Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The Fiio X3 Thread.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Fiio X3 Thread. - Page 98

post #1456 of 17217

bahh just upgraded to CF modded ipod!

 

Should i get the X3 or wait it out for the X5?

post #1457 of 17217
Sorry, ClieOS, if you mentioned it before...but, considering also what canikickit1 just said: do you know how the X3 SQ could compare to a Rockboxed ipod? ( I have a 5.5 gen video myself).
Thanks!
post #1458 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post


Have you even read the post you quoted?

I agreed with ClieOS that implementation is important

It's not "everything" though, no matter how good implementation is, you can't get from a chip more than it can give.

 

X3 is E17 that can play music. I do own E17 and ES9023-based DACs, so I can compare.

 

What exactly was stated as "not happening"? My question if FIIO plans to release any Sabre-based products is still unanswered.

 

Quoting what you said in the last post was just to let you know my comments are directed at you. You are saying that the ES9023 DAC chip is somehow superior to the other DAC chips, specifically the WM8740 and the planned DAC chip for the X5, the PCM1792. I'm saying where is your evidence? Obviously, all DACs differ sonically, even the ones using the same DAC chip. Why would any high end company (not referring to FiiO, this is purely an example) that makes DACs not maximize the full potential of their DAC chip? What I'm saying is, I believe implementation is everything. Meaning regardless of how good a DAC chip can be, the potential might be there, but if the execution is not, then the DAC will sound like crap. Also, I'm not trying to defend or even agree with ClieOS (he is more than qualified to do this himself), so stating that you agree with ClieOS is irrelevant. What I'm saying is, you are arguing and asking why FiiO isn't implementing any of the ESS chips, well they answered you. 

 

Originally Posted by JamesFiiO View Post

 

1, From the Objective tested result, WM8740 is better than ES9023. 

 

2, From the purchased price, WM8740 is expensive than ES9023.

 

3, From the subjective SQ , the hiss(noise) of WM8740 is lower than ES9023. ( it maybe the most noticeable thing among subjective tested )

 

4, WM8740 still is the flagship DAC from Wolfson which designed for portable used, of course, WM8741/42 are better but it is for desktop used. 

 

We can see lots of HiFi audio device used WM8740, the price range cover from $60 - $1500. includes Linn, Sony, iRiver and some famous brand. of course, but as I known , not so many brand used ES9023 . 

 

the world will become quite boring if every brand bring the same thing to the end customers, that is the one reason why we change to PCM1792 but not WM8741, it is more logical to upgrade from WM8740 to WM8741 in X5. and don't forget 

 

we start to use WM8740 from 2009. we are not follower .

 

BTW, we have very good relationship with ESS, in 10 years ago, ESS was famous by their chip sets for DVD. and I was working in the company ( now called OPPO ) who was the biggest customer of ESS, and the Soc of our D7 is made by

 

ESS too. 

 

Edited by Greed - 6/6/13 at 1:22pm
post #1459 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post

 

Quoting what you said in the last post was just to let you know my comments are directed at you. You are saying that the ES9023 DAC chip is somehow superior to the other DAC chips, specifically the WM8740 and the planned DAC chip for the X5, the PCM1792. I'm saying where is your evidence? Obviously, all DACs differ sonically, even the ones using the same DAC chip. Why would any high end company (not referring to FiiO, this is purely an example) that makes DACs not maximize the full potential of their DAC chip? What I'm saying is, I believe implementation is everything. Meaning regardless of how good a DAC chip can be, the potential might be there, but if the execution is not, then the DAC will sound like crap. Also, I'm not trying to defend or even agree with ClieOS (he is more than qualified to do this himself), so stating that you agree with ClieOS is irrelevant. What I'm saying is, you are arguing and asking why FiiO isn't implementing any of the ESS chips, well they answered you. 

 

"Full potential" means different things for different chips.

The best implementation in the world won't be able to go beyond the chip's limitation.

And the "best" is a different thing for different companies - depending on the talent they have and the amount of money/effort they can afford to pour into the product. In the Hi-Fi business more money is often spent on marketing than development.

