or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › $999 Calyx M with DXD + DSD, 64GB + SD + µSD storage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

$999 Calyx M with DXD + DSD, 64GB + SD + µSD storage - Page 168

post #2506 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post
 

 

Ah, thanks. I think that big concern for the M may be lag in its responsiveness. Otherwise, if they can address that, I expect that the UI will be great.

 

The DX50 UI is meh so I won't expect much more from the DX90. On the other hand, if they port Rockbox to the DX90, that is hard to beat. 

 

As for function, everyone has their own needs. I don't give as ram's damn about a digital out but it is very important for some people on here. On the other hand, a good active playlist is top of my key function list. It is the big thing that is missing on my X5 and a reason that I may yet get the M. The X5 + Pico Power is sounding very good.

 

How will the M sound with IEMs and no external amp? Inquiring minds want to know...!

We both share the same feelings except for the playlists, I used playlists quite a bit in my iPod days but I tend to create directory favorites which work just fine for me. So playlist is not a must have but I have to say that if the M does it very well, that might change. :) I do have a little concern about the responsiveness however I don't think it is any worse than when I click on the play/stop or forward/backward buttons on my DX50. :D

post #2507 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post
 

I think that big concern for the M may be lag in its responsiveness. Otherwise, if they can address that, I expect that the UI will be great.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post
 

I do have a little concern about the responsiveness however I don't think it is any worse than when I click on the play/stop or forward/backward buttons on my DX50. :D

 

I'm not sure it's useful to worry about the UI responsiveness from the demo unit. Indeed, with version 0.5, it has essentially been saddled with an alpha version of the software. It's likely that version 1.00 will be a drastically different experience.


Edited by bcarr112281 - 5/7/14 at 8:45am
post #2508 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcarr112281 View Post

I'm not sure it's reasonable to worry about the UI responsiveness from the demo unit. Indeed, with version 0.5, it has essentially been saddled with an alpha version of the software. It's likely that version 1.00 will be a drastically different experience.

The UI is not as fluid as its smartphonesque screen imply, but it isn't really that frustrating and it looks great and as responsive as any in the DAP world.

I guess the frustration we have is given it's price it would seem the incremental parts cost for opting for a speedier cpu/soc seems to be quite easily achievable. I suspect, at its price bracket, potential buyers are willing to folk out 20 or even 50 bucks to get that cpu and enjoy a more responsive UI.

What we might have missed is that it's not only hardware that make it fluid. The bottleneck might be in the coding or firmware that may or may not be simple/cheap to fix. Speedier cpu/soc (if such is available) may also cut into battery life. My guess is most of you will find it acceptable. Just my 2c.
post #2509 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcc View Post


The UI is not as fluid as its smartphonesque screen imply, but it isn't really that frustrating and it looks great and as responsive as any in the DAP world.

I guess the frustration we have is given it's price it would seem the incremental parts cost for opting for a speedier cpu/soc seems to be quite easily achievable. I suspect, at its price bracket, potential buyers are willing to folk out 20 or even 50 bucks to get that cpu and enjoy a more responsive UI.

What we might have missed is that it's not only hardware that make it fluid. The bottleneck might be in the coding or firmware that may or may not be simple/cheap to fix. Speedier cpu/soc (if such is available) may also cut into battery life. My guess is most of you will find it acceptable. Just my 2c.

 

I think the main reason for the low power cpu was for better battery performance. Thanks to info on the Cortex website we can precisely compare specs between the Calyx M cpu and Sony ZX1 cpu:

 

Calyx M cpu: Cortex A5 single core 625mhz

Processing power: 1000 DMIPS

Power consumption: 75 mW

 

Sony ZX1 cpu: Cortex A9 dual core 1000mhz

Processing power: 5000 DMIPS

Power consumption: 300mW

 

So processing power does scale with power consumption for the most part, ZX1 is 5x more powerful and 4x more power consuming.

