[MostlyGordon]

Probably a question for James or any Fiio staff lurking… If I play digital audio with no EQ, does the X5 feed the digital stream to its DAC with no processing?
 
The reason I ask is that I have had an X5 for around 6 months and am extremely happy with it. But, I obtained a couple of hires albums and preferred the sound of the red book versions on the X5. I thought, maybe the red book versions were radio mixes and I have just been conditioned to that sort of sound, but no…
 
I wanted a good FLAC / hires player for my Mac rather than transferring to the X5 all the time. After much reading I settled on Fidelia which sounded good for the price. Thought I’d try the X5 with it as a USB DAC and a hires album I didn't like the sound of on the X5 came to life! I did some AB testing and it definitely sounds much better played from the Mac than SD on the X5. I have EQ turned off on both.
 
Can anyone explain? Now before anyone starts with expectation bias theories. I was expecting them to sound exactly the same. It’s just the same bits being fed to the same X5 DAC with no EQ right?
 
I intend to do some more testing now and try AB with red book and might throw Windows Foobar and what ever Linux uses and see if there is any difference with them.
 
I’d be interested if anyone else can test and confirm what I am hearing. If the X5 firmware does some processing before the DAC, this might explain why some people say various firmware versions sound different. Although, I haven’t noticed this myself.

 

[x RELIC x]

The x5 decodes the file formats and also applies the EQ before the DAC. You are probably hearing and preferring the decoder in Fidelia (which is now decoding the music files) on the Mac and probably why you hear a difference.

 

[MostlyGordon]

 The x5 decodes the file formats and also applies the EQ before the DAC.

Thanks Relic. But surely if you decode a lossless file, any decoder should give you exactly the same bits. I would have thought that no EQ means you just send those bits straight to the DAC.
 
More info... I also have Fidelia set to use the files bit rate. So, I expect it should not be changing things in any way either.

 

[x RELIC x]

Thanks Relic. But surely if you decode a lossless file, any decoder should give you exactly the same bits. I would have thought that no EQ means you just send those bits straight to the DAC.

More info... I also have Fidelia set to use the files bit rate. So, I expect it should not be changing things in any way either.

Thinking of iZoptope’s 64-Bit Sample Rate Converter and MBIT+ dither available in Fidelia. Are you using bit rate from the source or upsampling in Fidelia?

Edit: Aparently I can't read. I see you're using the bit rate from the file.

 

[uzi2]

  Probably a question for James or any Fiio staff lurking… If I play digital audio with no EQ, does the X5 feed the digital stream to its DAC with no processing?

With EQ off, the X5 will output bit perfect over coax, so the answer should be yes.

 

[MostlyGordon]

 Are you using bit rate from the source or upsampling in Fidelia?

I'm using bit rate from the source and don't have any of the extra ad ons or any effects enabled.
 
When I say I prefer the Mac source. I have spent some time in music studios and from the Mac, it sounds like studio quality sound. On the X5, hires sounds coloured, more so than red book FLACs on the X5.

 

[x RELIC x]

I'm using bit rate from the source and don't have any of the extra ad ons or any effects enabled.

When I say I prefer the Mac source. I have spent some time in music studios and from the Mac, it sounds like studio quality sound. On the X5, hires sounds coloured, more so than red book FLACs on the X5.

Interesting. Could be the way each device handles jitter at different sampling rates. Might explain why you hear a larger difference at high resolution. The X5 II has improved dual crystal oscillators for better decoding in multiples of 44.1 and 48 to cover all the resolutions available and further reduced jitter.

 

[MostlyGordon]

 The X5 II has improved dual crystal oscillators for better decoding in multiples of 44.1 and 48 to cover all the resolutions available and further reduced jitter.

Hmm, I'd better check the credit card balance But seriously, I find the difference much greater than jitter could explain. Maybe someone else has a similar setup and can do some AB testing. Otherwise I'll do some more on the weekend with different bit rates, cans and OSes.
 
It's not really an issue for me. I'm just intrigued why it's happening, and thought others might be interested as well.

 

[Dobrescu George]

  Hmm, I'd better check the credit card balance But seriously, I find the difference much greater than jitter could explain. Maybe someone else has a similar setup and can do some AB testing. Otherwise I'll do some more on the weekend with different bit rates, cans and OSes.
 
It's not really an issue for me. I'm just intrigued why it's happening, and thought others might be interested as well.

My project is also working for MAC. It might solve your problem, as the main DAC I use for writting it is X5 itself.
 
On windows, there is zero difference between using X5 alone and using it as a DAC from a PC. So i guess that it is a software in MAC that changes the sound. I am yet to learn MAC ecosystem to pronounce with certainity.

 

[x RELIC x]

Hmm, I'd better check the credit card balance But seriously, I find the difference much greater than jitter could explain. Maybe someone else has a similar setup and can do some AB testing. Otherwise I'll do some more on the weekend with different bit rates, cans and OSes.

