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 269

post #4021 of 4353
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnakChan View Post
 

 

I forgot to follow up on this. So I'm comparing between the HM-901/Balanced amp module (fw 1.085 April '14 version) & Calyx M (fw 0.96) :-

 

1) JHA Roxannes

    - mids on the Calyx M seems fuller (which is closer to what I'd expect) compared to the HM-901. Stage width on the Calyx M is narrower than the HM-901. Still overall decent presentation by the Calyx M

2) FitEar TG!334

   - same with Rox. The mids are more prominent on the Calyx M than the HM-901.
3) FitEar MH335DW-SR

   - the same with the MH335DW-SR although with this, I kinda feel it's leaning a little towards the lower mids that's pushed forward.

4) Noble K10's

   - the mids are again more prominent on the Calyx M but with this, the trebles seems a little more rolled off compared to the HM-901. I didn't notice this with the other BA's above. Combined with the commonality of soundstage width as with other BA's, the Calyx M feels somewhat more "compressed".

 

Comparing back 'n forth between the HM-901/balanced amp/v1.085 vs the Calyx M 0.96, ignoring the sound stage difference, the Calyx M feels somewhat more linear than the HM-901 which seems to give a little more of a U-shaped presentation across all 3 of these IEMs. What's funny is that I never considered the HM-901/balanced amp as "U-shaped" prior to this test.

 

That's all tests I've done so far. I don't have any DD IEMs aside from the loaner Ditas which I've already commented on. It's rather unusual on how (multi)BA differs from DDs on the Calyx M vs another player.

Let me know if there's anything you'd like me to test and share my thoughts.

 

Thanks for this. Your impression of the M's mids with BA IEMs seems to be more in line with mine now. I do think that the treble is a bit rolled off also which I personally like at least 90% of the time. I hate jangly treble. It, and the overall smooth musical sound signature of the M have some interesting results. The M + Heaven VI is making early Husker Du (Zen Arcade, New Day Rising) sound rather well produced. Actually the sound is quite compelling. These albums were post-punk rough production in the first place and then transferred terribly to CD. This discovery is very pleasing. At the opposite extreme, Jesse Cook's flamenco guitar seemed a little too smooth during my listening yesterday. I felt that the guitar strings needed a bit more twang in the plucking. Generally though, the M sound signature is perfect for me, especially with the aforementioned Heaven VI. It is my favorite portable setup yet. I can listen for hours immersed in the euphonic detailed splendor of it all with zero fatigue.

 

I wonder if adding 1.1 ohms of resistance (as certainly needed with low ohm dynamics like the Kaede) will also add a little treble and reduce the smoothness with BA IEMs. I really have no reason to assume this yet I suspect it may. Eventually I will find out. If so, I will be glad to use an adapter and have the choice for different music. I am guessing that  I will stick with no adapter and zero ohms for the vast majority of my music but there would be exceptions.   

 

Again, much thanks for the impressions.

post #4022 of 4353

Adding impedance will do what it always did reduce dampening and alter frequency response based on the curve the headphone has.  Assuming the 901 amp cards haven't changed they have a pretty high output impedance so the typical mid range suck out and bass/treble boost is par for the course.

post #4023 of 4353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

Adding impedance will do what it always did reduce dampening and alter frequency response based on the curve the headphone has.  Assuming the 901 amp cards haven't changed they have a pretty high output impedance so the typical mid range suck out and bass/treble boost is par for the course.

 

We are talking about taking zero impedance to 1.1 ohms impedance. The latter is well understood. The question is the former which is a bit of a wild card. So without knowing what influence the zero impedance is havingn on BA IEMs, it is difficult to know what the relative change will be from switching to a normal 1.1 ohm impedance.

post #4024 of 4353
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post

 

I wonder if adding 1.1 ohms of resistance (as certainly needed with low ohm dynamics like the Kaede) will also add a little treble and reduce the smoothness with BA IEMs. I really have no reason to assume this yet I suspect it may. Eventually I will find out. If so, I will be glad to use an adapter and have the choice for different music. I am guessing that  I will stick with no adapter and zero ohms for the vast majority of my music but there would be exceptions.   

 

Again, much thanks for the impressions.

This depends on the BA iems, the impedance curve will show where the impedance is the highest and the lowest.  If the impedance is high at some area, it should be more stable than the area of low impedance closer to the added impedance. It should not have much affect on dynamic drivers as they are typically flat impedance, but the added impedance can increase distortion from the lower damping factor, but @ 1.1, it's not significan't enough.  

 

It's sounding like more people are using dynamic drivers with the M.  

post #4025 of 4353

Math, it's hard I know but one the impedance isn't 0, it's whatever the circuit is.  Two they are adding an additional 1.1 in the form of an inline resistor.  It's nothing more than a voltage divider.  If we take the 846 for an example at 0ohm the power delivered to the BAs is 100%.  At 1.1 where the 846 is 15ohm the BAs receives 93% where it is 4ohm 78% and so forth.  From there you take the gain percentage to find the dB drop and poof you know what will happen.

