Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The iBasso DX50 Thread - Latest firmware: 1.5.0
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The iBasso DX50 Thread - Latest firmware: 1.5.0 - Page 561

post #8401 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Varoudis View Post

Headwhacker, how does the dx50 compare (sq) to an android feeding via usb the c5d? (Any android player you think of course)

Thanks

I don't have an Android phone. I only tried the C5D DAC connected to my Mac and I only watched a movie.
post #8402 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by headwhacker View Post


I don't have an Android phone. I only tried the C5D DAC connected to my Mac and I only watched a movie.

It would be great if you could test some setup with flacs :)

 

I believe if you send a flac 16/44 without eq so the pure digital file from you mac via usb to c5d and also play the same flac from dx50 you will be able to compare.

post #8403 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by nakedtoes View Post
 

Tried the new 1.2.6..  great to see new media scanning bar and a new wallpaper but SQ wise is a downgrade......  bass is bloomy but not as tight as 1.2.5 .. the high is not as forward as 1.2.5 .. IMHO 1.2.2 sound the best follow by 1.2.5 for me using TG334 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jon parker View Post
 

Firmware Update 1.2.6

Some thoughts...

 

I LOVE

~ the new sensitivity of the screen

~ the new media scanning bar

~ the new background

~ larger and better album art

 

~~~ So thank you for those

 

but...I HATE

 

~ The sound quality. Now to some degree this is relatively subtle but even then it isn't pleasant. . .

The bass i find is bloomy, large and in general over bearing. It is now a main feature of the sound. (bear in mind I listen on Grados which are known for their clarity and highs so if the bass is too much on these then...!?)

It should be an equal partner between mids and highs and should not stand out

The characteristics of the bass assail my ears in quite a rude and over bearing way. By that I mean there are parts of words or instruments that punch through in an unpleasant way. For example if you go close to someone's ear and speak loudly but then really accentuate certain words, especially the 'p's and the 'b's. This is an exaggerated example of how the audio is now coming into my ears.

For example, in terms of headphones - Sometimes more bass = regular consumers out there thinking the headphone is better but I would think that this is really an Audiophile piece of kit and in that way I would imagine the emphasis going towards a perfect balance between low/mid and high would be the goal (in general!)

 

~ The EQ. The good news is I can now 'just about' hear the difference of the different presets but when I tries to alter the bass I refering to above it didn't work. Its hard to explain exactly why it didn't work but I will just say I have no confidence at all in the programming or implimentation of the iBasso DX50 EQ

 

~ With gapless -off- song endings and beginings are sometimes cut off and and with gapless -on- . . . well lets just say cross fades are interesting...but they are not a gapless function. gapless should be = gapless!!

 

~ I still think this is a magnificant player which I love but aside from v1.2.2 and 1.2.3 I have been quite dissapointed with the sound quality.

If iBasso wants to keep these different sound signatures as presets that would be wonderful and would keep everyone happy but I fear they might eventaully finally get the player OS right but leave it with a signature I / others wont like? (Being a player of this quality I believe that people headphones/IEM's makes a big difference)

 

Anyhoo, just some thoughts on the magical mystery tour of the dx50 :)

 

 

we share the same thought.... the DX50 like downgrade to a normal DAP..

post #8404 of 14750

personally like new FW and SQ, and bass are on the proper amount, not bloomy, not overbearing.

downgrade is only for the gapless function.

post #8405 of 14750
Beautiful sounding combination, I'm sorry HD25 ALU but you have been ousted from the spot of my favourite set of cans
post #8406 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratinox View Post

I just did a quick (at least as quick as I could) switch between 1.2.3b, 1.2.5 and 1.2.6 just to confirm what I thought I was hearing. DX50, KRK KNS-8400 on HO jack w/ gain 2, EQ off, vol 195, factory reset after every firmware install. "Where Is My Mind" by Pixies, "2112" by Rush, "La Villa Strangiato" by Rush. CD rip -> ALAC -> FLAC. This isn't a proper A/B/C comparison since I have only one player and it takes about 5 minutes to do a the updates so there may be some amount of confirmation bias involved.

1.2.3b: bass is a bit boomy and... kind of muddy? Highs and upper-mids seem... weak? But dayam! the stereo separation is hugely wide.

