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 199

post #2971 of 5549

That's crazy. I don't think any music listener would spend time to label 450GB of music. It will take few months of time. 

They must update this feature as soon as possible....Did they officially announce an update for this feature? I just sent them an e-mail regarding this.


Edited by kawaivpc1 - 5/29/14 at 10:47pm
post #2972 of 5549

Asked a couple of questions to the guys at Addicted to Audio....via email. 

 

They say the M is of similar SQ to the AK120 in terms of overall refinement but that the Calyx M is a little warmer sounding.

 

In their opinion the AK240 is absolutely top tier whilst the others available are not at the same level.

 

They made no comment on the UI or bugs.

 

So for owners of the AK120, how good is it ? If the Calyx M is similar in SQ does that make it (Calyx M) good value ?


Edited by Sauntere - 5/29/14 at 10:55pm
post #2973 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sauntere View Post

Asked a couple of questions to the guys at Addicted to Audio....via email. 

They say the M is of similar SQ to the AK120 in terms of overall refinement but that the Calyx M is a little warmer sounding.

In their opinion the AK240 is absolutely top tier whilst the others available are not at the same level.

They made no comment on the UI or bugs.

So for owners of the AK120, how good is it ? If the Calyx M is similar in SQ does that make it (Calyx M) good value ?

Well personally I prefer dx90 over
ak120 or M (v0.5). So to me at $419 dx90 IS a good value.

We'd tho probably wanna give calyx more time to come up with a version they deem worthy of v1.0....
post #2974 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by kkcc View Post


Well personally I prefer dx90 over
ak120 or M (v0.5).

 

I've not heard either, but the consensus does seem to be that the DX90 has the best SQ in general of all the current crop, with only the AK240 being better than that (caveat to that being that there are plenty of comments in various threads that say the AK240 improvement over DX90 is relatively minimal and certainly not worth the extra money).

 

I'd be heading straight for the DX90 if it had two micro SD slots, but as it stands I'd be taking a drop from my Cowon X7's 160gb (which has been maxed out for years), and I don't really want to wait another year or two before 256gb cards come out and drop to an affordable price.

 

The way I'm looking at this at the moment is that most, if not all, of these hi-res players are almost certainly going to be sonically better than the X7 by default, so it really is capacity, ability to play multiple file formats (particularly OGG), battery life and no ridiculous file limits which are the deciding factors for me - I hovered over a cheap (or, rather, good value) second hand AK120 Titan the other day, but when I really started looking into it discovered that it has a 10000 file limit, and it sounds like they're not really bothering with upgrades to AK120 firmware any more, concentrating on the 240.

 

EDIT - by the time a DAP comes out that meets all of my above requirements, I might have saved up enough for a 240!!


Edited by greatbadir - 5/29/14 at 11:59pm
post #2975 of 5549

Here is how I see it.  The M is the lowest cost fully featured dap in production.  The next cheapest would be a Cypher or Centrance stack, then the AK240 and finally a Hugo stack.  So while it might be at the quality of an AK120... it costs less and does more.

post #2976 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

Here is how I see it.  The M is the lowest cost fully featured dap in production.  The next cheapest would be a Cypher or Centrance stack, then the AK240 and finally a Hugo stack.  So while it might be at the quality of an AK120... it costs less and does more.

What do you mean by this?  We also have X5 and DX90 as options.  I wondering how well the Cypher or Centrance stack up to AK240.

post #2977 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by kawaivpc1 View Post
 

That's crazy. I don't think any music listener would spend time to label 450GB of music. It will take few months of time. 

 

 

That's only about 10 DSD tracks  :wink: 

post #2978 of 5549

I thought the X5 did DSD down conversion to PCM but maybe not since the 2.0 firmware.  The DX90 has neither native DSD or a hardware based usb dac.  Ie it is firmware implemented and lags behind the input.  So... yes the X5 is the least expensive fully featured DAP.  But it's not pretty :P  To be fair the Cypher and Centrance stack don't do DSD either.