Also I might add that the DX90 uses a similar cpu to the ZX1, but a Chinese Rockchip version of the dual core Cortex A9 Sony uses (so not as high performing, or as power efficient, by roughly 10%-20% on both accounts) 

post #2510 of 5495


True, personally I can tolerate the sluggishness for longer battery life. And i don't fiddle with UI too much while enjoying my music for it is moot for me. But then I even tolerated hifiman UI so my standard is pretty low lol.
post #2511 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcc View Post



True, personally I can tolerate the sluggishness for longer battery life. And i don't fiddle with UI too much while enjoying my music for it is moot for me. But then I even tolerated hifiman UI so my standard is pretty low lol.

So is that yours or are you demoing? Ignoring ergonomics, how does it sound compared to your extensive dap line up? Is it comparable to the 901 or 240 or is it more in the range of the x5 / dx90?
post #2512 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by T.R.A.N.C.E. View Post
 

 

I think the main reason for the low power cpu was for better battery performance. Thanks to info on the Cortex website we can precisely compare specs between the Calyx M cpu and Sony ZX1 cpu:

 

Calyx M cpu: Cortex A5 single core 625mhz

Processing power: 1000 DMIPS

Power consumption: 75 mW

 

Sony ZX1 cpu: Cortex A9 dual core 1000mhz

Processing power: 5000 DMIPS

Power consumption: 300mW

 

So processing power does scale with power consumption for the most part, ZX1 is 5x more powerful and 4x more power consuming.

Also I might add that the DX90 uses a similar cpu to the ZX1, but a Chinese Rockchip version of the dual core Cortex A9 Sony uses (so not as high performing, or as power efficient, by roughly 10%-20% on both accounts) 

 

How long does the Calyx M lasts? The ZX1 (despite it's faster CPU and higher consumption) seems to last for quite a long time & seeing it's size, I'd guess the ZX1 has a smaller battery capacity than the Calyx M.

post #2513 of 5495
I finally got the time to get down to JabenSG and try the Calyx M. Bad news is, there demo unit can't read my exfat formatted SD card. I just have to listen to whatever tracks available in the internal storage. My immediate impression of the SQ is it has very good imaging and instrument separation. Bass seems tight. I will not comment on the DX90 comparison since I hardly did a side by side comparison. What I can comment on is how the M feels like on my hand and it's usability.

As everyone already knows the M is quite huge. I'm 5 foot 6 inches tall and has a medium size hands. Although the M is about the size of the Galaxy phones, one handed operation is quite a challenge especially when dealing with the screen. I had to put it down the table so I can browse on the screen comfortably.

Scrolling is not as smooth as the samsung phones but it's just enough for me not to be bothered. It feels the same experience as scrolling down a long list on DX90. Certainly better than DX50.

The interface while pleasant to the eyes overall takes a while to get used to. I hope the final firmware includes directory browsing. At it's current state scrolling thru a single long list is a pain. Be it by track, artist or album. Creating a playlist is intuitive enough and I think is well implemented.

And the dreaded volume control, seems the magnet is strong enough and not easy to dislodge. There is a bit of delay when you slide it and the actual response but it does't bother me.

To be honest I don't like the copper color or the M's back and sides. I feels like a piece of metal block which is rusting on one side.

When I get the time, I'll definitely come back for more SQ comparison.
post #2514 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by headwhacker View Post

I finally got the time to get down to JabenSG and try the Calyx M. Bad news is, there demo unit can't read my exfat formatted SD card. I just have to listen to whatever tracks available in the internal storage. My immediate impression of the SQ is it has very good imaging and instrument separation. Bass seems tight. I will not comment on the DX90 comparison since I hardly did a side by side comparison. What I can comment on is how the M feels like on my hand and it's usability.

As everyone already knows the M is quite huge. I'm 5 foot 6 inches tall and has a medium size hands. Although the M is about the size of the Galaxy phones, one handed operation is quite a challenge especially when dealing with the screen. I had to put it down the table so I can browse on the screen comfortably.

Scrolling is not as smooth as the samsung phones but it's just enough for me not to be bothered. It feels the same experience as scrolling down a long list on DX90. Certainly better than DX50.

The interface while pleasant to the eyes overall takes a while to get used to. I hope the final firmware includes directory browsing. At it's current state scrolling thru a single long list is a pain. Be it by track, artist or album. Creating a playlist is intuitive enough and I think is well implemented.

And the dreaded volume control, seems the magnet is strong enough and not easy to dislodge. There is a bit of delay when you slide it and the actual response but it does't bother me.

