Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › iBasso DX90. Dual Sabre, 1st page latest FW download & general information/instructions . . . . . . . . . .
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iBasso DX90. Dual Sabre, 1st page latest FW download & general information/instructions . . . . .... - Page 4

post #46 of 8247
Ok so I need to buy the Calyx, X5, X7, Dx90 and Ak140...I am spending more time transferring music to DAP than actually listening smily_headphones1.gif
post #47 of 8247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimouille View Post

Ok so I need to buy the Calyx, X5, X7, Dx90 and Ak140...I am spending more time transferring music to DAP than actually listening smily_headphones1.gif

yeah.. thats exactly as i figure.. 

you guys are too focused on the gadgets ;)

what for? imagine all the precious moments you could spend listening to music, instead of working your asses off just in order to follow the trend,,,

dont mean to spoil the party, but honestly, the dx50 sounds GREAT with the right hp and quality music... 

THERE WILL ALWAYS BE BETTER EQUIPMENT....... AMEN

post #48 of 8247
Quote:
Originally Posted by princekali View Post
 

... imagine all the precious moments you could spend listening to music, instead of ...following the trend the DX90 thread.

 

 

.......:rolleyes:.......


Edited by burtomr - 12/27/13 at 6:20pm
post #49 of 8247
Implementation is exactly the issue.

Guys, I'm not saying that it won't be great - I am hoping that it will - only that the proof will be in the pudding. Right now the WM8401 based DX50 is sounding very good.

If it sounds even better, well... Cheers!
post #50 of 8247
And to think I was going to start a savings account. There is no rest in this hobby.
post #51 of 8247
This is certainly an unexpected twist. Should I now send my dx50 back and wait for the 90?
post #52 of 8247

No sure why they choose to use dual ES9018K2M instead of just one normal ES9018. The big advantage of the K2M is to save power and make it more portable friendly by reducing the number of DAC core inside (8 -> 2),  taking a hit on performance but extending the battery life. According to ESS, K2M is rated at <40mW while ES9018 is rated at <100mW. Since using two K2M probably not going to save much battery life than a normal ES9018 (*given you'll also have to double some of the circuit around K2M), the advantage of going to the K2M in the first place is no more, but you are still stuck with half as much DAC cores and potentially not as good a performance. I have recalled from an old discussion with a manufacturer that the bulk price of ES9018 isn't really that high (*in fact it is quite cheap), so cost is certainly not an issue. I would have been more impressed if iBasso put an ES9018 inside the DX90 instead of two K2M. Now that would have been something.


Edited by ClieOS - 12/27/13 at 7:19pm
post #53 of 8247

:popcorn:

post #54 of 8247
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
 

No sure why they choose to use dual ES9018K2M instead of just one normal ES9018. The big advantage of the K2M is to save power and make it more portable friendly by reducing the number of DAC core inside (8 -> 2),  taking a hit on performance but extending the battery life. According to ESS, K2M is rated at <40mW while ES9018 is rated at <100mW. Since using two K2M probably not going to save much battery life than a normal ES9018 (*given you'll also have to double some of the circuit around K2M), the advantage of going to the K2M in the first place is no more, but you are still stuck with half as much DAC cores and potentially not as good a performance. I have recalled from an old discussion with a manufacturer that the bulk price of ES9018 isn't really that high (*in fact it is quite cheap), so cost is certainly not an issue. I would have been more impressed if iBasso put an ES9018 inside the DX90 instead of two K2M. Now that would have been something.

 

Well in marketing/paper sheet perspective, people tend to go all hyped up over a "dual dac"  :)

post #55 of 8247
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
 

No sure why they choose to use dual ES9018K2M instead of just one normal ES9018. The big advantage of the K2M is to save power and make it more portable friendly by reducing the number of DAC core inside (8 -> 2),  taking a hit on performance but extending the battery life. According to ESS, K2M is rated at <40mW while ES9018 is rated at <100mW. Since using two K2M probably not going to save much battery life than a normal ES9018 (*given you'll also have to double some of the circuit around K2M), the advantage of going to the K2M in the first place is no more, but you are still stuck with half as much DAC cores and potentially not as good a performance. I have recalled from an old discussion with a manufacturer that the bulk price of ES9018 isn't really that high (*in fact it is quite cheap), so cost is certainly not an issue. I would have been more impressed if iBasso put an ES9018 inside the DX90 instead of two K2M. Now that would have been something.


Still learning about implementation type situations, but wouldn't dual DAC's (which I'm guessing will be implemented as dual mono) offload or split the work (having to process and decode 1 channel vs 2), making the performance difference with less cores negligible while at the same time delivering possibly a slightly lower cost and a bit of power savings?  I might be way off here too, just a thought that popped into my head.

post #56 of 8247

Sorry guys, not going to jump in with the party/bonfire/revolution and totally won't smash my DX50 just yet. :L3000:

 

 

Now unless DX90 will not need an external amp or at least rival a DX50+amp with ciems combo then I'll jump right in.

 

But as a rule of thumb learned with Ibasso and other DAP manufacturers. I will have to wait until the smoke, hysteria clears and don't want to be fiddling with UI/software bugs.

 

Heck, DX50 hasn't even cleared all the bugs yet.

post #57 of 8247
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClieOS View Post
 

No sure why they choose to use dual ES9018K2M instead of just one normal ES9018. The big advantage of the K2M is to save power and make it more portable friendly by reducing the number of DAC core inside (8 -> 2),  taking a hit on performance but extending the battery life. According to ESS, K2M is rated at <40mW while ES9018 is rated at <100mW. Since using two K2M probably not going to save much battery life than a normal ES9018 (*given you'll also have to double some of the circuit around K2M), the advantage of going to the K2M in the first place is no more, but you are still stuck with half as much DAC cores and potentially not as good a performance. I have recalled from an old discussion with a manufacturer that the bulk price of ES9018 isn't really that high (*in fact it is quite cheap), so cost is certainly not an issue. I would have been more impressed if iBasso put an ES9018 inside the DX90 instead of two K2M. Now that would have been something.

 

I agree the vanilla ES9018 would have make more sense. Like taking DX100's guts and stuff it inside DX50's and trim the excess.

post #58 of 8247

It depends on how you implement them but in general, dual mono (or in the case of ES9018, 4 cores per channel) tends to improve separation and SNR than just single chip 2 channels. But the real performance is usually limited by the analog stage and background noise. For example, If you have a background noise around -98dB, then the DAC's SNR of -127dB really won't help. So at some point, how good the DC itself is just starts to become less important than how well the circuit around it is.

post #59 of 8247
Interesting none the less and looking forward to this along with the supposedly upcoming calyx.
post #60 of 8247
Now if this was to have a balanced line out ....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › iBasso DX90. Dual Sabre, 1st page latest FW download & general information/instructions . . . . . . . . . .