Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The iBasso DX50 Thread - Latest firmware: 1.9.5 - June 30, 2016
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The iBasso DX50 Thread - Latest firmware: 1.9.5 - June 30, 2016 - Page 717

post #10741 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmahler2u View Post
 

thank you very much...I needed it!! very hungry for dsd files!!!!

 

:biggrin:

 

Have you checked out the offerings at the Acoustic Sounds digital downloads?  http://store.acousticsounds.com/cat/365/DSD - decent number of DSD albums in a variety of genres.

post #10742 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhizzo View Post

It is a possible use this cable (DAC and microusb on the Ibasso DX50)?

 

 I am afraid not. The microUSB, as far as I know, is only used to charge the DX50.

 From the photo in your post, the D42 is connected to a smartphone (Samsung S3 perhaps?) which does audio out via microUSB. I am pretty sure the DX50 does not. Audio only comes out from Coaxial/Line-Out or the Headphone out.

post #10743 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by themad View Post


I have recently cleaned up the tags, but I'll double check. I don't really leave anything other than artist, composer, album, title and track number.
It might be the long filenames. What do you suggest as maximum length? 25 chars?

Thanks for the ideas!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post
 


If you don't mind, I have made so many tags changes in order to get the DX50 right. I keep my filename to 30 chars max, that includes the track number at the beginning and the balance of the title. I religiously remove any quotes and commas in the title or for that matter if you can any punctuations of any kinds, it used to choke on that. The main tag items you need are title, author, album, track number and genre. You do not need anything else. Naming in this is everything, case will matter. Its, ITs and ITS are very different for the tag library, it will bunch things together according to case so name you stuff consistently and carefully,  it'll aggregate your songs together at the right place. If you have a PC, use the mp3tag app, it allows making all those changes in a clip.

 

One more thing: art works - Either deposit a file with the .jpg extension (name does not seem to matter). It will use it if you haven't embedded the art work in your file tag. If you want to use a specific one for a song then embed it in the song tag info and it will use it instead. Both can reside in the same directory and it will pick it up first in the tag, second in the folder. Do not keep multiple jpg files in your directory, only one is sufficient the other ones will be ignored anyway.

 

Hope this helps.

What musichaven said, and this means keeping the titlepart of the filename to about 25 chars max (2 chars for the track number, space, "-", space make up 5 chars)... in Mp3tag I use this function for the tag=>filename command: 

 

$num(%track%,2) - $caps($left(%title%, 25))

post #10744 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by geagle View Post
 

 

 

What musichaven said, and this means keeping the titlepart of the filename to about 25 chars max (2 chars for the track number, space, "-", space make up 5 chars)... in Mp3tag I use this function for the tag=>filename command: 

 

$num(%track%,2) - $caps($left(%title%, 25))

 

 Excellent!

 I already use the "%track%,2" part of the function, but I didn't know how to limit the number of chars.

 

 Thanks again!

post #10745 of 18461
:biggrin:Quote:
Originally Posted by frankrondaniel View Post
 

 

Have you checked out the offerings at the Acoustic Sounds digital downloads?  http://store.acousticsounds.com/cat/365/DSD - decent number of DSD albums in a variety of genres.

i got Miles Davis album and i'm d/l lot of free samples.  after that get more music.  But after listening dsd files, I can't go back to flac or mp3.

 

it's just me...

post #10746 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankrondaniel View Post

decent number of DSD albums in a variety of genres.

Save your money. The Audio Engineering Society demonstrated that human beings cannot distinguish between SACD (DSD) and CD-DA (16/44.1 PCM) in double-blind trials unless the volume is raised enough to make the CD-DA noise floor audible. There's no point to paying extra for DSD files unless you routinely listen to music at deafening volume levels.

DSD: DX50's new FOTM.
post #10747 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by salavat View Post
 

You extract .dsf files from ripped .iso image with the utility mentioned here http://www.computeraudiophile.com/f11-software/sacd-ripping-using-your-ps3-part-2-a-7495/index26.html. Since it is command line utility you need to make sure you are using correct key in the command line (e.g. "-s") to get .dsf files (not .dff).

Thanks, I actually had already found it, but certainly appreciate the suggestion…

 

I've been experimenting a bit, using a dsf extracted from the sacd ISO of Black Sabbath/Black Sabbath (title track), a 24/88 flac created from the dsf file through Korg Audiogate and a 24/88 flac created from the iso through foobar 2000.

 

First of all, my DX50 froze a few times while playing the dsf file, looks like it's definitely better not to touch many controls (worked fine if I just sat back and listened to the music, instead of going from 1 file to other, trying to A-Bing :smile:)…

 

Anyway, listening to the dsf was awesome:smile:… then I listened to the 24/88 flac produced by Korg and it was definitely awesome too:smile:… then I tried the foobar flac and I liked it a bit less, to tell the truth.. and, finally, I went back to my ordinary 16/44 file, and I found it quite awesome too:smile:… there were some differences, but to my ears, they really were quite subtle, not night-and-day variations, if this makes sense.

 

So I think that I'll skip using dsf, at least for the moment and on the DX50 (if the DX90 will have native DSD playback, it might be a different story)

post #10748 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by themad View Post

 I am afraid not. The microUSB, as far as I know, is only used to charge the DX50.
 From the photo in your post, the D42 is connected to a smartphone (Samsung S3 perhaps?) which does audio out via microUSB. I am pretty sure the DX50 does not. Audio only comes out from Coaxial/Line-Out or the Headphone out.


hummm this is sad! Lol

So, the only way to use the coaxial cable is with a DAC like DB2 (from Ibasso)?
post #10749 of 18461

With no native DSD support, what's the point? Seriously, all we get is on-the-fly DSD to PCM decoding of huge files. I think I'll just stick to FLAC, thank you very much.

post #10750 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrhizzo View Post


hummm this is sad! Lol

So, the only way to use the coaxial cable is with a DAC like DB2 (from Ibasso)?