 

Currawong did a DAP off that compared a bunch including the Cypher stack.  Long story short top shelf if the AK240 and Hugo.


Edited by Solude - 5/30/14 at 4:15am
post #2979 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython View Post
 

 

 

That's only about 10 DSD tracks  :wink: 

:eek:  Why do people want to go DSD with such huge files?  I bet DSD would eat up the battery in seconds.

post #2980 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post
 

:eek:  Why do people want to go DSD with such huge files?  I bet DSD would eat up the battery in seconds.

 

I was, of course, exaggerating for comic effect, but, on a serious note, DSD files are quite insanely large. Personally, if I owned an M, I doubt I'd ever use DSD files, and if I did, it would only ever be if I was using the M as a USB DAC.

post #2981 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython View Post
 

I doubt I'd ever use DSD files, and if I did, it would only ever be if I was using the M as a USB DAC.

 

Yup.  On the road even 16/44 FLAC is overkill given the ambient noise.  But I use my DAP at work too so... Team Overkill =)

post #2982 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

 

Yup.  On the road even 16/44 FLAC is overkill given the ambient noise.  But I use my DAP at work too so... Team Overkill =)

 

Ditto, on both of those observations.

 

Whichever DAP I do end up getting, I doubt I'll have much, if any, DSD stuff, and very little 16/44 FLAC.

 

I am wondering about the comments for all the hi-res players being quite unforgiving when it comes to playing lossy files - i.e. are my MP3 and OGG files actually going to end up sounding worse on a hi-res DAP?  About 60-70% of my collection is a mixture of OGG and MP3 and I really don't want to get all my CDs down from the loft, unbox them and spend weeks re-ripping them again!

post #2983 of 5549

That's what dBpoweramp is for.  Batch convert, go to bed, wake up and it's done.  What I have noticed is VBR is death.  Use CBR lossy if you have to, lossless otherwise.

post #2984 of 5549

Hi everyone,

 

The first time I heard the M was when a pre-production model was made available to Jaben Singapore.

 

For that pre-production model, I commented on the warmish sound and the rough edges on the back of the device. I felt the SQ was lacking in detail and definitely not to my liking at all.

 

Today, I had the opportunity to listen to a production model. I played several DSD files and even loaded my own music from my micro SD card. It took about 1.5 minutes to scan my 64GB card. I have to say that the sound quality is noticeable better than the pre-production model. This time, I felt the details were there. Still slightly warmish sounding but smooth. Soundstage was pretty good too. Of course, all this is based on memory. I did not do any side by side comparison but if you were to ask me, I would rate the SQ as about equal to the AK120, if not better. Do take into consideration that this unit may not be adequately burned in.

 

I still do not like the magnetic volume slider but someone else may love it. The edges at the back of the production model felt smooth to the touch and gave the impression of a well made device. Doesn't feel cheap at all.

 

Just wanted to share this information.

 

 

Note: Tested with Fitear 335DW

post #2985 of 5549
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlanYWM View Post
 

Hi everyone,

 

The first time I heard the M was when a pre-production model was made available to Jaben Singapore.

 

For that pre-production model, I commented on the warmish sound and the rough edges on the back of the device. I felt the SQ was lacking in detail and definitely not to my liking at all.

 

Today, I had the opportunity to listen to a production model. I played several DSD files and even loaded my own music from my micro SD card. It took about 1.5 minutes to scan my 64GB card. I have to say that the sound quality is noticeable better than the pre-production model. This time, I felt the details were there. Still slightly warmish sounding but smooth. Soundstage was pretty good too. Of course, all this is based on memory. I did not do any side by side comparison but if you were to ask me, I would rate the SQ as about equal to the AK120, if not better. Do take into consideration that this unit may not be adequately burned in.

 

I still do not like the magnetic volume slider but someone else may love it. The edges at the back of the production model felt smooth to the touch and gave the impression of a well made device. Doesn't feel cheap at all.

 

Just wanted to share this information.

 

 

Note: Tested with Fitear 335DW

thanks

 

and what about the UI reactivity ?  Still slow ?

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