or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The iBasso DX50 Thread - Latest firmware: 1.9.4 - January 24, 2016
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The iBasso DX50 Thread - Latest firmware: 1.9.4 - January 24, 2016 - Page 867

post #12991 of 18426

I was leaning towards the AK100 but went for the DX50 instead.  Too much talk of UI issues, and the price was SO much more than the iBasso, to what gain?  And I'm glad I did.  It gets to the point where the increase in SQ is incremental and the price difference is monumental.

post #12992 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by olddude View Post
 

I was leaning towards the AK100 but went for the DX50 instead.  Too much talk of UI issues, and the price was SO much more than the iBasso, to what gain?  And I'm glad I did.  It gets to the point where the increase in SQ is incremental and the price difference is monumental.

I have the modified AK100, which sound better than the stock AK100 and I still prefer the sound of the DX50 because to me, the DX50 is more musical and I don't find that there are any SQ areas that the AK100 is better. Everyone's milage may vary but that is my opinion. I also like the ability to change out the battery. 

post #12993 of 18426

I would pick the DX50 over an AK120 even. The OI at 3Ohm is still high for my JH16 which doesn't sound right to me when I demoed it for almost 1 hour.

post #12994 of 18426

you all mean you like the dx50 than ak100\ak120 without amp ?

post #12995 of 18426

UI wise YES....

 

sound wise it's a question of taste. 

 

but the AK UI are hell on earth 

post #12996 of 18426

The DX50 is $239, the AK100 (2nd version) is about $800 and the AK120 is about $1200.  If sound quality between the three comes down to a "question of taste," the implication is that the difference in sound quality is ephemeral, and varies from person to person.  That's why, after doing much reading about all three, listening to people on these threads talk about their likes/dislikes, doing Google searches for other reviews of all three, and thinking about did I REALLY want to spend $800/$1200 on a music player that I use to walk around with, I bought the DX50.  

 

And, truthfully, it's not THAT much better than my $100 Colorfly C3 (I prefer it, sound-wise, much more timbre in the sound) but the C3 is more than adequate and was itself quite a step up from my iPhone 4/5S).  UI-wise, it kicks the C3's butt, but is nowhere near as easy as the iPhone.  

 

Maybe the crazy Pono will be the answer, with great sound and a wonderful UI.  And Neil will convince all of the record companies to release their back catalogs in HD.  

 

For me, the DX50 is easy to use, easy to carry (even attached to my C5 amp), and it delivers a great listening experience.  And the combo costs about what an iPhone 5S 64gb costs, which is actually not bad.  

post #12997 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by olddude View Post

The DX50 is $239, the AK100 (2nd version) is about $800 and the AK120 is about $1200.  If sound quality between the three comes down to a "question of taste," the implication is that the difference in sound quality is ephemeral, and varies from person to person.  That's why, after doing much reading about all three, listening to people on these threads talk about their likes/dislikes, doing Google searches for other reviews of all three, and thinking about did I REALLY want to spend $800/$1200 on a music player that I use to walk around with, I bought the DX50.  

And, truthfully, it's not THAT much better than my $100 Colorfly C3 (I prefer it, sound-wise, much more timbre in the sound) but the C3 is more than adequate and was itself quite a step up from my iPhone 4/5S).  UI-wise, it kicks the C3's butt, but is nowhere near as easy as the iPhone.  

Maybe the crazy Pono will be the answer, with great sound and a wonderful UI.  And Neil will convince all of the record companies to release their back catalogs in HD.  

For me, the DX50 is easy to use, easy to carry (even attached to my C5 amp), and it delivers a great listening experience.  And the combo costs about what an iPhone 5S 64gb costs, which is actually not bad.  

I owned the AK100 and sold it to upgrade to the AK120, after reading lots of views about the DX50 I bought one and subsequently sold the AK120. I thought that for the price difference between the DX50 and the AK120 the Ak120 was overpriced. I subsequently sold the DX50 and lo and behold have recently repurchased one.....purely on the basis that for the price the DX50 is a cracking DAP which I personally feel is hard to beat for the money.
post #12998 of 18426

I totally agree that the DX50 is a good value for the money.   And that sound preferences are pretty much a subjective matter: there are certainly those who would prefer the DX50 over the AK100.   However, there are certain areas where the AK products are superior.  For instance, low distortion and blackness.   The DX50 is definitely a better value and many might prefer its sound signature over its more expensive counterparts, but there are real trade-offs in sound quality that should still be acknowledged.

post #12999 of 18426

For many of us, paying $800-2000 for some sound signatures is just too much.  Now, if I had unlimited funds I'm sure I'd buy the big boy AK for a couple of grand, because opportunity cost wouldn't enter into it.  I looked long and hard at the two lower AKs before deciding on the DX50.  The way they handle HD was something that interested me but I have so little HD material (and so little is available in the musical areas I travel in) that it became clear that, listening to 16/44 CD material as I do, the DX50 was the better deal for me.  The fact that all use the same Wolfson entered into it as well.  And everyone seemed to agree that the UI in the AKs was more problematic than that of the DX50.  I don't doubt that some can hear the "better" in these units but, again, I'm balancing that against cost and for me it made no sense.  That's not to say that others see a real reason to get them, and are very happy with them.  I've never said they weren't better, just that the amount of better vs. the cost wasn't enough to justify the price (to me).

post #13000 of 18426
I make a playlist with the few albums I want to play, e.g. 3CD "albums". I store my songs by the CDs in each folder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shad3925 View Post

Is it possible to make a selection on the DX50 where you can make it play one album after another(different artists) or do you have to compose a playlist?
post #13001 of 18426

I generally use a single folder per album, or have a folder full of assorted songs.  I suppose you could just number them in order for them to play as album 1, album 2, etc. in a single folder, but that shouldn't be too hard.  I use XLD with a Mac to do tagging and the like, not sure what you'd need with Windows.  Possibly just renumber everything beyond album 1 with higher numbers in order.  

 

I've been hoping that the next firmware would have album forwarding.  Guess we still have to wait and see (I understand that's possible with Rockbox, so I guess iBasso could do it if it wanted to).  

post #13002 of 18426

Hi for 1.2.8, under all music, are the file names or song titles displayed? I read that in earlier versions the firmware would display the file name instead of the song title, have they fixed the issue yet?

post #13003 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by olddude View Post
 

I generally use a single folder per album, or have a folder full of assorted songs.  I suppose you could just number them in order for them to play as album 1, album 2, etc. in a single folder, but that shouldn't be too hard.  I use XLD with a Mac to do tagging and the like, not sure what you'd need with Windows.  Possibly just renumber everything beyond album 1 with higher numbers in order.  

 

I've been hoping that the next firmware would have album forwarding.  Guess we still have to wait and see (I understand that's possible with Rockbox, so I guess iBasso could do it if it wanted to).  


And so it was life was easy, not only for the user but firmware programmers. :beerchug: 

post #13004 of 18426

Single folder play isn't the worst thing in the world.  But if I were a programmer I'd make it possible to flow automatically from folder to folder.  It's a logical way to play music.  

post #13005 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaTaLySt93 View Post
 

Hi for 1.2.8, under all music, are the file names or song titles displayed? I read that in earlier versions the firmware would display the file name instead of the song title, have they fixed the issue yet?

Song

Artist

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: 1.9.4 - January 24, 2016