Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › iBasso DX100:24 bit for bit, PG 1> Reviews & Impressions, Downloads, VIDEO, NEW Firmware 1.4.2.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iBasso DX100:24 bit for bit, PG 1> Reviews & Impressions, Downloads, VIDEO, NEW Firmware 1.4.2. - Page 604

post #9046 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsalomon View Post


Their message can still be good news.  For example, if the Head-Fi community could try to get the PowerAmp people to develop a version for the DX100 under non-disclosure with iBasso.  While it's not a complete OS replacement, it certainly would result in a much better player.  I don't know the innards of the PowerAmp software, but it would seem to me that the changes might not be all that major...replacing AudioFlinger calls with the DX100 version instead.  We never know until we ask.  PowerAmp has an external API.  Perhaps Figgie could figure out how to make the PowerAmp API talk to the DX100 API.  I think we should ask iBasso who qualifies as a trusted company or person, or suggest that they consider talking with a few companies like PowerAmp or Nullsoft (WinAmp) about the possibilities.  We (the royal we, that would be you, temporaryname) could facilitate some initial discussions to see if this is even possible.

 

Just thinking out loud...


Also keep neutron in mind. Actually dimetri was very interested in the DX100 due to its 24/192 support and was even asking question about it. I'll see if I can get into contact with him again and maybe he and ibasso can also collaborate. Still I very much would love to have Power Amps UI. It is the best.

post #9047 of 12887

Hi Folks

 

that is great news!

 

On the API issue. I mentioned to them that I would be willing to sign an NDA as this would  be dealing in the source code side of things.

 

With that said,

 

the API are tied to OS... IE ANdroid. Notice there wording on the API, due to there and the Chipset (read RockChip) IP which for anyone that had any douobt who's hands is actually developing this, there is your answer. I do not need access to the source code API, i need access to the API themselves (which I have) to make the calls from. I learned this when I decompiled the whiskey player APK.

 

anyway, the Version of the OS should not matter for the API as long as the OS did not change the HAL to much, which to my knowledge, Android has not. The ONLY time that might not be true is under a multi-CPU HAL.

post #9048 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by figgie View Post

Hi Folks

 

that is great news!

 

On the API issue. I mentioned to them that I would be willing to sign an NDA as this would  be dealing in the source code side of things.

 

With that said,

 

the API are tied to OS... IE ANdroid. Notice there wording on the API, due to there and the Chipset (read RockChip) IP which for anyone that had any douobt who's hands is actually developing this, there is your answer. I do not need access to the source code API, i need access to the API themselves (which I have) to make the calls from. I learned this when I decompiled the whiskey player APK.

 

anyway, the Version of the OS should not matter for the API as long as the OS did not change the HAL to much, which to my knowledge, Android has not. The ONLY time that might not be true is under a multi-CPU HAL.


Can't wait for you to get your unit figgie! Then the 3 amigos can can do beta testing to get the perfect UI ;).

post #9049 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by temporaryname View Post

Hi guys,
Sorry to get your hopes up. The future is bright but not as open source bright.
Hi, Jan,
Thank you for your kind words. I have to clarify that: We only can give API to some trusted software company or people, and they have to sign a non-disclosure contract with us. They can use the API to develop 24/192 player for the DX100. As it is our business confidential and confidential of the chipset company, we cant open the schematics, and some development interface. It is impossible for third party to develop a new OS for the DX100. Anyway, we will keep working on the DSP development. It would be endless support. Thank you for your understanding.
Sincerely iBasso Audio
It's always fun to dream. When I finish this block of work I'll reply to iBasso suggesting all our ideas again, like an optional rockbox port or at least something that will make the dx100 function like one.

 

 

Impossible?

 

A phone is a lot more complicated yet you have Cygnamod and countless other takes on the OS for a lot of phones.

 

Wth device in hand.. I will take that as a challenge.. lol

 

ANd notice there wording

 

"We can't open the schematics (read source code, don't need it) and SOME development interfaces". They did not say ALL development interfaces.. that is great news. As long as the calls can be made globally from Application X. That is what is really needed. :)

 

What DO I mean?

 

Basically make the call to the API from

 

PowerAmp

WinAMP

foobar2000 (if it ever gets ported to android)

Monkey Audio

 

instead of the stock AudioFlinger...

 

this is progress in the right direction.


Edited by figgie - 11/14/12 at 5:21pm
post #9050 of 12887

popcorn.gif

post #9051 of 12887

I challenge you figgie!!!! ;)
 

post #9052 of 12887

Interesting.