1.2.5: clearer/cleaner sound than 1.2.3b up and down the range, less pronounced bass, much less separation. The "echo" in the 2112 Overture with 1.2.3b reaches out past my outstretched hands; the same echo in 1.2.5 barely reaches my elbows. This does explain why the Grado fans really, really hate 1.2.5.

1.2.6: bass is noticeably stronger than 1.2.5 but not hugely so and not boomy with my KRK's. A 6dB change would be boomy; this isn't nearly that. Upper-mids and highs may be stronger but I don't think my KRK's are sensitive enough to tell. Separation isn't quite as wide as 1.2.3b with the 2112 Overture echo reaching out to my wrists. I also much prefer the brushed metal look from 1.2.5 and prior.

I didn't keep 1.2.3b; I went back to 1.2.2 before I could grow accustomed to it. I like 1.2.5 except for the separation and it seemed better with the Classical EQ preset than the flat line. I like 1.2.6 aside from the background and the crossfade and I'm happy with the EQ off/flat. Your mileage may vary with other headphones and amplifiers.

 

Im finding the differences in peoples perception and enjoyment of these different updates amazing :) Its sounds obvious to say it but it shows how we all have quite different, unique experiences and of equipment! It strikes me also how much difference the sonic qualities of various headphones makes a big difference in the qualative experience of people.

For example with my Grado's I personally found sonic heaven with v1.2.3beta where as v1.2.6 just doesn't work for me at all.

I can appreciate how certain qualities have been improved upon. Listening back to 1.2.3 from 1.2.6 it is a lot brighter, the highs are far more present and bass if not reccessed then definately has a different quality, a lot warmer and more friendly! im realising more and more that its how audio makes me feel that is the most important for me. Whilst i can appreciate some of the technical qualities of the other updates thus far its only 1.2.3 that has that unknown 'wow' factor for me. Also, being quite of fan of detail and presence and not being so much a fan of bass the other updates are so much on my radar. Im enjoying reading others experiences of these updates and enjoying hearing the different qualities and characteristics of the updates as they are released :D

post #8407 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cotnijoe View Post
 

 

1) you can add entire albums, artists, etc. 

 

3 and 5) as far as i know, right now playlist is strictly on the DX50 =\

 

8) yes, they are all the same asides from FW

 

in my limited knowledge. Sorry =P

 

hopefully its a start and those more knowledgeable can cover me :etysmile:

 

Thanks, although note that since I browse by folder/filetree, I'll be adding whole folders rather than albums/artists. The below supports 3&5 which is irksome! Knowing each batch is physically identical is a load off my mind in case I end up purchasing from a domestic retailer/reseller.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ratinox View Post

Playlist support at this time is... "poor" is an understatement. It's practically nonexistent. What DX50 calls playlists are stored on one of the data partition (I believe) along with user settings. Since a firmware update requires erasing this partition it means that your playlists get wiped every time. There is currently no way to save or edit these. Unfortunately, while it is Android under the hood, iBasso has stripped out almost everything that would make it possible to get at these files in the interests of minimizing the sizes of the firmware downloads.

As an aside, does anyone still reading this thread have a version 1.0 firmware image? Am I even allowed to ask for it?

Browsing by folder is definitely possible. In fact, it's required for USB On-the-Go devices (see the FAQ) as those aren't scanned like the internal store and uSD card.

 

Thanks. I don't see why it should be so hard to support playlists. Rockbox has done so for a decade right? &continues to do so with Android devices for 3+ years.

 

In terms of size of firmware, I see what you mean what with full android been a few hundred MBs. Having said that, there've been countless devices supporting simple playlists, going back (in my personal experiece) to my archos jukebox from 2002 which supported m3u playlists. iBasso seem like a really great team so I'm surprised they couldn't easily emulate others without relying on a full android environment/OS.

 

That aside, it's interesting reading about people's experiences with the different sound sig with each firmware. I like how someone said it's like getting a new toy each time, lol. I'm impressed with the frequency of updates.

post #8408 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by nakedtoes View Post
 

 

 

 

 

we share the same thought.... the DX50 like downgrade to a normal DAP..

 

