or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Sponsor Announcements and Deals › iDSD micro Black Label. Tour details (page 147). Release info (page 153).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iDSD micro Black Label. Tour details (page 147). Release info (page 153). - Page 16

Poll Results: What % of your listening is Desktop vs Portable? (click on ONE answer please)

Poll expired: Apr 22, 2014  
  • 22% (30)
    Desktop (100%)
  • 36% (49)
    Desktop (75%) & Portable (25%)
  • 18% (25)
    Desktop (50%) & Portable (50%)
  • 17% (24)
    Desktop (25%) & Portable (75%)
  • 5% (7)
    Portable (100%)
135 Total Votes  
post #226 of 2389
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by roamling View Post


I think a poll is a really good idea. The question if the dac is for portable or desktop situations is a vital one when it comes to the features that are requested. i have the slight suspicion that many users would not consider the micro line as portable in a sense the you use it on the go but more like portable in a way you bring it from on desktop to another (home, work) or even the bed site locker . the nano idsd is the real portable one in my opinion.

 

Hi,

 

We are thinking of the lines of a poll of "What % of your audio use is portable and what % is desktop."

 

So a customer who only uses desktop is 100%.

 

But one who spends half their time out and about and the other half their time indoors would be 50% and 50%.

 

 

Better suggestions appreciated.

 

The more Head-Fi'ers who come in to vote, the more valuable - we may offer up iPurifiers and/ or Mercury cables as small thanks for those whose name comes out of a hat. :beerchug:

 

Does this work for you all?

post #227 of 2389
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillsonChang007 View Post

-1 for funny colors for iFi Micro iDSD frown.gif Black and silver is nice but adding too much color is just ermmm errrr ehhhhh I don't want my desktop to be princess's room xD

 

Hi,

 

To-date, several thousand nano iDSDs have been sold. By this we mean sold to end users and it is in their hand and they are playing with it (ie: we are not talking vapourware)

 

So to do another colour is a logistical headache but if several of our larger retailers agreed to a certain colour, then we could look into that. Not an easy one.

 

This is besides working on the suggestions rec'd so far which already echo comments from other sources.

 

Hope this clarifies.

post #228 of 2389
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipAC View Post
 

Hi Vince

 

Are you intending that the Micro will have better SQ than the Nano, or just better features?

 

 

Hi,

 

To reiterate, this is the specs of the micro iDSD. It will be the Dual-Core Burr-Brown configuration.

 

DAC: 

Dual-Core Bit Perfect DSD,

PCM & DXD DAC by Burr Brown (2-DAC Chip; 4-Channel; 8-Signals)

Formats: 44.1/48/88.2/96/176.4/192/384KHz PCM
  2.8/3.1/5.6/6.2MHz DSD
  DXD
  Dual Core Bit Perfect DSD, PCM & DXD DAC by Burr Brown (2-DAC Chip; 4-Channel; 8-Signals)

 

The nano is Single-Core Burr-Brown.

 

We'll ask Thorsten to come in and update you guys on Single and Dual-Core configurations.

 

So expect even better sonics and even more features.

 

It will be have to be portable/desktop-based.

 

The nano iDSD is almost solely portable-based.

post #229 of 2389
Quote:
Originally Posted by iFi audio View Post

Hi,

We are thinking of the lines of a poll of "What % of your audio use is portable and what % is desktop."

So a customer who only uses desktop is 100%.

But one who spends half their time out and about and the other half their time indoors would be 50% and 50%.


Better suggestions appreciated.

The more Head-Fi'ers who come in to vote, the more valuable - we may offer up iPurifiers and/ or Mercury cables as small thanks for those whose name comes out of a hat. beerchug.gif

Does this work for you all?
works for me. I am 90% Desktop 10% Mobile.
Edited by roamling - 4/9/14 at 12:38pm
post #230 of 2389

Hi, I am beginner of using this new system to listen music and this is new experience to me as I never use this before. I currently own iDAC, iCan, iTube, iUSB Power and iLink.  I use them with my iMac and headphone so am happy with the performance so far as beginner.   Easy to set up with great design and nice sound. 