Yep. Or just use the analog lineout and enjoy one of the best ever Wolfson DAC implementations in  a DAP :smile_phones:

post #10751 of 18461
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratinox View Post


Save your money. The Audio Engineering Society demonstrated that human beings cannot distinguish between SACD (DSD) and CD-DA (16/44.1 PCM) in double-blind trials unless the volume is raised enough to make the CD-DA noise floor audible. There's no point to paying extra for DSD files unless you routinely listen to music at deafening volume levels.

DSD: DX50's new FOTM.


I would not apply the rule across the board without consulting your ears in the process first. Your ears are the best judge for that. It also depends how well the music was recorded. Assuming they followed all of the audio engineering rules as to close to perfect recording, you might find that if the player allows, you might pick up extra micro details that you wouldn't with a lower res recorded file. I have some recordings here of the same tune at different sampling rates and I can tell you the instruments and voices sound more detailed, clearer and with a better resolve than the lower res ones. That is what my ears say and my ears are the boss so I don't dare challenging them. We will be debating this until we are blue on the face, but if you can afford higher res files, then that is really up to you and no one will be the lesser for buying more expensive files, it is a personal choice and we all have to respect that.

 

Having said that, I am with you on that, I don't even think it was necessary to test the DSD files maybe for only one thing: regression testing to make sure that iBasso has not broken anything that was working prior to allowing DSD file recognition (post 1.2.8 or if you prefer 1.2.7). However I am sure iBasso loves it when people beta test their changes, so please go ahead and load those large files to your microSD and test them out. If there are any issues with them, ask first as it might be an encoding the player is not  compatible with but if it is supposed to then by all means please report it to iBasso for bug fixing.

 

I was going to say, I would rather want to see additional functionality being added like the USB connectivity than things I don't need like DSD compatibility. I think this might be in preparation for the upcoming DX90 which they may implement a hardware driven interface that the Saber chip can handle but again, it is wishful thinking for the hi-res mordicus and a totally useless feature for me. On the other hand they may want to add the claim that they can read DSD files which put them up there with the other hi-end daps. Who knows what the motivation was but it was not one I would have agreed on.


Edited by musicheaven - 1/28/14 at 9:38am
post #10752 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post

I would not apply the rule across the board without consulting your ears in the process first. Your ears are the best judge for that.

Well, no, they're not. Rather, your ears are, but your brain isn't. This is why the AES performed 554 double-blind trials with a variety of listeners. Tested listeners correctly identified the SACD source 49.8% of the time. Short version: they guessed.

If you genuinely can tell the difference in double-blind trials then please contact the AES. They would love to study you.

As for me... I'm using a Sansa Clip Zip with Rockbox more than my DX50. The Clip simply works better.
post #10753 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by ratinox View Post


Save your money. The Audio Engineering Society demonstrated that human beings cannot distinguish between SACD (DSD) and CD-DA (16/44.1 PCM) in double-blind trials unless the volume is raised enough to make the CD-DA noise floor audible. There's no point to paying extra for DSD files unless you routinely listen to music at deafening volume levels.

DSD: DX50's new FOTM.

 

Well, on my b&w 803 i have to say the 16/44.1 vs 24/96khz have a small but quite apreciable diference. More air between the instruments, more resolution, and also i can feel (for real) the music (like the vibration of strings or sax) this is dificult to hear on earphones due the lack of air being moved.

But on short, yep there is diference =)

post #10754 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post
 


I would not apply the rule across the board without consulting your ears in the process first. Your ears are the best judge for that. It also depends how well the music was recorded. Assuming they followed all of the audio engineering rules as to close to perfect recording, you might find that if the player allows, you might pick up extra micro details that you wouldn't with a lower res recorded file. I have some recordings here of the same tune at different sampling rates and I can tell you the instruments and voices sound more detailed, clearer and with a better resolve than the lower res ones. That is what my ears say and my ears are the boss so I don't dare challenging them. We will be debating this until we are blue on the face, but if you can afford higher res files, then that is really up to you and no one will be the lesser for buying more expensive files, it is a personal choice and we all have to respect that.

 

Having said that, I am with you on that, I don't even think it was necessary to test the DSD files maybe for only one thing: regression testing to make sure that iBasso has not broken anything that was working prior to allowing DSD file recognition (post 1.2.8 or if you prefer 1.2.7). However I am sure iBasso loves it when people beta test their changes, so please go ahead and load those large files to your microSD and test them out. If there are any issues with them, ask first as it might be an encoding the player is not  compatible with but if it is supposed to then by all means please report it to iBasso for bug fixing.

 

I was going to say, I would rather want to see additional functionality being added like the USB connectivity than things I don't need like DSD compatibility. I think this might be in preparation for the upcoming DX90 which they may implement a hardware driven interface that the Saber chip can handle but again, it is wishful thinking for the hi-res mordicus and a totally useless feature for me. On the other hand they may want to add the claim that they can read DSD files which put them up there with the other hi-end daps. Who knows what the motivation was but it was not one I would have agreed on.


Happy to read you, also on cd quality, but on hi end gear you can feel the sound, perceive the micro detalis on the record (must been good records).

And on hi-er res you can hear a lot more, more definition on each instrument, more micro details.

=) happy vice enjoying audio

post #10755 of 18461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorensiim View Post

Yep. Or just use the analog lineout and enjoy one of the best ever Wolfson DAC implementations in  a DAP smile_phones.gif

Thank you for your help too.

I have one more question: if I use the analog line out, it will lose quality instead the coaxial connection, right?
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: 1.9.5 - June 30, 2016