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 646

post #9676 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by nakedtoes View Post

Try firmware 1.2.7. 1.2.2 1.2.5 see which u prefer. Can try 1.2.3 if u only like bass..

Out of the box it has 1.2.5. Will give the others a whirl shortly.
post #9677 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by alimonkey View Post


Out of the box it has 1.2.5. Will give the others a whirl shortly.

Personally, I liked 1.2.5 the worst of all, compared to 1.2.2, 1.2.6, 1.2.7 (though some others have different opinions), and I really liked the sound of 1.2.2… but initial scanning in 1.2.2 is very, very, very much slower than in 1.2.6 (especially) and 1.2.7… In the end it's up to your ears what you'll prefer, so giving them all a swirl is probably the best way for you to decide on what to settle on (assuming all of them have the essential features you require: gapless, stability - some people had problems with 1.2.2, though I didn't, thankfully! - EQ, etc.)

post #9678 of 18426
@howdy and I work together and both have dx50s, so naturally I down rev'd mine to 1.2.2 with his a 1.2.7. and did a side by side identical conditions test

The setup: I copied some music from him and queued up the same song, same volume, same EQ setting (on- all bands flat at 0), same gain, and hit play at the same time. Most of the music is 16/44 FLAC ~1kbps with some 320 MP3 CBR songs in there. My headphones are (nothing special) o'neill/phillips Stretch over ear.

I've been doing side by side comparisons for the last 20 minutes or so and there is certainly a subtle difference in sound. Its not much; it would be hard to notice if it were not side by side with a 1 second interruption for me to switch the HP from one to the other.

My conclusion: I prefer 1.2.2. Its "brighter". The sound stage sounds slightly larger or more "airy". I mean, it sounds like the band is performing in a larger room than with 1.2.7. I didn't have many problems with 1.2.2. so I will be leaving mine at 1.2.2. until the next FW. Then Ill do another side by side and decide again. 1.2.7 isn't bad at all, but I like 1.2.2 more.

Specifically, I noticed this most in 2 songs if you want to compare and see if you find the same things yourself:
Weezer's The Greatest man that ever lived - When they go acapella near the middle of the song, going back and forth between the players, the singers voices sounded 'bigger' and subjectively better on 1.2.2.

2nd - Shpongle's Nothing is something worth doing - The metal drums sound different between the FWs. 1.2.2 sounds 'like it should'. 1.2.7 I thought sounded ever so subtly like there was something touching the side of the drum, muting it ever so slightly, almost like there was something in between you and the drum, like a cubicle wall or something like that.

These are extremely small differences im talking about. I don't think I could identify which FW im listening to in a blind comparison very well...I might get 50-70% right, but I guarantee that you would need golden ears to correctly identify the FW in the 90% + range, or 24k golden ears if its not side by side.

Ill pass the units over to @Howdy at lunch so we'll see what he thinks, so we'll get a 2nd opinion too.
Edited by MCImes - 12/31/13 at 8:33am
post #9679 of 18426

1.2.7 flashed, sounds good, performs well, but I'm going to give it a few hours listening tomorrow to be sure.  What an awesome little player this is, think we're going to get on very well :)

post #9680 of 18426

Well, my DX50 just showed up at my door.  Not sure what batch it is, but it came with FW 1.2.6 installed.  Initial impressions are good.  Soundstage is much more expanded vs my Sony F807 w/ Neutron I was previously using.  My music is 100% flac, mostly 16/44 cd rips, with a couple higher res thrown in the mix.  Currently enjoying the player via line-out to my RSA Shadow > SE846.  Sound is full, everything seems to be where it should be.  I don't even feel the need to tinker with the EQ yet.  That may change however when I plug my HD700's into it, as you gotta tame those treble spikes just a bit ;).  Coming from my 32GB Sony, the 64GB microsd is a welcome addition.  The player is a bit bulkier than my Sony, but I think I can cope with that.  Interface so far on 1.2.6 seems flawless, scan went quickly, and having external control buttons is nice, as I usually just run all my music on shuffle.  Bass doesn't seem quite as controlled as the Sony, but it definitely extends deeper, so that's a trade-off I'm willing to live with, making that low pass filter on the SE846 really show its true colors :)

