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

The Fiio X3 Thread. - Page 437

post #6541 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
 

James, have you tried re-encoding some of your files with a different encoder just to be sure it isn't a codec issue? I have an occasion where one of my FLAC file is also audibly distorted, but re-encoding fixes the problem and turns out to be the issue of the encoder.

 

Just run a RMAA test recently on both wav, flac, mp3 and acc using X3. Don't see any problem on wav and flac but mp3 and acc are both noticeably more distorted for sure, though in different ways. From the surface, they do look more like compression artifact. Then again, there is no easy way to be sure from my end.

 

You may have missed my earlier posts and the samples I provided. The links in my quoted post below are still active if you want to check it out for yourself.

 

The fact that the background noise is gone after you transcode the mp3 to flac should be sufficient proof that it's indeed an issue with the X3 decoder. Any mp3 compression artifact would definitely still be present in the transcoded flac file.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post
 

 

Those shares have expired, but Fiio already listened to my test files and confirmed this to be a bug two months ago. Anyway, I just made new shares for the mp3 and the flac that I transcoded from the mp3, in case you're interested.

 

Like I said in my post back then, it's a lame encoded mp3 (by myself, iirc) that exhibits horrible background noise on the X3 if you crank up the volume a bit. These are not mp3 compression artifacts, because the same file plays fine on my other DAPs. And moreover, if you transcode the very same mp3 file to flac (second link), it plays without that background noise on the X3.

 

As a side note, these artifacts sound very similar to those produced by PlayerPro on my SGS3 Android phone if I activate the PlayerPro's DSPPack. The moment I deactivate DSPPack, the background noise is gone. I've documented this bug on the PlayerPro forum a year ago, but it never got fixed.

post #6542 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesFiiO View Post
 

 

1, The RMAA test is not a serious reference for technical and  R/D if you are refer to the THD test result of MP3 , OGG, FLAC, WAV.

 

Correct, it´s for amateurs. Like me :)

It still shows very well what for example lossy codecs are capable of. It gives a 'face' to psychoacoustic encoding.

 

Quote:
2, of course, mp3 format will have bigger THD than other lossless format. that is why we need lossless DAPs.

 

I´ve seen you at hydrogenaudio, I thought that their message (mp3 is good, mp3 is perfect) would have had enough time to sink in ;)

No, I don´t agree with them. mp3 certainly is decent, lossless is better. But with the FiiO X3 mp3 could be good instead of only decent (or distorted :bigsmile_face:)

post #6543 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by razorblader View Post
 

Good point, RMAA is not really a proper tool for serious audio measurements.

 

Problem is that anything else but RMAA (a.k.a something producing meaningful measurements) costs money. Loads of money.

post #6544 of 17217
I dont see why it matters that NWavGuy is MIA and how that relates to showing how the X3 measures.

We have his measurements for the O2 along with an extremely detialed series of articles that explains what the measurements are, why they are important, what they tell us, and what to look for.

Then we have measurements for the X3 from fiio, although not as indepth as the O2 measurements.

The real problem is, no one wants to read and learn and do any critical thinking. Most of you, myself included, dont care enough. Its enough to have someone tell you "the X3 measures so well it competes with the O2" and then post some pictures of side by side graphs of the o2 and the X3. You have no clue what the graph means, no clue what it is showing, and no clue why it is important.

That is why I dont even bother much with measurements. Does it have bass roll off with a 16 ohm load? no? Good. Does it have any really bad distortion issues? Do basic measurements show that it is a neutral player? Good enough for me.

Apart from that I am concerned with usability and featureset. Can my music fit, how can i use it with other devices, does this purchase make sense with the rest of my hardware, etc.

I dont need a bunch of meaningless measurements and some random guy to tell me "yeah, your product measures extremely well". So what? If I like the way it sounds and it is passing basic quality control/specifications, who cares?