 

One other thing is the size of each device is so tiny which only occupies very small space on my desk. I think the performance could improve better using other headphones, I am currently using Beats' executive headphone (by Dr.Dre) so I will see how it goes. 

 

Any suggestions or ideas of how to use these devices better are welcome!! I will also keep my eye on the upcoming new devices.

 

Cheers Ricky

post #231 of 2389
Having just read the iCan nano review, I think one area that iFi in general can improve its products is to work on the background noise. I know that with my nano iDSD, there's audible hiss using grados and denons and a lot of hiss on very sensitive IEMs. This has to be addressed if iFi really wants to make the products truly portable as many people will use IEMs.
Edited by kugino - 4/9/14 at 12:59pm
post #232 of 2389

It seems that with the upcoming iDSD micro using dual DAC chips the S/N may be better.

post #233 of 2389
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

Haven't been following the thread closely --- what will the headamp be based around?

 

IIRC, the iCAN and iDAC were TPA6120 and MAX97220 based, respectively. Since these are all modern IC based headphone amplifiers (well, for the iCAN, the TPA6120A2 was supposedly used just as a current buffer, utilized some kind of inductive trick to avoid the use of 10 ohm resistors for current stability), would iFi be willing to consider trying out new parts, such as the ES9601? On top of being very, very high performance in terms of specifications (122 dB SNR, -117 dB THD+N), it seems to be designed for mobile use, and draws power from single 3.3V rails (stepped up via an integrated charge pump) and eliminates DC blocking caps, so it'd be suitable for being powered by an USB power supply. On top of that, the 20-QFN package is really, really small, allowing space for other components. Other details are sparse on this yet-to-be-released part, but I assume it has good PSRR and all that jazz as well.

 

The following is a small tech note to you all from Thorsten Loesch - he saw your posts and thought this would give you all some idea of the "behind the scenes stuff."

 

Sabres (at the) ready?

ESS has made a name for itself with very innovative products that combine headlining spec's with very easy implementation. We always find their products interesting and evaluate them. And we probably would like to use them in many of our products. We might even included the above Headphone amplifier chip, though it is designed mainly for one very large customer of ESS who is a major player in the Chinese high-end Smartphone/Tablet market.

 

There is a problem however. ESS likes to announce products so long before they are in mass production, they are hard to design in for any company who is not on the preferred customer list (which is quite short). It is difficult to even get datasheets, never mind samples. And if you look and spend time to optimise the system it is easily possible to get the same or a greater level of sound quality as ESS deliver, with less headaches.

 

Last year when we first started the nano iDSD development, our first design studies actually called for a lower budget ESS Sabre DAC with DSD and HD Audio. When it became clear that such a chip may not be available for some considerable time our design team started to look further afield and originally intended to use the Niigata Seimitsu DSD/HD PCM DAC Chip.

 

This was was compared against some other options we felt could deliver what we wanted from DSD and PCM and the eventual chip selected was based on above all, sonic merit. Throughout all this process, the design team worked on a parallel platform that would have filled the DAC Socket with an ESS part. This duplicated efforts and caused some delays as well as additional costs.

 

When we had already our Burr-Brown based solution near shipping readiness and were showing prototypes, we suspended production to wait for the ESS Chip samples that had finally made it to silicon. We were even prepared to delay the iDSD nano for another few months, just so we could give our customers the "ESS Sabre". When we got the samples we found they worked, but the sound quality was not so good. A bit of a disappointment. Apparently these samples were still Beta and we could not get a firm shipping date for production level chip's or samples to audition.

 

By that time we had already evaluated and benchmarked the Quad-Core Burr-Brown based iDSD mini against some extremely expensive competition including some ESS Sabre Reference based options. 
 