 

Daft Punk's Random Access Memories in 24/96 is definitely an improvement from the Sony, but Daft Punk's albums are all that I have that is higher that 16/44, so I'll have to hop on HDtracks and fix that.  Never saw much of an improvement between resolutions with the Sony, so I never bothered getting anything better.

 

Running the Hornet from the LO to the HD700's I also noticed that the LO signal from the DX50 is stronger than the Sony's LO via the WMport they use.  I have been running the volume for the LO at 250.  On the HD700's, the warmer nature of the sound is apparent to me as the treble spikes aren't as glaringly obvious as they are when running the from my DACmini on the computer.  Not ideal bands in the EQ for what I need, but a quick fix of -4db in both 4K and 12K bands seems to clear those pesky treble spikes right up.

 

Here are a few pics comparing size to my RSA amps, I know there was someone a handful of pages back that was interested in how the DX50 stacks with the Shadow.  I haven't quite figured out my attachment solution for the Shadow yet, I think I am going to try and find some of that 3m low dual lock, to try and keep the thickness down.  Also, I need to get a different interconnect between LO and amp.  Blue amp is the Hornet, which I use to power my HD700's around the house when I can't sit at my computer.

 

 I'm going to quit rambling now as I try to wrangle my thoughts into the keyboard.  If I can answer questions for anyone, I'll be glad to do so, as I feel like I will be sitting in front of my computer the majority of the day enjoying this little dap.  On to the DX90 now! (Sorry wallet, I promise I will stop one day...)

 

:beyersmile:

 

 

 

 

 

post #9681 of 18426

I shortly tried the DX50 on a Bowers and Wilkins Car system at a Jaguar shop (on a used car, a XF), and then again (right afterwards) on their stock basic audio on another used XF (via the auxiliary mini-jack plug, from LO and therefore at full volume on the DX50 as recommended on the thread). The music I tried was a song from Purcell (from the album "Apparition" with as singer Christine Schäfer). I did it on parked cars with engines off. 

 

I was surprised that the sound was really not good on the B&W car system, i.e. the mediums (medium highs) were almost shrieking, very unpleasant. The stock car-system audio from Jaguar was sounding ok (no similar shrieking, but also a rather dull boring sound - probably not very good speakers in there, but that is less surprising). I did not have time for a more detailed listening though - as I was more looking into the cars generally than specifically into the audio systems.

 

Alas, when I came back with the original CD of the same album (and to test drive that car), the car with B&W sound was already sold so I couldn't test from the car's CD player, by comparison to the DX50...

 

Did anyone else on this thread test the DX50 with in-car audio systems, and more specifically with good-quality medium-size 'executive' cars (like the Jag XF, or a BMW 320 for example, or an Audi A4/5)?

 

BTW: Happy new year to all DX50 users!

post #9682 of 18426
Hello All,
I just updated my player to 1.2.7 not sure about the sound yet but I did notice a smaller width in the soundstage. The player crashed again when I took it outside for a walk? I am curious how buggy is 1.2.2? I don't care if it takes a long time for the music to download I am more interested in best possible sound.

Regards
Jeff
post #9683 of 18426
how buggy 1.2.2 is different for everyone.

1.2.2. works fine for me. It crashes once every couple-few days, but not too often that I get overly annoyed with it. Its worth the minor annoyance for having my preferred sound signature among the FW's

For others, it will hardly get past the scan. It seems how your music is tagged has a lot to do with how it will work for you, so just try it and see. Worst case serario, you load it, it fails, you go back to 1.2.7 and waste 20 mins in the process, so just try it out!
post #9684 of 18426
Thanks!
post #9685 of 18426
Hello all,
Just made the change from 1.2.7 to 1.2.2. Deffinitely better overall sound Width, Depth, clarity, Air... I can see why the card scanning could piss people off, but in the end it is the sound of the player that is most important! I might have to live with this until they upgrade the sound again.

