Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › ibasso dx50 vs studio v 3anv
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ibasso dx50 vs studio v 3anv

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 

Hi guys, I am looking for new portable music player. Which one is better in term of sound quality? 

post #2 of 20

DX50 is much better. Studio-V has only deeper soundstage.

post #3 of 20

well... maybe you can elaborate a bit more!

post #4 of 20
I have never heard either. DX50 has 15 hours playback (with 2100mah battery), Studio V has 100 hours playback (with 2000mah ? battery). One is clearly superior to the other.
post #5 of 20
Lol
post #6 of 20

Nothing at $300 is going to be 'much' better than the Studio. Bias is showing. Lee730 preferred his Anniversary 3 to a DX100 overall which is indisputably better than a DX50 so there's going to be conflicting opinions.

 

See if you can find some nearby Headfiers to try both.


Edited by goodvibes - 10/2/13 at 4:49am
post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post
 

Nothing at $300 is going to be 'much' better than the Studio. Bias is showing.

 

How do you know? :D I mean, that counter bias (which I like BTW) should have its limits. never say never kind of philosophy is a good one in this case...

post #8 of 20

I own both Studio V (non 3rd anv) and DX50.

They're rather different beasts especially where tonality is concerned, The Studio V leans a touch cooler in tonality exhibiting more aggressive detail extension. it's in your face and kind of thrown at you the way Studio V expresses detail, where as DX50 you'll really be required to pump the amp section (volume) to gain similar (but still below imo) overall detail. Studio is also highly transparent which allows you to almost see through the music and pick out all the layers, some might call it on the thin side of the spectrum. (but very crisp and clean)

Although DX50 is said to be neutral to slightly bright I can still hear a hint of warmth from the DAC beneath the amp section and that's where you'll find an advantage. Where the Studio V to me can sound a touch sterile or raw as I put it you can hear the rhythm and PRaT coming out of the Wolfson DAC on DX50, this makes for a good listening experience, one you can foot tap along with. I can hear good swing to the music and good resolution. On a technical level however I still find Studio V superior, especially in instrument separation and soundstage width and of course the detail we mentioned.

I think DX50 is a good player, has great PRaT and resolution but it's missing something my Studio has, and that's the Hisound house sound, the timbre and technical ability all pushing what makes a " true audiophile DAP" I think DX50 is just sneaking out of mainstream territory. it sounds great to my ears and does enough but when I switch between it's missing that something, that special edge or essence of 'audiophile' the Studio offers where it takes technical areas like transparency and separation to another level.  


Edited by H20Fidelity - 10/2/13 at 5:36am
post #9 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by nihontoman View Post
 

 

How do you know? :D I mean, that counter bias (which I like BTW) should have its limits. never say never kind of philosophy is a good one in this case...

 

It was explained clearly enough. You obviously want your DX50 to be better than everything. I also own and personally prefer an AK120 but can understand others preferring a Tera or 901. Big deal. It's hard enough to find musically involving DAPs that can relate an emotional message. At under $500 it's rare and once you do, 'much' better becomes a relative overstatement even if something else is personally preferred. 


Edited by goodvibes - 10/2/13 at 5:38am
post #10 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by H20Fidelity View Post
 

I own both Studio V (non 3rd anv) and DX50.

They're rather different beasts especially where tonality is concerned, The Studio V leans a touch cooler in tonality exhibiting more aggressive detail extension. it's in your face and kind of thrown at you the way Studio V expresses detail, where as DX50 you'll really be required to pump the amp section (volume) to gain similar (but still below imo) overall detail. Studio is also highly transparent which allows you to almost see through the music and pick out all the layers, some might call it on the thin side of the spectrum. (but very crisp and clean)

Although DX50 is said to be neutral to slightly bright I can still hear a hint of warmth from the DAC beneath the amp section and that's where you'll find an advantage. Where the Studio V to me can sound a touch sterile or raw as I put it you can hear the rhythm and PRaT coming out of the Wolfson DAC on DX50, this makes for a good listening experience, one you can foot tap along with. I can hear good swing to the music and good resolution. On a technical level however I still find Studio V superior, especially in instrument separation and soundstage width and of course the detail we mentioned.

I think DX50 is a good player, has great PRaT and resolution but it's missing something my Studio has, and that's the Hisound house sound, the timbre and technical ability all pushing what makes a " true audiophile DAP" I think DX50 is just sneaking out of mainstream territory. it sounds great to my ears and does enough but when I switch between it's missing that something, that special edge or essence of 'audiophile' the Studio offers where it takes technical areas like transparency and separation to another level.  

 

Thanks for that. If you want to try a warmer iteration of studio sound (maybe) PM me for something to try.

post #11 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by goodvibes View Post
 

It was explained clearly enough. You obviously want your DX50 to be better than everything. I also own and personally prefer an AK120 but can understand others preferring a Tera or 901. Big deal. It's hard enough to find musically involving DAPs that can relate an emotional message. At under $500 it's rare and once you do, 'much' better becomes a relative overstatement even if something else is personally preferred.

 

 

Of course I want it be the best ever and it isn't. it might be "worse" than studio V but if someone prefers something over something that is preferred to something, doesn't mean that someone other won't prefer the later to even the first thing :D

 

Sad thing is, even if studio V has better sound, the firmware sucks (I haven't had experience, but this is a general consensus here as it seems) and DX50 and X3 have beat it in that aspect...

post #12 of 20

I only had issue with the word 'much' being used. Don't spin it into something I didn't imply. Preference was never questioned and there's never anything sad about better sound.

 

I personally don't have issue with the Studio UI though agreed it could be better. Most issues have turned out to be user related but that may also mean it should be less fussy. Never bothered me considering the result it gives. 

 

It may also be a bit early to extol the virtues of the DX50 OS.

 

Glad that you like yours.:smile: 


Edited by goodvibes - 10/2/13 at 11:13am
post #13 of 20
Thread Starter 

Thank you guy for your opinion.I already tried Ibasso Dx50 I think it isn't good enough for me. So I decided to buy studio v anv and ordered it in yesterday. 

post #14 of 20

Good luck, Feel free to Pm if you need some info once it arrives. It does take a bit to fully run in.

post #15 of 20

Thank you H20 for your valuable comparison, very interesting. I was waiting for such a review for couple of weeks now

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › ibasso dx50 vs studio v 3anv