Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › iBasso DX100 or Colorfly C4 or iRiver AK100
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iBasso DX100 or Colorfly C4 or iRiver AK100 - Page 2

post #16 of 27

What about the AK100? Seems like nobody mentioned them.

 

Will like to know how it fares when compared to the HM-801.

post #17 of 27
Thread Starter 

so people which is the best? only in terms of SQ. i trust your judgement

post #18 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by LionPlushie View Post

What about the AK100? Seems like nobody mentioned them.

 

Will like to know how it fares when compared to the HM-801.


there is a really bad impression of it in headfonia, where there is little praise sung to it besides its build quality

post #19 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retrias View Post


there is a really bad impression of it in headfonia, where there is little praise sung to it besides its build quality

For HM-801 or the AK100?

 

Well.. My friends like it very much. Some said it is at least 85% of DX100.


Edited by LionPlushie - 1/10/13 at 6:39am
post #20 of 27

For the AK 100 , maybe its not as bad as it make it sound, but its generally worse than most of the players review I have seen there
 

post #21 of 27

On the black background alone it easily betters the DX100, the Solo, the Hifiman HM60X series, the Hifiman HM801, and even the Altmann Tera by a slight margin. That’s pretty much all the high end player in the market today. And yet it has such a cold static feel to the sound. Un-analog. Lacks fluidity. Lacks warmth, among other things. Moderate dynamic range. Relatively flat sound stage with disappointing layering. Ugh. My interest in the AK100 went from peak high to almost zero.

 

 

Pretty much summarizes the article. But apparently it seems that what you are using it with also affects how well it sounds..

post #22 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thracian View Post

I went to try the DX100 and was shocked at how slow it took to change songs. I don't know if its a problem with the tester, but changing from song to song literally took 5 seconds.

Yep.

 

It is that slow. Reason at this time is because when you change the file, the DX100 resets the ESS every single time regardless if the Bit Depth/Frequency changes or not. That is also the reason that manually changing music introduces about .5 second fadein when the music starts. That will all change with the upcoming firmware ;)

post #23 of 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by figgie View Post

Yep.

 

It is that slow. Reason at this time is because when you change the file, the DX100 resets the ESS every single time regardless if the Bit Depth/Frequency changes or not. That is also the reason that manually changing music introduces about .5 second fadein when the music starts. That will all change with the upcoming firmware ;)

I cannot wait for the new firmware. 

post #24 of 27

I have the latest firmware on the DX and I can change songs in about 1 second and from album to album in just about 1.5 seconds. Maybe I misread the post above.

post #25 of 27
Thread Starter 

i think i would buy the DX100 but i still curious with the C4 and AK100 SQ against the DX100

post #26 of 27

Define SQ. If you are looking for a specific sound then all this sound quality discussion is moot. If you are interested in simply 100% the closest sound reproduction to the original wave, then the DX100 is it. You'll have to decide what you want. SQ isn't at headfi, a well-defined, or agreed upon term. The metric upon which it is doomed is your decision.

post #27 of 27

I owned Colorfly C3 rececently. C3 sounds very much better than ipod or Fuze despite a very poor UI.

I just curious if C4 sounds many times better than C3?

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 or Colorfly C4 or iRiver AK100