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 176

post #2626 of 4178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sauntere View Post
 

So what is going on ? They say the M has the same sound signature as the Femto which is highly regarded as a $6000 dac. Yet the M is just not getting impressions indicating a top notch sound.

 

Marketing?

post #2627 of 4178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluebear View Post
 

 

Go and try to audition an In Ear Stage Diver SD3 if you can get access to it. So far IMO it has the closest sounding signature to Calyx M based on my memory. Also wait for more people to post their review of M. They may have different taste compared to mine since my preference is EX-1000 and 1plus2 style of signatures, so they may have different opinions of it. More impression will come when the actual model launches in May/June. The sound signature may also change in the launch version.

 

I love the EX-1000 sound signature as well. At first I really hated it but it has grown on me tremendously over 2 years. Seems like the Calyx M battery life is about just as good as the AK240 as well if not slightly better (only 7 hours at minimum it seems). 

post #2628 of 4178

post #2629 of 4178

^ With that alphabet sidebar on the Artists view (and Album, Track etc.), this interface might work just fine. It doesn't seem terribly laggy.

post #2630 of 4178

Imagine that professionals who take their time to develop a product know what they are doing.  Now we need them in stock somewhere that will ship to NA =)

post #2631 of 4178

Responsiveness seems similar to the AK120. Pretty well done UI though.

post #2632 of 4178

UI responsiveness seems bearable, animations seem a bit slow moving. It is far behind my ZX1 though... and even behind the DX90. It wouldn't have been to difficult to throw in a good cpu at the price they are asking. Although the decision was probably a battery trade off, due to the large screens power consumption unfortunately. This is why I love my ZX1, the battery can go for 24 hrs on flac if you don't use the screen much and thanks to all the side buttons you don't have to. Hmmph, when will battery technology advance or power efficiency increase in electronics.


Edited by T.R.A.N.C.E. - 5/10/14 at 9:46pm
post #2633 of 4178

At 98.2 Mw per channel, the Calyx M is more than 6 times as powerful as the Sony NWZ-ZX1 (15 Mw per channel). That also influences battery life.

 

Edit: I should add some context. That is measured at 16 ohms. Here are some published specs DAP comparisons on a per channel basis with 16 ohm IEMs:

 

X5:               230 Mw

AK100:          70 Mw

Sony ZX1:     15 Mw

Calyx M:        98.2 Mw


Edited by cooperpwc - 5/11/14 at 12:06am
post #2634 of 4178

I wonder how DX90 fits into all this, but yeah, I know X5(and even X3) has the more powerful amp section.  This is one reason I would consider the X5 as iems do sound more punchier with a more powerful amp, but yeah, when it comes to clarity and accuracy, you want a good DAC implementation(trying to figure out which one it is, obviously the AK240 is the best, but $$$$).  That Sony is weak.  :p 


Edited by SilverEars - 5/11/14 at 12:33am
post #2635 of 4178
The calyx M uses the sabre es9018 right? Is this the mobile version(dx90) or desktop version of the chip?

I have the dx90. Ia the calyx m worth the upgrade?
post #2636 of 4178

Is the ZX-1 even able to adequately drive multi-BA ciems? I like everything about the ZX-1 except the lack of a mSD slot, but this really gives me pause.

post #2637 of 4178
Quote:
Originally Posted by ojy89 View Post

The calyx M uses the sabre es9018 right? Is this the mobile version(dx90) or desktop version of the chip?

I have the dx90. Ia the calyx m worth the upgrade?

Mobile version which is the ESS9018K2M which has two channels each.  DX90 is dual K2M(4 channels), whereas, the calyx M uses single K2M.  The DX100 uses single desktop 9018 with 8 channels available, and the HM-901 uses dual desktop 9018 with total of 16 channels available.  In terms of sonic quality, you have to listen to them to determine which you think sounds the best to your subjective perception.  


Edited by SilverEars - 5/11/14 at 1:02am
post #2638 of 4178
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post
 

I wonder how DX90 fits into all this, but yeah, I know X5(and even X3) has the more powerful amp section.  This is one reason I would consider the X5 as iems do sound more punchier with a more powerful amp, but yeah, when it comes to clarity and accuracy, you want a good DAC implementation(trying to figure out which one it is, obviously the AK240 is the best, but $$$$).  That Sony is weak.  :p 

 

iBasso does not publish the specs and I have not otherwise seen them.