 

My "evidence" is the DACs I own.

 

Nowhere in James's respond did he say anything about using or not using Sabre DACs in the future.

That's all I want to know.

Don't have the intention to convince anyone which DAC is the best.

Everyone spends their money the way they want.

I already own 4 Sabre based DACs (ODAC + 3 Hifimediy), and the fifth one (NFB-11.32) is on the way.

post #1460 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post

"Full potential" means different things for different chips.

The best implementation in the world won't be able to go beyond the chip's limitation.

And the "best" is a different thing for different companies - depending on the talent they have and the amount of money/effort they can afford to pour into the product. In the Hi-Fi business more money is often spent on marketing than development.

 

My "evidence" is the DACs I own.

 

Nowhere in James's respond did he say anything about using or not using Sabre DACs in the future.

That's all I want to know.

Don't have the intention to convince anyone which DAC is the best.

Everyone spends their money the way they want.

I already own 4 Sabre based DACs (ODAC + 3 Hifimediy), and the fifth one (NFB-11.32) is on the way.

 

Full potential, is just that... full potential. Meaning utilizing as much of the technology as possible (that is known, obv). No where did I say implementation goes past limitation, that should be fairly obvious, even to average consumers. I agree with your assessment of the "best", it is subjective, but many people here and on other forums will have the same idea of what are the "best" brands and models of DACs.

 

The underline above I do not agree with 100%. I do agree many more mainstream audio companies follow this, but IMO the best DACs are made by boutique and relatively small business that don't spend much on marketing. I'd say the same goes for amps as well. Although, FiiO does fall into the category that you believe.

 

As far as your evidence goes, that is subjective... not objective. No where does objective information say or read that the ESS chips have more clarity or are superior. You obviously like the Sabre chips, that is great, I do too... but that doesn't mean that I can't get the same SQ or better with different DAC chips. The answer I quoted from James seems pretty clear to me. They aren't going to use the ESS chip for said reasons 1, 2, 3, etc. Beyond that, you are talking atleast a year before FiiO decides to go forth with new projects. The X5 is still months away, so your question would be hard to answer I assume.  

post #1461 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post

 

Quoting what you said in the last post was just to let you know my comments are directed at you. You are saying that the ES9023 DAC chip is somehow superior to the other DAC chips, specifically the WM8740 and the planned DAC chip for the X5, the PCM1792. I'm saying where is your evidence? Obviously, all DACs differ sonically, even the ones using the same DAC chip. Why would any high end company (not referring to FiiO, this is purely an example) that makes DACs not maximize the full potential of their DAC chip? What I'm saying is, I believe implementation is everything. Meaning regardless of how good a DAC chip can be, the potential might be there, but if the execution is not, then the DAC will sound like crap. Also, I'm not trying to defend or even agree with ClieOS (he is more than qualified to do this himself), so stating that you agree with ClieOS is irrelevant. What I'm saying is, you are arguing and asking why FiiO isn't implementing any of the ESS chips, well they answered you. 

 

Based on the actual experience from many headfiers that iBasso DX100 (or HDP-R10) & Hifiman HM-901 have already proven they are among the best sounding DAPs. And so happened they are using dual ES9023 DAC chips. This gives impression that ES9023 is a better DAC chip.

 

However iRiver AK-120 with dual WM8740 has also proven to be the best DAP that competing with DX100 (or HDP-R10) & HiFiman HM-901.

 

From the trend, to be the best sounding DAP that on par with DX100 (or HDP-R10), HM-901  & AK120, most probably you need at least 2 pcs of DAC chips.

 

Thus, I can say both ES9023 & WM8740 are equally good. But the final implementation would be the key that decides the success of best sounding DAP.

 

Since Fiio X5 will be competing with DX100 (or HDP-R10), HM-901 & AK120 in the sound quality, the question here can the single PCM1792 DAC chip and its circuitry implementation in X5 can match or even sound better than those mentioned DAPs?


