Just ported 2.0 to the dx50
- 477 Posts. Joined 1/2014
- Location: Toronto'ish
- Select All Posts By This User
Just ported 2.0 to the dx50
(genuine question): Won't iBasso offer this soon, to DX50-owners, anyway?
Not until the end of the month and he did bring rockbox to the dx50..... He also ported the different sound sigs from different firmware versions too.
But.... yes, the release is inevitable.
Ahh, now that's quite cool, I admit
As for Rockbox, I know what it is, but let me ask you: does it have any significant advantages over a modern firmware like that provided by iBasso on the DX50/90 or, say, Fiio on the X5?
Firmwares in 2013/2014 devices offer substantially better functionality than older DAPs, so I wonder if there is much benefit to Rockboxing a recent DAP.
Mehh.... so basically, it's not really worth Rockboxing a DX90, then
I think sometimes people change firmwares (or root their cellphones) mostly because it makes them feel empowered in influencing the operation of their device, rather than necessarily achieving substantial gains in performance.
That's OK - more power to them, but if there's marginal returns on the hassle, then I personally won't bother. It's all-good. Each to their own, etc. etc.
Yep, me too. Sorensiim said, a month or so ago, that he'd be willing to try a mod, since the standard DX90 circuit topology is apparently 95% of the way there, anyway, so a mod should be easy. I did click on the recently-posted foreign link, but it didn't seem sufficiently detailed to me.
Hopefully, someone here on Head-fi will post an appropriate explanation of how to accomplish it, soon
However, having just received my DX90, I will admit that the stock firmware is not the sonic disaster that the DX50 has been from day one. It will be interesting to see if the "sound signature" changes with every firmware upgrade like the DX50 and DX100 before it. If iBasso (or more likely Rockchip) has finally resolved the morphing sound signature problem once and for all, I might actually be able to live with the stock firmware. In a strange way, I kind of like its simplicity. Still, the stock DX90 firmware doesn't have anywhere near the the features and versatility of Rockbox, and like the DX50 firmware, gapless doesn't always work correctly.
The DX90's hardware, on the other hand, is unquestionably better than the DX50. I would attribute at least 85% of the improvement to the much superior amplification stage. After the DX50, I just don't trust Rockchip to get the most out of the hardware, so I'm looking forward to a Rockbox port.
I downsampled all of my high res audio to 44/16 using MBIT+ in the iZotope RX software. It saves a massive amount space, with no sonic downside that I can hear using the DX50. I'm beginning to believe high res playback for practical uses is little more than a gimmick.
Even if you are a staunch supporter of high res playback, if you had to choose between native high res playback with deeply flawed codec (DX50 stock firmware) or downsampled playback with a flawless codec (Rockbox), which would you choose? My suggestion would be to try both before reaching any conclusions.
My guess is that it may be either a power management or data buffering issue. Whether firmware tweaking would be sufficient to address that (or whatever else it might be), is anyone's guess.
I'm still likely to buy a DX90, but I would like to know that this issue has been successfully dealt with before I do (as well as the random truncation of the first 2, or last 2, seconds of each track, which has been reported by many users).
Downsampling it at least to 24/96 would be the best solution.