 

We've been making speaker amps for some time now... 0ohm output isn't some newly developed feature.  It's just new to DAPs which are usually built for safe usage and not performance.  Ie run cold and aren't at risk of blowing their output devices when inserting the trs jack.  Looking at you B22 ;)  The effect of 0 output is in fact... no effect.  Adding resistance on the other hand now forces the amp section to provide more voltage and the same current to reach the same levels it did before but can't be shorted out and potentially blown.

 

That said we don't know what the circuit looks like so it might be a discrete circuit, an opamp/buffer or an all in one headpone amp ic.  Calyx typically doesn't do discrete though so... that isn't likely.

post #4026 of 4353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

Math, it's hard I know but one the impedance isn't 0, it's whatever the circuit is.  Two they are adding an additional 1.1 in the form of an inline resistor.  It's nothing more than a voltage divider.  If we take the 846 for an example at 0ohm the power delivered to the BAs is 100%.  At 1.1 where the 846 is 15ohm the BAs receives 93% where it is 4ohm 78% and so forth.  From there you take the gain percentage to find the dB drop and poof you know what will happen.

 

We've been making speaker amps for some time now... 0ohm output isn't some newly developed feature.  It's just new to DAPs which are usually built for safe usage and not performance.  Ie run cold and aren't at risk of blowing their output devices when inserting the trs jack.  Looking at you B22 ;)  The effect of 0 output is in fact... no effect.  Adding resistance on the other hand now forces the amp section to provide more voltage and the same current to reach the same levels it did before but can't be shorted out and potentially blown.

 

That said we don't know what the circuit looks like so it might be a discrete circuit, an opamp/buffer or an all in one headpone amp ic.  Calyx typically doesn't do discrete though so... that isn't likely.

 

This is great information and appreciated. The question is: how come the M distorts with certain low ohm dynamic IEMs? It seems to be the "zero impedance" but nothing in the above tells me why it is happening.


Edited by cooperpwc - 7/30/14 at 7:42am
post #4027 of 4353

Has anyone with an M that distorts actually tried the fix and reported that it removes it?  My guess is that the M has a noise floor that low impedance, read high sensitivity, headphones can find.  The output impedance mod would eat some of that noise.  If the noise is the floor and not from the amp, ie doesn't increase with volume, then it'll help.

 

But until someone actually confirms that the "fix" fixes anything... conjecture.

post #4028 of 4353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post
 

Has anyone with an M that distorts actually tried the fix and reported that it removes it?  My guess is that the M has a noise floor that low impedance, read high sensitivity, headphones can find.  The output impedance mod would eat some of that noise.  If the noise is the floor and not from the amp, ie doesn't increase with volume, then it'll help.

 

But until someone actually confirms that the "fix" fixes anything... conjecture.

 

^ It is not a noise floor. My Heaven VI are much more sensitive than the Kaede but do not distort.

 

I have no issues with hiss with the M and any of my IEMs. What I and others are hearing, only with certain low ohm dynamic IEMs, is distortion.

post #4029 of 4353
Quote:
Originally Posted by cooperpwc View Post
 

What I and others are hearing, only with certain low ohm dynamic IEMs, is distortion.

 

Can you be more precise because distortion could be any type of sound deemed offensive and in some cases even liked.  Is it a hiss, smear, crack, brightness, shoutiness?  

 

Electrically the Kaede is a much easier load than the Heaven in every way imaginable.  It's frequency response is a mess but that's a problem for your ears not the amp :P

post #4030 of 4353

People were getting weird sounds which they call noise, but not the noise we are accustomed to hearing like hiss.  There was a Korean user that was using an impedance adapter with his LCD-X to take out this sound or noise.  LCD-X is resistive and low impedance.  Some dynamic drivers are low impedance and close to flat impedance graph. I have heard this issue for my Galaxy S4 for low impedance phones, but it happened with BA iems also.  What it did was distorted the bass creating distortion.  IT was fixed by firmware upgrade.


Edited by SilverEars - 7/30/14 at 6:20pm
post #4031 of 4353

How can i cause the cxM to play all tracks from the (complete) library randomly (shuffle mode), like the DX90 does - it´s very practical to use the player blind, when you are on the go ?

 

Is there any idea ?

post #4032 of 4353
Make a playlist of all album and set it to shuffle.
post #4033 of 4353

thx for this wonderful idea, i used this way with all artists - but even then, there are too much entries.

post #4034 of 4353

I was thinking... why would I want to keep my Geek Out now that I have the Calyx M? I can use the M as an USB DAC and I guess I won't need all the 1,000 mW of the Geek Out since I will use IEMs now and LCD-XC in the future. Better sell the Geek Out and the DT880/600 to help finance the LCD-XC. :) 


Edited by Matias - 7/31/14 at 2:56pm
post #4035 of 4353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matias View Post

I was thinking... why would I want to keep my Geek Out now that I have the Calyx M? I can use the M as an USB DAC and I guess I won't need all the 1,000 mW of the Geek Out since I will use IEMs now and LCD-XC in the future. Better sell the Geek Out and the DT880/600 to help finance the LCD-XC. smily_headphones1.gif  

Sounds like a plan! 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