 

X5 is powerful but actually I think that its line out is the real sweet spot. As a source through the Pico Power it is lovely. However the stack is a bit on the large and heavy side. As I have said, my holy grail is a standalone DAP. The potential of the apparently punchy sound signature of the M together with very low published THD has me intrigued. It could be great - or really not great. I have to hear it for myself.

post #2639 of 4178
Quote: low
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post
 

At 98.2 Mw per channel, the Calyx M is more than 6 times as powerful as the Sony NWZ-ZX1 (15 Mw per channel). That also influences battery life.

 

Simple power figures can be misleading, there are fluctuations in power output for different parts of the frequency range (severely across multi BA, but bass in dynamics also) as well as other design elements to consider. For example the ZX1 uses Capacitors to make its power delivery more "robust" and less prone to variations in frequency response. The simple way to put is, the ZX1 sounds more powerful than the specs would let on. Another example of this same Capacitor enhanced power stage design is in the Dx90. The X5 has been shown to have over 150mW more power than the DX90 at high impedances, yet many impressions on Head-Fi have stated that the DX90 can power phones like the HD800 and HE-500 better than the X5. Why? Even though it has less power, it has a more robust and stable power delivery (better power reserves due to the capacitors, meaning in high stress situations it has an advantage, similar to the ZX1.

 

Taken from a Russian comparison for example of driving a difficult load, in this case a tricky low 8 ohm load:

"To assess surge capacity were taken some of the "tight" and require high current due to the impact resistance of 8 ohms. DX 50 on medium goes into overload mode. X5 and DX 90 develop sufficient volume without distortion, but headroom in DX 90 above, since X5 begins to choke at maximum volume."

 

From impressions is the DX90 can power tricky low, and heavy high loads better than the X5. Even though it has been tested as having significantly less power output at both low and high impedances. Conclusion is we cannot take power specifications at face value!

 

If these hear say impressions are not enough for you, I have personally compared my ZX1 to my DX50. The DX50 has 2 times more power at 16 ohm than ZX1. Then how is it that the ZX1 has more usable volume at 16 ohm? How is it that the ZX1 is more airy, more dynamic while using 20-30% of its total volume, compared to the DX50 on high gain where I had to use 70-80% of its total volume? Power stage design makes a difference! Numbers are not everything! The DX50 also uses caps in its power stage, but this advantage is negated because the DX50 also uses output coupling caps, which the DX90/ZX1 do not. The X5 does not use any caps in its design. We have no idea what Calyx are going to do, and I doubt we ever will, as the M looks mighty hard to open up to see its inside.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by doublea71 View Post
 

Is the ZX-1 even able to adequately drive multi-BA ciems? I like everything about the ZX-1 except the lack of a mSD slot, but this really gives me pause.

 

It can drive the 6 BA Noble very well, I can only use less than 50% volume, and that's for extremely loud. So I'd wager it can drive 8-12 BA iems with no problems.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ojy89 View Post

I have the dx90. Ia the calyx m worth the upgrade?

 

Its up to each persons sound signature preferences. Not enough impressions to make an informed decision at the moment. From some impressions, it seems several people find the Calyx M less neutral/natural than the DX90. But I would wager that has a lot to do with their sound preferences and the music they listen to. I'm sure some impressions will come along with praise for the M soon enough.


Edited by T.R.A.N.C.E. - 5/11/14 at 2:53am
post #2640 of 4178
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post

Mobile version which is the ESS9018K2M which has two channels each.  DX90 is dual K2M(4 channels), whereas, the calyx M uses single K2M.  The DX100 uses single desktop 9018 with 8 channels available, and the HM-901 uses dual desktop 9018 with total of 16 channels available.  In terms of sonic quality, you have to listen to them to determine which you think sounds the best to your subjective perception.  

Well i demo-ed the pre production unit and wasn't really impressed with it, especially im comparison with the DX90. But I must say the unit was faulty and was not able to read my sd card, so I cpuldnt test with tracks that I am comfortable with. Also, I was told the production unit might be tuned further, so lets see how it goes!

It means I would not be the first few to jump the boat however, until I demo the production unit at least. smily_headphones1.gif
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