To be honest I don't like the copper color or the M's back and sides. I feels like a piece of metal block which is rusting on one side.

When I get the time, I'll definitely come back for more SQ comparison.

 

Thanks for the impressions. Actually I kind of like what I am hearing about the M.

 

More SQ impressions please when you get the chance!

post #2515 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by headwhacker View Post

The interface while pleasant to the eyes overall takes a while to get used to. I hope the final firmware includes directory browsing. At it's current state scrolling thru a single long list is a pain. Be it by track, artist or album. Creating a playlist is intuitive enough and I think is well implemented.

 

Is there no Genre implementation?

 

I agree that browse by folder is an essential firmware upgrade. I remember reading that they are working on it.

post #2516 of 5495

Confirmed on Calyx Facebook page hat you have to format the card to FAT32 or NTFS

post #2517 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barra View Post

So is that yours or are you demoing? Ignoring ergonomics, how does it sound compared to your extensive dap line up? Is it comparable to the 901 or 240 or is it more in the range of the x5 / dx90?

It's the demo unit. First production units would only arrive end May or early June.

As with the SG demo unit, the one I tried also cannot read my 64GB exFat micro SD card. I suspect the current firmware (hopefully not hardware) can only support up to 32GB mSD cards in FAT32 like the old ak100. Didn't have my full size SD card to try if that works. So I too was limited to trying tracks already loaded and the only familiar album is audiophile jazz prologue vol3.

Soundwise it is enjoyable with enough oomph for all IEMs and many cans. I was at about 15% volume with jh13 or tg334, and never crossing halfway on the slider.

I did a/b compare with dx90 and found them more similar than different FR/tonality wise. I don't think it is too warm, just that the M has more density and smoother sound while dx90 more airy and transparent. I can see people preferring one or the other. Persobally I do quite like this sound. I can also see users who like hifiman or portaphile type sound attracted to it. I can almost imagine it is what the dx90 would sound like with LO to the 627x/micro. Will get a FAT32 card with my usual albums to demo again.

I share a lot of headwhacker's impression on UI, slider, casing material etc. Slider is quite tight and should be "safe" but hard to fine tune volume. It can be disable and use the UI to change volume tho the software slider is kinda buried inside couple layers of menu. UI doesn't seems particular intuitive. Lack of folder browsing could be a deal breaker for me. Also I would like the option to view the full album art instead of the themed overlay "hole" that shows only the centre of the image.

The exterior look and feel is a mixed story. It look and feel gorgeous on the top with the large nice Gorilla glass covered screen. But the aluminium on the side and back seem quite flimsy - might be the same grade (or worse) than that of dx50/90. The laser engraving was crude and hope it is much better in production units. Sizewise it's kinda like stacking two galaxy s4 together. Doesn't feel particularly hefty/robust given it's size.
post #2518 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcc View Post

I did a/b compare with dx90 and found them more similar than different FR/tonality wise. I don't think it is too warm, just that the M has more density and smoother sound while dx90 more airy and transparent. I can see people preferring one or the other.

 

It sounds as though the M may not be worth the asking price then.

 

I thought i had read that folder browsing was going to be available on the M. If not then another strike against it for me.


Edited by Sauntere - 5/7/14 at 1:36am
post #2519 of 5495
I hope it's just a FW update away to support exfat. I'll bring a 16GB formatted with FAT32 when I get the chance. It's early to say for me it shares similar SQ with DX90 but I don't feel like the urge to order the M just because I already am enjoying DX90. I think we are at the crossroads of diminishing return in terms of SQ. User experience will weigh more than ever on current and future DAPs.

Before I forget, I think the M because of it's size at least for me is not a pants/jeans pocket device. I tried it on my front pants pocket and it's sticking out.
post #2520 of 5495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sauntere View Post

It sounds as though the M may not be worth the asking price then.

I thought i had read that folder browsing was going to be available on the M. If not then another strike against it for me.

Get a demo and decide for yourself. My situation is maybe unique as I kept both ak240, hm901, in addition to dx90 so the delta from dx90 to M might not be important to me, but could be significant for others. Cheers!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › $999 Calyx M with DXD + DSD, 64GB + SD + µSD storage