Well, I wouldn't say that. Quite the opposite! Im just not finding exactly the type of audio characteristic from the player yet that im looking for (and I know is in there!). Its more that I found a perfect match with v1.2.3 and my personal headphones/set up. As more improvements with the players UI has come along Im not enjoying the other SQ updates so much. Nothing wrong with them, they are just not suiting my personal preferences for audio. :)

post #8409 of 14750
My new DX50 has been happily upgraded to the new FW and I'm really loving it so far. I have 64gb of flacs and 320kbs and a pair of Momentums, and now have the perfect high quality listening station for the bedroom ;-)

Listening to a 24bit FLAC of Joni Mitchell sounds wonderful, with a really impressive soundstage and imaging. Only thing I don't get is that when I check the file info, it says that it's a 32bit file?
post #8410 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexTES View Post
 

On the one hand, people discuss changes of SQ in different FW, and call those changes "huge", and make decisions either to "move to the next FW" or to "stay with the previous one". On the other hand, the same people claim that the EQ in DX50 doesn't work at all, because they can hardly hear difference between the EQ preset profiles and they don't hear difference when they move EQ sliders up and down.

 

Am I the only person here who think that's strange? :)

One needs to remember that audiophiles tend to describe minor changes with cables, firmware, etc. as "revelatory" and "veils are lifted," while often ignoring major differences caused by other factors.

 

It is inconsistent, but is the nature of the beast.

post #8411 of 14750

@AlexTES What has your experience been then that has made you feel so normal compared to these people? :)

Peoples experiences are their own. It would be difficult and time consuming to write in a forum with the precision needed to get all ones points across in a detailed and full manner.

As Wapiti says there are so many factors that make up ones experience of sound, often changing many times even in the space of a day!

If you want a detailed explanation of 'some' of my thoughts regarding the points you raise I would oblige :)

Thinking about the EQ point though, in my experience - over all, when compared to other EQ's in other systems then the EQ in the DX50 doesn't really work at least to the degree that I have previously been used to and that I have found practically useful


Edited by jon parker - 12/11/13 at 8:40am
post #8412 of 14750

I couldn't wait to see if playlist issues are fixed in future updates. Wanted something for Christmas break. Will just have to go really old skool and use lots of folders for reliable 'playlists' like mixtapes/mixcds/mix-minidiscs back in the day, lol. Will end up with lots of duplicate files however the option of using a spare 64gb USB stick via USB OTB plus 64gb mSD from old PMP should make up for it.

 

 

One question. Since coaxial is digital, is it OK to pickup a female coaxial to male coaxial to extend the length of the included 3.5mm to male coaxial cable to feed the S/PDIF input in my DAC? Note, my DAC has both Toslink and RCA input for S/PDIF input - I'll use the RCA one.

 

Cheers

post #8413 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by analogue 3 View Post

I couldn't wait to see if playlist issues are fixed in future updates. Wanted something for Christmas break. Will just have to go really old skool and use lots of folders for reliable 'playlists' like mixtapes/mixcds/mix-minidiscs back in the day, lol. Will end up with lots of duplicate files however the option of using a spare 64gb USB stick via USB OTB plus 64gb mSD from old PMP should make up for it.


One question. Since coaxial is digital, is it OK to pickup a female coaxial to male coaxial to extend the length of the included 3.5mm to male coaxial cable to feed the S/PDIF input in my DAC? Note, my DAC has both Toslink and RCA input for S/PDIF input - I'll use the RCA one.

Cheers

Yup, no worries about extending the cable! One could argue that a single cable would theoretically be better, but I'd love to see anyone actually hearing a difference...
post #8414 of 14750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cotnijoe View Post

server as in the download section of ibasso.com?
Servers as in the actual download URL, not what they have listed on the downloads page. The file was there Sunday. It wasn't there last night.
post #8415 of 14750
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorensiim View Post

Yup, no worries about extending the cable! One could argue that a single cable would theoretically be better, but I'd love to see anyone actually hearing a difference...

Yes I heard the difference that a less than 75 ohm cable makes when not matching, you know this famous digital reflection?

Seriously I agree with you, I'd be hard pressed to find someone who could hear a difference with the digital signal with such a cable patch. wink.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The iBasso DX50 Thread - Latest firmware: 1.5.0