Regards
Jeff
Edited by TheMaestro335 - 12/31/13 at 11:08am
post #9686 of 18426

To me, FW 1.2.2 was to unstable and full of bugs, I know that the sound signature was good but too annoying. I prefer a more stable FW with a suitable sound signature. I already updated to 1.2.7 and don´t find the changes to drastically. I prefer to stay here and see what the new year says

post #9687 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrRuss View Post
 

how was ur sound experience across different firmwares? would u prefer any particular firmware over the others given ur rig set-up?

I was only comparing EQ off to EQ w. all bands at 6, not comparing firmwares.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilfurbal View Post

 

I do look forward to what the Kaiser 10 does for me.  :)  Speaking of which, my audiologist actually did have bite blocks. 

Oh boy are you in for a treat! The fact that your audiologist had bite blocks is a very good sign that they actually know what they're doing!

post #9688 of 18426

Hi Luenberg and all,

 

Apologies as this is my first post.

 

I have a Jag XF Luxury with the Aux socket.

 

I don't have an IBasso as I plumped for a Fiio X3. I started using iPhones and an ipod Nano and gradually I concluded that the sound was a little bit more natural than the CD player which previously I rated very highly. The X3 sounds so much better through the Jag standard system than all of the above. It's proper hifi.

 

I have a very expensive valve/vinyl system with KEF Reference speakers so tend to be a bit anal about sound quality.

 

I loved the sound in my old S Type Jag and still wonder if I should have changed it (the car not the stereo). When I first got the XF it sounded more detailed but no boogie factor. I tweaked the bass up to +1 and since then it works for me.

 

They are very good quality stereos in the Jags so I would maybe try the vol at 80%. The X3 has a line level which I use but they both seem high quality components so can believe there is going to be much difference between splitting hairs.

 

Happy New Year!

post #9689 of 18426

Happy New Year from Latvia!

post #9690 of 18426
Quote:
Originally Posted by lueneburg View Post
 

I shortly tried the DX50 on a Bowers and Wilkins Car system at a Jaguar shop (on a used car, a XF), and then again (right afterwards) on their stock basic audio on another used XF (via the auxiliary mini-jack plug, from LO and therefore at full volume on the DX50 as recommended on the thread). The music I tried was a song from Purcell (from the album "Apparition" with as singer Christine Schäfer). I did it on parked cars with engines off. 

 

I was surprised that the sound was really not good on the B&W car system, i.e. the mediums (medium highs) were almost shrieking, very unpleasant. The stock car-system audio from Jaguar was sounding ok (no similar shrieking, but also a rather dull boring sound - probably not very good speakers in there, but that is less surprising). I did not have time for a more detailed listening though - as I was more looking into the cars generally than specifically into the audio systems.

 

Alas, when I came back with the original CD of the same album (and to test drive that car), the car with B&W sound was already sold so I couldn't test from the car's CD player, by comparison to the DX50...

 

Did anyone else on this thread test the DX50 with in-car audio systems, and more specifically with good-quality medium-size 'executive' cars (like the Jag XF, or a BMW 320 for example, or an Audi A4/5)?

 

BTW: Happy new year to all DX50 users!


I used the dx50 in my van with a modest Kenwood system (Burr Brown dac, 300w sub/amp, 500w amp, 10 inch sub, volume maxed), the difference was obvious, the sound had a better sound stage and imaging and the bass tightened up a lot, a definite improvement.  In my GF cheep jeep system still an improvement (esp the bass) but had to turn the volume down to approx 200 or it sounded distorted.  All in all its a good improvement just play with the volume a little to see if that helps.

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