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 162

post #2416 of 13841
Thread Starter 
Deleted. 
 
Measurements all look good, difference but I look forward to listening impressions. 

Edited by jamato8 - 4/9/14 at 7:30pm
post #2417 of 13841

 

 

 

post #2418 of 13841

I think the DX90 and X5 are neck and neck except distortion, which DX90 has less, and X5 has more power.  I'm not totoally sure, but DX90 square wave looks the best, and X5 is the next best.

post #2419 of 13841

According to that Chinese link, the graphs show that DX90 wins in almost any aspect compared with DX50/X3/X5...

 

Also someone in that link said it would be better to use the LO and add an amp in order to get better SQ from the DX90, just like the AK series...

post #2420 of 13841

DX50 definitely measures the worst among the 4.  I don't know why they didn't include the FR graph and square wave of DX100.


Edited by SilverEars - 4/9/14 at 7:43pm
post #2421 of 13841

Wait... why is the voltage only 2.1Vrms?

 

Shouldn't it be 2.8Vrms like the X5 and X3?

 

147mW into 32ohms, while being okay is much lower than stated by Ibasso. I was thinking it would do 250mW+ like the X5 since they're both rated at 2.8Vrms.

 

(Is this DX90 perhaps just a beta-test unit or something?)


Edited by M-13 - 4/9/14 at 7:51pm
post #2422 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by M-13 View Post

Wait... why is the voltage only 2.1Vrms?

Shouldn't it be 2.8Vrms like the X5 and X3?

147mW into 32ohms, while being okay is much lower than stated by Ibasso. I was thinking it would do 250mW+ like the X5 since they're both rated at 2.8Vrms.

(Is this DX90 perhaps just a beta-test unit or something?)


I don't read chinese, but possible it's set to mid gain?
post #2423 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by M-13 View Post
 

Wait... why is the voltage only 2.1Vrms?

 

Shouldn't it be 2.8Vrms like the X5 and X3?

 

147mW into 32ohms, while being okay is much lower than stated by Ibasso. I was thinking it would do 250mW+ like the X5 since they're both rated at 2.8Vrms.

 

(Is this DX90 perhaps just a beta-test unit or something?)

Maybe it was set it medium gain? That would make sense as medium gain is rated 2.0Vrms

post #2424 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by headwhacker View Post

I don't read chinese, but possible it's set to mid gain?
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegunner100 View Post
 

Maybe it was set it medium gain? That would make sense as medium gain is rated 2.0Vrms

I REALLY hope that's what it is. And you guys are right, that's the most logical explanation.

 

For reference on the Ibasso site it says:

 

Output Level: 1.3Vrms(Low gain), 2.0Vrms(Mid gain), 2.8Vrms(High Gain)

 

So if it was on medium gain then it exceeds the specifications, if it was on High, then... :confused: (calling on our Chinese members for clarification please, thank you)

post #2425 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post
 

I think the DX90 and X5 are neck and neck except distortion, which DX90 has less, and X5 has more power.  I'm not totoally sure, but DX90 square wave looks the best, and X5 is the next best.

 

You are somewhat right. The number looks better on DX90 for the most parts but when it comes to full output, you can see X3 and X5 can comfortable max out (and almost double the output) and still has THD under 1%. Basically it means DX90 should have the advantage as long as you don't push it outside of its comfort zone. The further you push it, the more X5 will catch up, and overtake when near / over 150mW is needed. But with that much power into 32ohm, DX50 should be just fine with most headphone out there.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-13 View Post
 

Wait... why is the voltage only 2.1Vrms?

 

Shouldn't it be 2.8Vrms like the X5 and X3?

 

147mW into 32ohms, while being okay is much lower than stated by Ibasso. I was thinking it would do 250mW+ like the X5 since they're both rated at 2.8Vrms.

 

(Is this DX90 perhaps just a beta-test unit or something?)

 

iBasso stated it can do 2.8Vrms, but it is not that same as saying it is the maximum undistorted output. It is the 1% THD threshold that matters. Gain setting doesn't have much to do with it directly. What the measurement means is that you keep pushing the volume (and gain) higher and higher until you hit the 1% mark (or you max out on volume and gain, like X3 / X5 in this case). The 1% mark is chosen because it is believed that that is the point when distortion becomes audible to human ears. So basically it is a test to show the maximum power you can get into a certain load until you start to distort the sound audibly.


Edited by ClieOS - 4/9/14 at 8:17pm
post #2426 of 13841
Thread Starter 

All I know from listening is that I can run the DX90 at max volume and I hear no distortion and the sound quality doesn't really change from when the volume was lower. I wonder if they tested it correctly. I trust iBasso more than what is shown there for output because I have heard the output into the TH900 and the HE-560. 

post #2427 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
 

 

iBasso stated it can do 2.8Vrms, but it is not that same as saying it is the maximum undistorted output. It is the 1% THD threshold that matters. Gain setting doesn't have much to do with it directly. What the measurement means is that you keep pushing the volume (and gain) higher and higher until you hit the 1% mark (or you max out on volume and gain, like X3 / X5 in this case). The 1% mark is chosen because it is believed that that is the point when distortion becomes audible to human ears. So basically it is a test to show the maximum power you can get into a certain load until you start to distort the sound audibly.

I see, so what you're saying is that if the tester maxes the volume of the DX90, then it will be 2.8Vrms, but with higher than 1% THD?

 

Does it say what volume he used before reaching 1%?

 

Hmm... I guess the X5 does have an advantage for harder to drive cans that need closer to max volume.

post #2428 of 13841

I see, so I'm thinking X3 and X5 would perform better at high volume for more demanding headphones.

 

The FR graphs, at what load is that?

post #2429 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamato8 View Post
 

All I know from listening is that I can run the DX90 at max volume and I hear no distortion and the sound quality doesn't really change from when the volume was lower. I wonder if they tested it correctly. I trust iBasso more than what is shown there for output because I have heard the output into the TH900 and the HE-560. 


So from your subjective impression, would you say the DX90 is just as powerful as the X5 in driving all those cans? Or a little less? Because according to this tester the X5 is like 48% 25% more powerful which seems just wrong, unless he was using medium gain or something.


Edited by M-13 - 4/9/14 at 8:46pm
post #2430 of 13841
Quote:
Originally Posted by M-13 View Post

I REALLY hope that's what it is. And you guys are right, that's the most logical explanation.

For reference on the Ibasso site it says:

Output Level: 1.3Vrms(Low gain), 2.0Vrms(Mid gain), 2.8Vrms(High Gain)

So if it was on medium gain then it exceeds the specifications, if it was on High, then... confused.gif (calling on our Chinese members for clarification please, thank you)

It must be. The DX50 is also at the same level at 1.7Vrms (1.612Vrms) for mid gain.
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 . . . . .