or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear ›  DX90. 2X Sabre,1st page: Downloads, info&inst. . ! Lurker0 FW Mod link 1st page !!. .NEW FW! 2.3.0 . . . . .
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

DX90. 2X Sabre,1st page: Downloads, info&inst. . ! Lurker0 FW Mod link 1st page !!. .NEW FW! 2.3.0 . . . . . - Page 109

post #1621 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post

One week left, that will be very surprising but again you never know. deadhorse.gif

Sorry I could not help. 
Will you be attempting a balanced output mod on the dx90?
You seem to be very knowledgeable!
post #1622 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by wickson View Post


Will you be attempting a balanced output mod on the dx90?
You seem to be very knowledgeable!

Me? Very unlikely, the dac in dual mode requires some output circuitry to balance it, that means they have not designed the player as a balanced player. It would be best iBasso does it themselves and create a balanced version. Maybe my friend @Sorensiim may want to try it? Sorry Soren I could not resist. :beerchug:

post #1623 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post
 

Me? Very unlikely, the dac in dual mode requires some output circuitry to balance it, that means they have not designed the player as a balanced player. It would be best iBasso does it themselves and create a balanced version. Maybe my friend @Sorensiim may want to try it? Sorry Soren I could not resist. :beerchug:

 

Sorry my DAP knowledge is quite limited..

 

What is a balanced player? Would you also mind quickly summarising why the dual dac implementation is advantages to improving the SQ as well please?

 

With all honesty, I was a bit worried about the dual dac being a gimmick but having heard from Jamato about the SQ im quite assured..

post #1624 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by philiptw View Post
 

 

Sorry my DAP knowledge is quite limited..

 

What is a balanced player? Would you also mind quickly summarising why the dual dac implementation is advantages to improving the SQ as well please?

 

With all honesty, I was a bit worried about the dual dac being a gimmick but having heard from Jamato about the SQ im quite assured..

 

The single-end version is simple and does not require any adjustments but a dual dac implementation does require additional circuitry in order to maintain equality on both channels. The differential consists of signal inversion so it's more complicated but supposedly provides a better output signal that isolates the positive and negative of each channel instead of having a common ground.

 

As far as if you think the single versus the double-dac makes a difference, what do you think of the AK100 and AK120? For balanced, how about HM-901 or AK240? tough decisions and varied implementations. The skills of the design staff is at a premium when implementing such boards.

 

it usually comes down to isolation and better SNR.


Edited by musicheaven - 3/30/14 at 3:39pm
post #1625 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by musicheaven View Post
 

 

The single-end version is simple and does not require any adjustments but a dual dac implementation does require additional circuitry in order to maintain equality on both channels. The differential consists of signal inversion so it's more complicated but supposedly provides a better output signal that isolates the positive and negative of each channel instead of having a common ground.

 

As far as if you think the single versus the double-dac makes a difference, what do you think of the AK100 and AK120? For balanced, how about HM-901 or AK240? tough decisions and varied implementations. The skills of the design staff is at a premium when implementing such boards.

 

it usually comes down to isolation and better SNR.

 

Thank you for the summary! ^_^ 

post #1626 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamato8 View Post

Yes, OTG works great. The dac function from PC will be implemented but not yet. 
Oh. I thought the DAC function from PC was going to be enable on the next FW release for the DX50 so assuming the same for the DX90
post #1627 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twinster View Post

Oh. I thought the DAC function from PC was going to be enable on the next FW release for the DX50 so assuming the same for the DX90
Dx50 DAC function? I haven't spent much time in that thread... They're implementing it?
post #1628 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by wickson View Post


Dx50 DAC function? I haven't spent much time in that thread... They're implementing it?

 

Yup we have been waiting for it. That is about the only feature update missing on DX50.

post #1629 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by headwhacker View Post

Yup we have been waiting for it. That is about the only feature update missing on DX50.
Now I regret selling mine!
post #1630 of 13841

When the opening spec post states "USB music and OTG support", are we talking USB Audio Out so that it would work with a DAC's usb input?

post #1631 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by likearake View Post
 

When the opening spec post states "USB music and OTG support", are we talking USB Audio Out so that it would work with a DAC's usb input?

Unfortunately, no.  It means you can feed music into the DX50's DAC via the USB port from a source like a computer and use the on-board DAC and Amp (or use the line out to plug into a different amp).  Hope that helps...

 

Cheers!:beerchug:

-HK sends


Edited by HK_sends - 3/30/14 at 7:27pm
post #1632 of 13841

From my extensive reading of opinions/reviews/PMs on Head-Fi, I found the consensus in rating stand alone DAP SQ only (ignoring ergonomics) from headphone out (with no external amp) to be:

 

Apple<<X3<AK100<=DX50<AD120<=X5<DX90 (expected)<=DX100<AK240<=Calyx M (expected)<=balanced 901<Hugo

 

Is this how everyone else does the math? 

post #1633 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by HK_sends View Post
 

Unfortunately, no.  It means you can feed music into the DX50's DAC via the USB port from a source like a computer and use the on-board DAC and Amp (or use the line out to plug into a different amp).  Hope that helps...

 

 

 

Ah thanks for that! Would have made the DX90 the standout for me as I like to have as many playback options as possible...

post #1634 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barra View Post
 

From my extensive reading of opinions/reviews/PMs on Head-Fi, I found the consensus in rating stand alone DAP SQ only (ignoring ergonomics) from headphone out (with no external amp) to be:

 

Apple<<X3<AK100<=DX50<AD120<=X5<DX90 (expected)<=DX100<AK240<=Calyx M (expected)<=balanced 901<Hugo

 

Is this how everyone else does the math? 

the case about "listening to music" is that actually there is no math. math can only give you general clues about what you would possibly meet when you buy a dap. it can be expected that a dap with signal-to-noise ratio of 119db to give a clearer and less distorted sound than a one that has 90db, yet this superiority in math does not make it "better" in sound quality in subjective terms.

 

keep the above table you made in mind, but as a headfier who changes daps frequently, i recommend you to try each of them! : )

post #1635 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barra View Post
 

From my extensive reading of opinions/reviews/PMs on Head-Fi, I found the consensus in rating stand alone DAP SQ only (ignoring ergonomics) from headphone out (with no external amp) to be:

 

Apple<<X3<AK100<=DX50<AD120<=X5<DX90 (expected)<=DX100<AK240<=Calyx M (expected)<=balanced 901<Hugo

 

Is this how everyone else does the math? 


The AK100 sounds much better than the DX50, depending on headphones. The modified AK100 sounds much better than the DX50 with all headphones.

Everyone is making assumptions about the DX90 and Calyx M, we have to wait and see.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear ›  DX90. 2X Sabre,1st page: Downloads, info&inst. . ! Lurker0 FW Mod link 1st page !!. .NEW FW! 2.3.0 . . . . .