specifically meant that you are the only one (that I read) that didn't like the S:Flo's SQ more than other consumer DAPs. Though I do trust Shigzeo, I got mixed messages from him. You does seem to be a "no-voter" in the post you pointed me towards, but in post #50 (see below) he seems to be a "yes-voter". I didn't count shigzeo because I didn't understand what he meant, unless he simply changed his mind in between posts.

 

EDIT: Was Shigzeo comparing the Headphone Out's of the players? If so, then this completely makes sense.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mobbaddict View Post


I don't dislike the s:flo at all, i just said it doesn't do anything better than a regular DAP (Sansa Clip for instance). Soundstage and detail are extremely similar.

And you missed shigzeo's comment (someone who can be trusted)

http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/493409/let-s-cut-to-the-chase-s-flo2/30#post_6666836

 

And i agree that the line out is great. It's not really better than the headphone out soundwise but it has a lot of voltage: just as much as my CDP when paired with my Stax rig.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post

The Clip's headphone out is great, but not particularly 'wide' or ping clean. I'd take the LO from the S:Flo to an amp over the clip anyday. The T3 is actually a great, great amp (not only for the price), so I am a fan. I'd imagine that if the Clip had a wider, iPod-like stereo image, the HPO to an amp might be a worthy comparison when level-matched. It's not though, and clearly the LO on the S:Flo is clearer with the same amp and cable. That I agree on. But then, it's huge. I prefer to go ampless unless I am really prepared to audiophile it up whilst out and about. At home, I am pretty much always with amp. 


Edited by violinvirtuoso - 5/31/10 at 4:56pm
post #62 of 84

I was comparing the HPO before, but then brought in why would you compare the LO to the HPO and had some non-fans of that thought. So, I mentioned that the reason the Clip doesn't sound as clean or wide from the HPO as the S:Flo from the LO is that its stereo image is clogged in comparison. That can really mean a big difference between 'clarity' and 'mud'. 

 

Comparing the two on LO to HPO doesn't make sense to me because it adds a difference output stage to the S:Flo (an amp) or the little engine who could (Clip) to get a booster (amp). HPO to HPO compares both units 'sound', and there are small differences, some that favour the clip, some that favour the S:Flo. One thing the S:Flo does better is a cleaner midrange - something I really like in my music. But as I mentioned, I noticed an overall 'smooth' sound that doesn't pair as well to all genres. 

 

For touch screens, the S:Flo is amazing because of: LO and price ain't bad. But it isn't doing anything but sustaining a good stereo image better than any other DAP from the HPO despite its legendary 'no changes' output.

post #63 of 84

No gapless playback: paperweight.

post #64 of 84

No problem violinvirtuoso. It's easy to do blind tests (you need two similar extension cables), if people really hear big differences from the HPO it's a very simple way to prove it...

Let us know your opinion when get yours :)

 

Shigzeo: what about comparing the s:flo LO to a ipod/iphone LO? That would be more fair.

edit: just saw your post :)


Edited by mobbaddict - 6/1/10 at 1:23am
post #65 of 84

Sorry, I did compare the two - they are both very good, very good. But the S:Flo has a slight edge in stereo separation, probably the reason that it at some points sounds clearer. But the difference between them is quite small. Neither is a clear winner. Tested through the iBasso T3D. Both use great DAC's in terms of giving up detail and producing lively music. I wouldn't pin one as a winner over the other unless you are just in it for a certain signature. 

 

S:Flo (Teclast T51) vs iPod touch 2G LO RMAA tests via iBasso T3D

post #66 of 84


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianmedium View Post

 

This sound comes so close to the sound I heard in the studio but with the added benefit of being slightly smoother and slightly less analytical. We needed to analyze every last detail in the studio to make sure the quality was high. However that can be very tiring on the ears so the secret to good production and mastering is to keep as much detail as possible but also to make the experience a pleasure to listen to..This recording I am happy to say achieves that (IMHO!)

 



Hi Ian,

 

I like to hear good music. And would be happier if they are executed properly. Do you mind to inform us what music/album it is, and when will it be released (if they are to be)?

 

Thanks,

David

post #67 of 84

Hi David.

 

I asked my client but she would rather wait to go public with the launch once all the publicity work is in motion. Once that is done (and I have to get on with writing the liner notes for the album before that!) then I will post a thread on the forum with details.

 

I can say that she is very aware of the importance of sound quality from a HIFI perspective and the album certainly sounds very good on a decent set up ( I just listened to it yesterday through a DCS/Krell/Sonus faber set up and it sounded wonderful through that!)

 

Her music has many influences, urban jazz right through to Elizabethan influence madrigals!

post #68 of 84

Hey I want to ask which get better sounding, Cowon S9 or S:flo2?

post #69 of 84

iPhone4G - I think it would be best to ask which has x signature and which has y signature. I think the whole 'better sounding' thing only gets more complicated by questions since everyone has a different answer. Some prefer this sound, some prefer that; others prefer the sound, any sound just doesn't come from one company, and that everything from y company is absolute grace, despite anything factual.

 

Maybe you should tell us what your requirements are for sound. What are you looking for and don't say stuff like 'silky midrange' as that will just lure fanbois from both camps to in charge their favourite platform. 

post #70 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by iPhone4G View Post

Hey I want to ask which get better sounding, Cowon S9 or S:flo2?





Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post

iPhone4G - I think it would be best to ask which has x signature and which has y signature. I think the whole 'better sounding' thing only gets more complicated by questions since everyone has a different answer. Some prefer this sound, some prefer that; others prefer the sound, any sound just doesn't come from one company, and that everything from y company is absolute grace, despite anything factual.

 

Maybe you should tell us what your requirements are for sound. What are you looking for and don't say stuff like 'silky midrange' as that will just lure fanbois from both camps to in charge their favourite platform. 


But does the s:flo2 or the S9 have a distinct sound signature? People post that the iPods sound somewhat tinny and some of the sony players are more full bodied but not so much about either the S9 or the s:flo2. I agree with what you're saying but with DAPs, how much of the player's "sound sig" really makes an impact? 

 

But to answer that question, on a flat setting the s:flo2 is better. The S9 does have a better equalizer and more functions to morph the sound if you want to change it. 

post #71 of 84
Quote:
Originally Posted by Young Spade View Post








But does the s:flo2 or the S9 have a distinct sound signature? People post that the iPods sound somewhat tinny and some of the sony players are more full bodied but not so much about either the S9 or the s:flo2. I agree with what you're saying but with DAPs, how much of the player's "sound sig" really makes an impact? 

 

But to answer that question, on a flat setting the s:flo2 is better. The S9 does have a better equalizer and more functions to morph the sound if you want to change it. 


Thanks.

post #72 of 84

No problem man. 

post #73 of 84

been a long time since I posted here in head-fi and as soon as logged in here....you guys made me purchase an S4 immediately. :)

 

been following this thread for 5 days already and so far looks like there's no clear winner on which sounds better. For those who own the s:flo2, hows their build quality now? i'm looking in the market as well for a new DAP that sounds good and has .txt file support

 

Used to own the original s:flo and sound wise, its warmer than the ipod 5.5/nano 3G BUT the D2 beats the SQ by a mile (the cowon makes an mp3 file sound less artificial).

 

post #74 of 84

The S:Flo is made quite reasonably. I don't think that dropping it would be clever, but otherwise, the thing should survive some sort of pocket holocaust.

post #75 of 84

My girlfriend dropped mine in a party from about 4 ft above the wooden floor. The player landed face down, and it's still working. I would never let her get close enough again...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Let's Cut to the Chase- S:Flo2