EDIT: example: 1/8th rule dictates that the bottlehead crack should not sound good with the HD650, but ive not found anyone who thinks that is a bad pairing. go figure. measurements and math arent everything, and i highly doubt the bottlehead crack has any glowing measurements. not with those tubes thrown in the mix. (lol glowing measurements, get it?)
Edited by shrimants - 11/22/13 at 6:40am
post #6545 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrimants View Post

Does it have bass roll off with a 16 ohm load? no? Good. Does it have any really bad distortion issues? Do basic measurements show that it is a neutral player? Good enough for me.

Apart from that I am concerned with usability and featureset. Can my music fit, how can i use it with other devices, does this purchase make sense with the rest of my hardware, etc.

I dont need a bunch of meaningless measurements and some random guy to tell me "yeah, your product measures extremely well". So what? If I like the way it sounds and it is passing basic quality control/specifications, who cares?

 

 

Well by your reasoning then, you must accept that your issues with the X3 are utterly trivial for OTHER people.

 

What your priorities are, won't be the same as other peoples. I am a classic example of that, where the things you are complaining about regarding the X3, are of no significance to me. What I want from it, is the best audio quality. 

 

Horses for courses. What is important for one person will be trivial to another and vice versa. 

post #6546 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by shrimants View Post

That depends on your sampling algorithm.

Playing at a higher bit depth (24) when your music is NOT at 24 does nothing. At best, it gives you finer control of the volume, at worst it does nothing. That depends on who is controling the volume: software or windows. If windows is controling the volume, you have a 16 bit signal being played at full dynamic range into windows sound, then you are controlling windows interface directly in terms of output. This is not ideal, and this i the point of WASAPI and ASIO output modes in the first place. If the software volume is the one being controlled, you are instead doing a 16 bit to 24 bit conversion, but the number wont change. IE you can only count from "1 to 10" with 16 bit, evn though 24 bit lets you count from "1 to 100", so if your source file is 16 bit, playing from a 24 bit output will do nothing but let you set the volume to "10". I hope that simplified things, its not really correct to say, but for the sake of understanding, its an OK example. Alternatively, you could map the outputs 1-10 to the output levels of 1-100, and that means that changing your output by 1 will change the volume of your source by, technically, 1/10th. So really it depends on how its implemented.

So just use wasapi and save yourself the headache.

For upsampling: it depends greatly on how it is implemented. Best case scenario: nothing happens. Worst case scenario, noise and crap is introduced into your stream.

My rule of thumb: if my source file is in a certain format, that is my output settings. That is why i dont bother wasting money on frivolous audiophoolery junk like 192/24 bit stuff. I dont have any sacd, i just use 16/44.1. (refer to the xiph.org article about high res formats, plus i cant find any sacd that i actually enjoy listening to. just stuffy classical and jazz music. blech).

I use Sinegen for testing
http://sinegen.en.lo4d.com/
I find that if windows is doing the sample rate conversion (e.g. sinegen playing at 44.1kHz and windows set to output anything other than 44.1kHz) I get ugly buzzing sounds instead of a pure tone. Best to leave sample rate of the X3 device in windows at 44.1kHz unless you are using a music player with built-in high quality resampling (such as foobar2000 with PPHS Resampler in DSP chain running Ultra mode). I use my DAC as a general sound source so I leave it at 44.1kHz (and leave PPHS resampler in foobar2000 resampling to 44.1kHz just to make sure I don't get caught out by the odd album that isn't 44.1kHz). But 24bits smily_headphones1.gif
post #6547 of 17217

OK, let's stop the argument about distortion of MP3, maybe there are better way to improve the decode for MP3 format, but it is not the job for us right now cause it is too difficult and we have better solution right now ( used flac/wav/ape/alac  and even aac ). 

 

 

and all I know that AAC/FLAC/ALAC is better than mp3 format in SQ. 

post #6548 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by phlashbios View Post

Well by your reasoning then, you must accept that your issues with the X3 are utterly trivial for OTHER people.