Unwilling to risk ending up with production chip's that sounded no better than the samples and unwilling to tie our product schedule to ESS's delivery schedule (which would likely have had us a few places in the queue behind Oppo and other "preferred customers") while at the same greatly confident that our Burr-Brown solution delivered the sonic goods, we instead fast-tracked the Burr-Brown based iDSD nano into production and shipped at the end of 2013. The rest is history.

 

 

So, no Sabre in the iDSD nano, not because we did not originally want to. Looking back, we feel that the problems with ESS delivering goods came as a blessing in disguise, as we might have just delivered "another Sabre DAC," while missing the great and unique sound quality provided by our chosen Burr-Brown solution.

 

Sometimes, life's twists and turns end up being for the better - despite the best laid plans.

post #234 of 2389
Thread Starter 

latest update:

Guys and gals. ONE more day left for all entries to be submitted. There are a few who have contributed a heck of a lot but at the other end, there are some neck and neck entries.

 

It is really difficult to to pick those at the moment as it is a real close-call.

 

If you are one of those, keep chiming in as it is likely to make a difference.

post #235 of 2389

I would think that the mini would have a larger battery than the nano and maybe a bit more headphone output. For marketing purposes I would like a see a chart in column format comparing the nano and the micro with the common features on top and the extras and changes down on the list. Should make is easy to compare sizes, weight and run time to decide which model is more suited to your potable needs. The mini could be added when it comes available.

post #236 of 2389

If the RCA jacks can be recessed (like on the Hugo, but with sensible counter-bores) I think that would preserve the design's intent better. The volume knob looks so good, it's a shame to clutter up the front.

post #237 of 2389

Sorry I'm late to the party Vince, better late than never though eh? :D

 

I think if there was one overriding feature I wanted, it would be a balanced headphone out

 

It doesn't appear so popular reading the thread, but I'd also love an optical in, as I use the AK120 whilst out on the go and it would be great to plug that straight in to the idsd and use it as a transport.

 

I think you're already doing it anyway, but the 3D functionality from the ICan would also be awesome. It still amazes me how great that sounds

post #238 of 2389
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraftyClown View Post
 

Sorry I'm late to the party Vince, better late than never though eh? :D

 

I think if there was one overriding feature I wanted, it would be a balanced headphone out

 

It doesn't appear so popular reading the thread, but I'd also love an optical in, as I use the AK120 whilst out on the go and it would be great to plug that straight in to the idsd and use it as a transport.

 

I think you're already doing it anyway, but the 3D functionality from the ICan would also be awesome. It still amazes me how great that sounds

 

Hi,

 

Better late than never!  :tongue_smile: Still got another day to go!

 

 

1. The XLRs wont make it into the micro iDSD (cigar box-size) which of course has the same chassis as the iCAN micro. It is a matter of lack of real estate and circuit layout.

 

Though the XLR will make it into the mini iDSD (shoe box-size) which comes towards the end of this year.

 

 

2. The optical input - will be tallied up to see its popularity ranking.

 

3. Oh dear, another happy 3D Holographic customer :L3000: 

 

Thorsten and his team are definitely gonna be ordering in McDs/KFC for supper over the coming weeks!

post #239 of 2389

So regarding balanced headphone output, is a smaller jack out of the question too? Such as with the Astell & Kern AK240 which has both a single ended headphone out and a balanced headphone out on a unit far smaller than the micro.

post #240 of 2389
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CraftyClown View Post
 

So regarding balanced headphone output, is a smaller jack out of the question too? Such as with the Astell & Kern AK240 which has both a single ended headphone out and a balanced headphone out on a unit far smaller than the micro.

 

Hi,

 

Yes but the micro iDSD will have a whole host other features.....watch this space. It really is pushing it for XLRs as well all the other features. We may even have one or two special ones that will blow your mind.

 

Nevertheless, we have noted your preference!


Edited by iFi audio - 4/10/14 at 8:13am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sponsor Announcements and Deals
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Sponsor Announcements and Deals › iDSD micro Black Label. Tour details (page 147). Release info (page 153).