Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Colorfly CK4 first review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Colorfly CK4 first review - Page 7

post #91 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


I also owned the Sansa Fuze and at one point the Sansa Fuze plus (which I found sounded even better than the Fuze and better than the iphone4 IMO). But the Fuze plus UI was just a joke. Still not even close to the sound quality I got from my older Studio V :P. Why not send me over your CK4+ and I can give a real comparison smily_headphones1.gif. Also what headphones did he use to do his reviews with? TF10s? lol. Hey I'll make a deal with you. If indeed the player sounds better than the Studio V I'd sell my Studio V and buy a CK4 wink.gif.

Yes I owned Fuze+ for a while, the UI was a little lacking. I didn't like the SQ really either. I'd love to let you try CK4+ Lee, especially with your 1plus2, these are the problems of being on opposite sides of the world unfortunately. You have some admiring run times there though. 8 hours does become a choir. But....compared to something like the Cowon S9, CK4+ sounds like you're carrying a portable Hifi system. The sound it produces for those 8 hours is highly impressive. The mids are just like melt your brain slushy with the right IEM.
post #92 of 249
things heating up in here LOL kinda hope the ck4 beats the studio, then we have a real winner on our hands...
post #93 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachchen1996 View Post

things heating up in here LOL kinda hope the ck4 beats the studio, then we have a real winner on our hands...


Well it would be great as everyone would save money but as far as I see it now it's just speculation and wishful thinking ;). I'm even trying to get my RMAA testing set up properly to do testing on Amps and DAPs but haven't gotten any real solid guides on how to do it. Most of the guides are half assed and don't go into full detail on how to do what and exactly how you do it. It is kinda sad as I think RMAA could be quite helpful if properly implemented. From what I am gathering from the lack of information on how to do it many may be doing it wrong and spreading misinformation.


Edited by lee730 - 12/2/12 at 6:44pm
post #94 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


Well it would be great as everyone would save money but as far as I see it now it's just speculation and wishful thinking wink.gif.

OR, you jus mad that you might've wasted some precious benjamins biggrin.gif
post #95 of 249
CK4+ uses Cirrus CS4398 flagship DAC chip. (take note of the word 'flagship')

Cirrus CS4398 PDF

That alone would be putting Studio V's DAC at high risk keeping up.






What DAC does Studio V use Lee? smile.gif I forget the name.
Edited by H20Fidelity - 12/2/12 at 6:54pm
post #96 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post

CK4+ uses Cirrus CS4398 flagship DAC chip. (take note of the word 'flagship')
Cirrus CS4398 PDF
That alone would be putting Studio V's DAC at high risk keeping up.

What DAC does Studio V use Lee? smile.gif I forget the name.


And what is your point H20? My UHA6 MKII also has that chip and IMO the DAC sucks in comparison to my Studio V & DACport LX. It actually degrades the amp section in the UHA6 MKII. The real bread and butter is plugging it directly into the DACport LX and bypassing the Cirrus logic chip. Not a small difference either. A night and day one.


Edited by lee730 - 12/2/12 at 7:20pm
post #97 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


And what is your point H20? My UHA6 MKII also has that chip and IMO the DAC sucks in comparison to my Studio V & DACport LX. It actually degrades the amp section in the UHA6 MKII. The real bread and butter is plugging it directly into the DACport LX and bypassing the Cirrus logic chip. Not a small difference either. A night and day one.

You didn't answer my question Lee. What DAC does Studio V use? Just tell me that please.
post #98 of 249

Studio V is a pile of junk next to the ck4 that is for sure.  But dont let lee's bias get in the way of things, sometimes he doesnt quite know what he's talking about.

post #99 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by stozzer123 View Post

Studio V is a pile of junk next to the ck4 that is for sure.  But dont let lee's bias get in the way of things, sometimes he doesnt quite know what he's talking about.


I beg to differ on that Stozzer lol :P.

post #100 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post


You didn't answer my question Lee. What DAC does Studio V use? Just tell me that please.


It uses a Sigmatel DAC. My point is though it is all in the implementation. Thus my comment earlier. Just because the UHA6 MKII has the Cirrus Logic DAC doesn't mean it's a magical DAC and sounds amazing. Because in reality it doesn't. It sounds better than an ipod or Sansa that's for sure. But then again that isn't really something to write home about at least from the audio gear that I have in comparison. My offer is still open. I'd love to demo your unit if you are willing. My Rocoo BA will be going to you eventually anyways ;).