What your priorities are, won't be the same as other peoples. I am a classic example of that, where the things you are complaining about regarding the X3, are of no significance to me. What I want from it, is the best audio quality. 

Horses for courses. What is important for one person will be trivial to another and vice versa. 

Yes, of course, Im not saying that its not important. I'm saying that measurements are a low priority for me, and im saying that if you want to compare measurements or understand them, the O2 web page already has all the info you need. Nwavguy does not need to spoonfeed any information, thats all. More clearly stated: If you care, do the research and do some learning. Otherwise, live with it and be happy.

Also, James, I dont think your definition of "solution" is correct. Solution is when you fix a problem. What you are describing is "workaround".

mp3 is not being decoded correctly. "use something else" is not a solution. You cant say your product supports mp3 and then have poor mp3 decode.

And I dont like to see this "too difficult" argument. If its too difficult, then you have no business releasing the product and no business advertising it as a high quality product, IMO.

No one is telling you "this must be fixed right this instant". But we would like you to acknowledge there is a problem, we (marlene) have tested it and proven it, and we (head-fi) would like it fixed eventually.
post #6549 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by james444 View Post
 

 

You may have missed my earlier posts and the samples I provided. The links in my quoted post below are still active if you want to check it out for yourself.

 

The fact that the background noise is gone after you transcode the mp3 to flac should be sufficient proof that it's indeed an issue with the X3 decoder. Any mp3 compression artifact would definitely still be present in the transcoded flac file.

 

 

Yes, just listened to those files and indeed the mp3 version is much more noisy. Any chance you can tell us what music / recording it is?

post #6550 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
 

Yes, just listened to those files and indeed the mp3 version is much more noisy. Any chance you can tell us what music / recording it is?

 

Of course, it's the 2007 Hickox / LSO recording of Vaughan William's "A Sea Symphony" on Chandos (track #5).

 

Just for clarification, the flac file you listened to wasn't encoded from WAV, but transcoded from the noisy mp3 file.


Edited by james444 - 11/22/13 at 8:23am
post #6551 of 17217

Thanks.

post #6552 of 17217

I have 3 questions regarding the x3

 

1. i have searched the Internet and can find little that compares the x3 with the rockboxed classic ipod either 5.5g or 6g. I want to know if the x3 will give better sound on 16/44 lossless files from 1930-60's jazz/blues some of which are not recorded well.

 

2. Is the Gui on the x3 going to be updated to be similar to the proposed gui for the x5

 

3. Given my musical tastes (above) is the x5 likely to be significantly better than the x3, i am not intending to use high-res files as they do not exist for my choice of music.

 

thanks

 

d

post #6553 of 17217

Is anyone else having a problem with the X3 drives showing up in Windows since the 2.05 update? With the external storage card removed, Device Manager shows two entries for the X3 (as a SCSI drive), one of which has a yellow alert triangle. That entry says "No driver installed".

 

The internal drive no longer shows up in Explorer.
 

I tried a Reset, and the internal drive showed up for a little while, then disconnected. Subsequent resets haven't helped.

 

I'm using Win 8.1 64-bit, but the same problem occurs on Win 7 64-bit.

post #6554 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesFiiO View Post
 

OK, let's stop the argument about distortion of MP3, maybe there are better way to improve the decode for MP3 format, but it is not the job for us right now cause it is too difficult and we have better solution right now ( used flac/wav/ape/alac  and even aac ). 

 

 

and all I know that AAC/FLAC/ALAC is better than mp3 format in SQ. 

 

I have 75% of my music collection in MP3 format. Now what? I've been listening to the 25% of FLAC all the time. No solution.


Edited by FatalDestiny - 11/22/13 at 10:29am
post #6555 of 17217
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatalDestiny View Post

I have 75% of my music collection in MP3 format. Now what? I've been listening to the 25% of FLAC all the time. No solution.
exactly. Not a solution to use a different format, and if it's too difficult to code then take the product and give back money. That's a solution too.
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.