It's not really an issue for me. I'm just intrigued why it's happening, and thought others might be interested as well.

I'm also curious. I use Audirvana+ on the Mac and don't notice any appreciable difference when using X5 as a DAC vs as a player.

 

[MostlyGordon]

 On windows, there is zero difference between using X5 alone and using it as a DAC from a PC.

Is this with hires files? I haven't done AB with red book yet, but the X5 sounds great with them to me.

 

[Dobrescu George]

Hello, everyone!
 
I want to bring my problem with distortions back. I had managed to solve it for good. It was because o headphones/IEMs. After buying Ie800 I do not get any distortions at all. Every song i was hearing distorted is clear as daylight.
 
It seems that the distorted parts, were exactly what I had thought, very complicated passages of songs, for example with haggard, three violins sang in counter notes. It is amazing what X5 is able to pull off with good enough headphones. Zero distortion starting from now. I now understand how great some of my music really is. 
 
I love those complicated songs which used to distort. @JaZZ was right with the aspect of fuzzy guitars and normal distorted guitars being what I heared in metal tracks. It seems that with ie800 i can clearly point the guitars and their distorted parts without problems, and they sound clear and crisp.
 
I want to also thank @JamesFiiO for taking the time of discussing the problem, testing the problematic tracks, and confirming that my X5 is in good working condition. Also thanks for creating a great product!
 
Now I am really able to continue deeper into my project, as playing with transient recovery and attack of notes, I am able to obtain results beyond what I have been expecting. I guess that I had been ignorant of the advice that headphones makes the most difference. But this is how it actually is. If someone wants to make a difference, headphones are the first thing to look at. 
 
All types of music are crisp clear, distortion free now. 

 

[Joe Bloggs]

What headphones were you using before?

 

[Dobrescu George]

What headphones were you using before?

Ultrasone dj one pro and Sennheiser ie8.
 
Both are amazing really, but on particular very complicated tracks would give distortions instead of detailed portion of that song. By any means, for their price both are killer products, I just fiind that for the best experience having better, more detailed IEM / headphone solves the problem much better.
 
It seems that what I heared was not distortion, but rather the way Ie8 and dj one pro play those songs. Ie800 just plays those songs in a different way, which makes it easier for me to understand what is what, and not perceive those sounds as distortions, but rather separate instruments or separate parts of a instrument note

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Probably a question for James or any Fiio staff lurking… If I play digital audio with no EQ, does the X5 feed the digital stream to its DAC with no processing?
 


The reason I ask is that I have had an X5 for around 6 months and am extremely happy with it. But, I obtained a couple of hires albums and preferred the sound of the red book versions on the X5. I thought, maybe the red book versions were radio mixes and I have just been conditioned to that sort of sound, but no…
 


I wanted a good FLAC / hires player for my Mac rather than transferring to the X5 all the time. After much reading I settled on Fidelia which sounded good for the price. Thought I’d try the X5 with it as a USB DAC and a hires album I didn't like the sound of on the X5 came to life! I did some AB testing and it definitely sounds much better played from the Mac than SD on the X5. I have EQ turned off on both.
 


Can anyone explain? Now before anyone starts with expectation bias theories. I was expecting them to sound exactly the same. It’s just the same bits being fed to the same X5 DAC with no EQ right?
 


I intend to do some more testing now and try AB with red book and might throw Windows Foobar and what ever Linux uses and see if there is any difference with them.
 


I’d be interested if anyone else can test and confirm what I am hearing. If the X5 firmware does some processing before the DAC, this might explain why some people say various firmware versions sound different. Although, I haven’t noticed this myself.

It's not expectation bias that ruins sighted tests, it's the basic fact that they are sighted tests. Any time you are able to identify the A and the B of an AB test without referring to the actual property to be tested (in this case sound), your brain will be able to assign any imagined differences, real or not, consistently to the A and B respectively without referring to the actual sound. These imagined differences will build up (whether or not any truly audible differences are there) until before you know it, you are elucidating the audible differences between two identically built, differently colored USB cables in a tome worthy of an extended review on The Absolute Sound or something.

Seriously, if you want to go at this scientifically, you need to find a way to match volumes between the X5 as a player (A) and the X5 as a DAC (B), and have someone else work with you to administer an ABX test where you are given a randomized A or B (X) and asked to find its true identity (being able to switch to identified A and B at will and back to X on request) for a significant number of trials to show that you can identify X significantly more than 50% of the time.

If volume matching cannot be done precisely, perhaps have your friend jiggle the volume randomly between trials.

I can envision the sound of operating your Mac vs operating the X5 to get at the same song being a significant confounding variable (i.e. factor that allows you to differentiate between the two without listening to the song itself) that needs to be addressed.

Best regards,
Joe