Originally Posted by AnakChan
I think you've clearly misunderstood my message. I didn't say that technology and audio cannot co-exist. I'm saying when I'm on Head-Fi, I know my priorities are about audio. Technology OTOH, is merely a tool to implement/execute that audio to it's advertised specs. So if a DAPs plays audiofiles beautifully, it's fulfilled it's goal - it doesn't have the latest OS. Similarly with the HM901 having dual DACs - I'd rather make my conclusions after listening to one rather than just disrepute a product based on theory. I don't believe that we have mastered and quantified the science of sound 100% 'cos if we did, then we'd all be solely be reading graphs and waterfalls charts to make our decisions. The ultimate decision will still be my ears.
That is with my head-fi hat on.
If you can conclusively tell me that the DX100/HDP-R10 will improve it's SQ, ability to sort tracks correctly with every album upload, or correctly recognise ID3 tags and artwork just by upgrading its OS to ICS or JB, then my ears are open to your reasoning. Similarly if you can conclusively guarantee that the HM901 would sound exactly the same without the additional DAC, I'd also lend you my ears.
It is not theory.
It is 16 years of experience talking. ;)
I can not conclusive state anything especially on someone ELSE shoddy development work. Mind you that it is not even iBasso doing the work. It is RockChip since it is there closed system. I still don't get how the MusicT60.apk player takes so long to index. My guess. they created there own file read routine instead of leveraging google's.
With that said, judging by what was released. I am sure that there development skills are not up to googles work, or even the majority of the xda developers. and the last aforementioned group are usually lone person working on couple of device.
Just in the SAME OS 2.3.1... ver 1.1.7 was imporved by 1.2.3. SQ (at least some people thought so making that a SUBJECTIVE gain) meaning that "sound" has more than just the OS to contend with. again can not tell you anything because people hear differently. Some liked it. Some don't. But without an objective form of measurement... it is all subjective. So if the same OS had "improvements" within it's own version, why would ANY one say that an OS would improve SQ? Hell I didn't even say that. What it did say is that it might improve memory managment, better HAL, better power management. Of course all this has to be CODED for it.
Drivers, how the DSP is leverage, the external routines to leverage the ESS chip, the code itself (loops, integer useage v floating point) any filters that are being put in place. Without access to the DSP code, better SQ is based on just it's predecessor and not a 20-20khz plus minus 0 dB deviation. One being subjective, one being objective.
So again, with the Dual DSP in the 901. That has to be coded for and for true impartiallity, DBx performed. Then and ONLY then can one objectively compare if there is infact differences. otherwise the words, I think, it feels, it sounds etc are used. Like I said, Fig-666 will have quad DSP in them. 32 channels out. Good enough to control a studio mixer. ;)