 

Bias won't affect my opinion if I feel the CK4 is better indeed my Studio V will go up for sale. Obviously bias hasn't affected my opinion on the Studio V otherwise I'd think it sounds like **** because it uses a Sigmatel DAC and consists of only $30.00 parts like Stozzer likes to parade around.


Edited by lee730 - 12/2/12 at 8:44pm
post #101 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


It uses a Sigmatel DAC. My point is though it is all in the implementation. Thus my comment earlier. Just because the UHA6 MKII has the Cirrus Logic DAC doesn't mean it's a magical DAC and sounds amazing. Because in reality it doesn't. It sounds better than an ipod or Sansa that's for sure. But then again that isn't really something to write home about at least from the audio gear that I have in comparison. My offer is still open. I'd love to demo your unit if you are willing. My Rocoo BA will be going to you eventually anyways wink.gif.

Bias won't affect my opinion if I feel the CK4 is better indeed my Studio V will go up for sale. Obviously bias hasn't affected my opinion on the Studio V otherwise I'd think it sounds like **** because it uses a Sigmatel DAC and consists of only $30.00 parts like Stozzer likes to parade around.

Well, I'll consider sending CK4 your way in the future. I'm by no means saying CK4+ is a better DAP than Studio V, that would surely be naive of me without hearing it. I am very reluctant to choose an opinion without hearing any device in question personally. So, this isn't about which is the better player or taking the most donuts. that's not my point, my point was CK4 uses some high quality components and V does not, that makes me question leaning towards the reviews opinion even more so. I just feel that the Frenchmans review and my opinion having three players there forms a reasonable conclusion IMO because the graphs measure up to what I'm hearing between them. Plus, besides your praise for the player I've read some pretty negative non Head-fi related reviews on Studio V, especially at it's asking price.

I think what happened here is a friendly disagreement, you enjoying Studio V very much and myself enjoying CK4+ while both of us haven't heard the other. tongue.gif

Just a friendly game of tag really. smile.gif
Edited by H20Fidelity - 12/2/12 at 9:45pm
post #102 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


And what is your point H20? My UHA6 MKII also has that chip and IMO the DAC sucks in comparison to my Studio V & DACport LX. It actually degrades the amp section in the UHA6 MKII. The real bread and butter is plugging it directly into the DACport LX and bypassing the Cirrus logic chip. Not a small difference either. A night and day one.

So now, to stick up for your beloved studio, you are countering with external components?  The topic put forward to you was that the ck4 is using a cirrus chip, no.  Also having owned the UHA6 I also put it that you are talking nonsense again to get you point over.  I think the issue here is not that someone should review this or that player but they should review your ears undefined.  Again you have absolutely no Idea on  manufacturing process and component limitations, absolutely none other than what you have gleaned since joining head-fi.  I'm sure many will be awaiting your personal testing you plan to do on the studio as I'm sure a first timer will provide us with much better results than those established reports from consistent RMAA providerswink_face.gif

post #103 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by stozzer123 View Post

So now, to stick up for your beloved studio, you are countering with external components?  The topic put forward to you was that the ck4 is using a cirrus chip, no.  Also having owned the UHA6 I also put it that you are talking nonsense again to get you point over.  I think the issue here is not that someone should review this or that player but they should review your ears undefined.  Again you have absolutely no Idea on  manufacturing process and component limitations, absolutely none other than what you have gleaned since joining head-fi.  I'm sure many will be awaiting your personal testing you plan to do on the studio as I'm sure a first timer will provide us with much better results than those established reports from consistent RMAA providerswink_face.gif


Actually I think to concern with hearing damage is regarding your ears. Since you said you listened to the Studio V at near max volumes. I'd say you are the one who needs to get your ears checked ;).

post #104 of 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by stozzer123 View Post

So now, to stick up for your beloved studio, you are countering with external components?  The topic put forward to you was that the ck4 is using a cirrus chip, no.  Also having owned the UHA6 I also put it that you are talking nonsense again to get you point over.  I think the issue here is not that someone should review this or that player but they should review your ears undefined.  Again you have absolutely no Idea on  manufacturing process and component limitations, absolutely none other than what you have gleaned since joining head-fi.  I'm sure many will be awaiting your personal testing you plan to do on the studio as I'm sure a first timer will provide us with much better results than those established reports from consistent RMAA providerswink_face.gif


Actually I think the concern with hearing damage is regarding your ears. Since you said you listened to the Studio V at near max volumes. I'd say you are the one who needs to get your ears checked ;).

post #105 of 249

lol the classic I'm not stupid your stupid argument.......  tongue_smile.gifbeerchug.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › Colorfly CK4 first review