 

Actually don't need to worry, it seems the statements from ibasso is just to clarify their rights for protecting their IP rights on their source code, and this is common for the software companies to make their product open source. I am not firmware developer, but as far as I understand, if we got the APIs and the testing device, basically we could do many things to mod the device as we like.

post #9053 of 12887
Waiting for the hm901 to come out, but Fang's attitude bothers me so I don't know, hmm I might just have to start saving for a dx100 tongue.gif The ibasso guys seem legit.
post #9054 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachchen1996 View Post

Waiting for the hm901 to come out, but Fang's attitude bothers me so I don't know, hmm I might just have to start saving for a dx100 tongue.gif The ibasso guys seem legit.


Good luck on the 901 lol. I won't even bother at this point. I am completely satisfied with my unit as of now and know they will fix the remaining issues already :).

post #9055 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


Good luck on the 901 lol. I won't even bother at this point. I am completely satisfied with my unit as of now and know they will fix the remaining issues already smily_headphones1.gif.

Hmm just found this article http://www.headfonia.com/audiophile-dap-2-0-ibassos-dx100/ it appears that the author thinks the 801 has better resolution, timbre, and soundstage.
post #9056 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachchen1996 View Post


Hmm just found this article http://www.headfonia.com/audiophile-dap-2-0-ibassos-dx100/ it appears that the author thinks the 801 has better resolution, timbre, and soundstage.


I think you should ask tupac what he thinks as he actually owns both units and doesn't have an incentive to say otherwise. I really don't put to much trust into headphonias reviews in general. I know he wasn't too happy because ibasso wasn't willing to loan him the DX100 for review. One reason why he doesn't do reviews on Leckertons amps because Nick is not willing to loan him his products and rightfully so. The DX100 is clearly superior to the 801 in both RMAA tests and sound quality. He is also making a judgement from an old firmware which is clearly not showing the DX100's true potential.


Edited by lee730 - 11/14/12 at 11:31pm
post #9057 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee730 View Post


I think you should ask tupac what he thinks as he actually owns both units and doesn't have an incentive to say otherwise. I really don't put to much trust into headphonias reviews in general. I know he wasn't too happy because ibasso wasn't willing to loan him the DX100 for review. One reason why he doesn't do reviews on Leckertons amps because Nick is not willing to loan him his products and rightfully so. The DX100 is clearly superior to the 901 in both RMAA tests and sound quality. He is also making a judgement from an old firmware which is clearly not showing this units true potential.

True, it appears he did review it when it was on its older firmware. The dilemma I'm in now is whether to save up a little more and get a used dx100 or continue saving up to get the tg334's first.
post #9058 of 12887
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachchen1996 View Post


True, it appears he did review it when it was on its older firmware. The dilemma I'm in now is whether to save up a little more and get a used dx100 or continue saving up to get the tg334's first.


Well what do you have for headphones or IEMs? I generally recommend upgrading your head gear first unless it is adequate enough to warrant upgrading the source. You can't go wrong with the 334s but also keep a look out on the Tralucent thread. You may be in for a very big surprise :).

post #9059 of 12887

i really love the synergy transparency on the tg334>dx100 line out..

 

 

mine is the hdp r10 dx100 (japanese version), do this and the dx100 have the same firmware updates?

post #9060 of 12887

I didn't wanna be rude when people saying 801 is several levels higher than DX100 on erji.net's hifiman zone, since it's like pouring gasoline on myself. Those fans will just bite like mad dogs even when they probably never heard of either 801 or dx100.

 

Dx100 is more powerful, spacious and more.....well probably better in everyway than 801 although certain people will still enjoy the house sound of 801 (forward mids, relaxed treble), especially out of the box when they don't know what sound they are looking for since 801 sounds different for sure. dx100 is even better driving sensitive IEMs because it should have lower output impedance than 801.  whatever I feed dx100 with, it brings out the most of my phones, big or small. so I don't know why people are like: hmm, you use 801 only with CIEMs? that's why?!.. or hmm you don't own balanced amp module of 801? that's like you never heard of 801.. what the hell? Even with balanced amp, 801 still sounds fairly unbalanced compared to dx100.

 

And don't call me a troll, because if you go back a few hundreds of pages on this thread, you probably see me questioning the sound of dx100 and hasitating buying one because I was so in love with my 801.

I gonna admit, with older firmwares of dx100 (apart from 1.1.7, 1.2.7). I would call it a draw between 801 and dx100. But 1.2.7 really outshines 801 by a significant extent which is why my 801 is on the exchange list for 901 now.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › iBasso DX100:24 bit for bit, PG 1> Reviews & Impressions, Downloads, VIDEO, NEW Firmware 1.4.2.