Edited by cyberalpha11 - 6/6/13 at 3:32pm
post #1462 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post

Why are you still arguing about something that has already been stated is not happening? The X3 hasn't been released, and the X5 is a long way from being released, there is no reason to assume the Sabre chip is better when you haven't even heard what FiiO has to offer for its budget DAP. Having a Sabre chip does not mean it will sound better than any of the other DAC chips, period. It has been proved before in both desktop and semi-transportable components. Heck, so of the best DACs in the world, don't use the ES chips... so proclaiming that they are indeed better is false. Implementation is everything. 
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberalpha11 View Post

Thus, I can say both ES9023 & WM8740 are equally good. But the final implementation would be the key that decides the success of best sounding DAP.

+1

I don't understand either why this conversation even started. The X3 is in production. Didn't ClieOS or James say that the firmware has reached 1.0 status? All that is left is to hear and/or test the X3 to see how it is, and it won't be that long before people can. Carrying on arguments about what might/what should been for the DAC chip right now is a moot conversation. Now if it doesn't seem to perform well for the price, then this conversation might make a little more sense.

Why not stick to the topic of what the X3 is, and if people want to discuss a redesign, spare the rest of us and start a new thread? LOL
post #1463 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post



+1

I don't understand either why this conversation even started. The X3 is in production. Didn't ClieOS or James say that the firmware has reached 1.0 status? All that is left is to hear and/or test the X3 to see how it is, and it won't be that long before people can. Carrying on arguments about what might/what should been for the DAC chip right now is a moot conversation. Now if it doesn't seem to perform well for the price, then this conversation might make a little more sense.

Why not stick to the topic of what the X3 is, and if people want to discuss a redesign, spare the rest of us and start a new thread? LOL


Why so many people here fail to comprehend English?

I never questioned choices for X3/X5, just asked why nobody (not just FIIO) uses ES9023 DAC for their DAPs, and if FIIO has any plans to use any Sabre DACs in any of their future products (not just DAPs).

post #1464 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post


Why so many people here fail to comprehend English?
I never questioned choices for X3/X5, just asked why nobody (not just FIIO) uses ES9023 DAC for their DAPs, and if FIIO has any plans to use any Sabre DACs in any of their future products (not just DAPs).

May be JamesFiio can consider your suggestion in X7?biggrin.gif
post #1465 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberalpha11 View Post


May be JamesFiio can consider your suggestion in X7?biggrin.gif


I am sure that someone will step in and use this wonderful,yet cheap DAC in their DAP. May be Hifimediy or another enthusiast shop.

post #1466 of 17217
And I thought that I take threads off topic,...major derailment in progress!!!

popcorn.gif
Edited by tds101 - 6/6/13 at 5:53pm
post #1467 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by tds101 View Post

And I thought that I take threads off topic,...major derailment in progress!!!

popcorn.gif


I agree, let's stop the Sabre discussion.

post #1468 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post


Why so many people here fail to comprehend English?

I never questioned choices for X3/X5, just asked why nobody (not just FIIO) uses ES9023 DAC for their DAPs, and if FIIO has any plans to use any Sabre DACs in any of their future products (not just DAPs).

 

Go buy a DX100 or HM901. There, done. 

post #1469 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greed View Post

 

Go buy a DX100 or HM901. There, done. 


I'm asking about an existence of a DAP based on a dirt cheap (less than 10$) DAC and you recommend ~800-1000$ ones based on a different DAC?

post #1470 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post


Why so many people here fail to comprehend English?
I never questioned choices for X3/X5, just asked why nobody (not just FIIO) uses ES9023 DAC for their DAPs, and if FIIO has any plans to use any Sabre DACs in any of their future products (not just DAPs).

Huh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post


I agree, let's stop the Sabre discussion.

Good. You got my point that the discussion was off topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post


I'm asking about an existence of a DAP based on a dirt cheap (less than 10$) DAC and you recommend ~800-1000$ ones based on a different DAC?

Maybe not. Just wanted to start another off topic discussion? LOL
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The Fiio X3 Thread.