DX90. 2X Sabre,1st page: Downloads, info&inst. . ! Lurker0 FW Mod link 1st page !!. .NEW FW! 2.3.0 . . . . . - Page 345
Gear mentioned in this thread:
Nope. Planning on using the phase-flipped noise reduction and extra drive to clean up the sound and widen soundstage, etc. Look up Tyll's posts on balanced headphone amping.
Unfortunately all you're right about SQ changes. Damn it, iBasso. On 2.0.5 dynamics are gone, soundstage is wider, but depth sucks (the 3D like presentation is gone), also sound is warmer, there is less treble and sound is just boring and slow. DX90 with 2.0.5 reminds mi of DX50.
I also got back to 2.0.0 using RKbatchtool - downgrade was flawless.
If you watched the posts after this, you'd find that Vinnie responded to me personally saying he'd make time as long as I could verify at least 10 people would be interested. Already up to 7. Once I get 3 more I'll ship my DX90 off to Vinnie for him to develop on.
Edited by Kojaku - 5/17/14 at 6:16am
I have to say you must be the smarter one because you haven't still bought the DX90 and see people struggle when they do.
What do you think of the DX90?
Edited by musicheaven - 5/17/14 at 6:14am
He thinks it's a possibility. Just wants to know if there's demand. If you'd like a balanced DX90 mod to exist, join the list!
Yes, I saw the subsequent posts, thanks.
headwhacker made a reasonable point:
However, I still stand by what I originally said.
Vinnie can charge, say, $500 to modify a $1300 DAP, but it's not so easy to charge, say, $350, to mod a $419 DAP.
Hope you get a nice outcome from your 10+ units effort with Vinnie, though - he's good at what he does
Edited by Mython - 5/17/14 at 6:25am
The question is how much and what solution does he have in mind?
Don't mind my inquisitive mind, my mind may say yes but my wallet says no, so I need a reason to tell my wallet to let go.
Edited by musicheaven - 5/17/14 at 6:22am
I'm on the fence, in terms of the issues (as you'll no doubt have seen, from my posts around 12 hours ago)
At the beginning of the year, I was slightly keener on the Calyx-M, but then they persisted with that stupid, stupid, stupid magnetic volume slider, and stealthily increased the weight from 160g to 230g, which is almost as heavy as an HM-901/DX100.
I want to see the DX90 overcome the teething issues, and then I'll more than likely go ahead and buy one. I can't think of anything else on the market that matches the SQ at $419 and a mere 140 grams.
Well that's the point. This is to get support for an R&D unit to be developed so that he can hone in on the perfect mod set. I assume it'd at least involve looking at output impedances (maybe changing them like in the RWAK100) and of course introducing balanced output, which many are interested in.
Yes but the shared grounds at the TRS jacks break the complete balanced output, so we get none of the benefits. Honestly dual-DAC without balanced output it a bit odd...they may as well have built a really good 1-DAC implementation and added another SD slot or something.
Edited by Kojaku - 5/17/14 at 6:31am
Being back on firmware 2.00 sounds great, I've sent an email to ibasso asking if they can keep the sound of the the original firmware for their next update, but add in all the massive improvements the newer update has. If you feel the same way then send an email also, otherwise ibasso will probably come up with another messed up sound signature for next update. Or at least let iBasso know you liked 2.00 better than 2.05, as it gives them an idea of what sound we like and don't like. Moving backwards in sq with a newer update is just silly, it pretty much negates my being impressed that iBasso got the sq right the very first time, lol.
I'll do the same or even I will ask about "new" version of 2.0.5 with 2.0.0 sound libraries - maybe it will be faster than waiting for new FW. I hope so.