bellyworshipper said:

wide, but not oversized and software boosted soundstage

Click to expand...

I had a Colorfly C4 that I felt tried to artificially enhance the soundstage which presumably lowers the sound quality. I wonder whether the X7 will have a 3D soundstage through hardware or software. Hopefully if it does a capability to switch the interferance off would be useful.

bellyworshipper said:

  Pity James doesn't show up to tell us about the advancement of X7 development and manufacture Or at least about the extent, to which FiiO still heeds the posts of this thread. 
I don't want to offend any of the site members or people, who make posts in the thread about wanting video outs, big (4" and wider screen), bluetooth and Wi-Fi support on X7, etc., but, obviously, those features are irrelevant to DAP's fundamental features such as sound quality, audio formats support, battery life, usability (ergonomics, DAC feature). Just want to point out again that there is nothing wrong in many outs or a big screen on the DAP, but these features don't come free as if to say-to implement them one must sacrifice the fundamental functionality. So, here is my personal list of wanted features:
-sound quality (neutral sound, wide, but not oversized and software boosted soundstage, tight and well-controlled bass, clear, sibilant free and non-fatiguing highs, informative and clear middles)
-good battery life (12 hours or more)
-popular formats support: besides the FLAC, APE, ALAC, lossy formats and native DSD support I'm dreaming of TAK format support on X7, but the author, as far as I know, has not disclosed the sourcecode and there is no hardware TAK-decoding support, at least on mobile devices...While FLAC and APE are good enough, TAK, to my thinking, encompasses all their advantages-FLAC's low hardware requirements and APE's high compression rate. Besides, TAK is multithreaded and one can utilize all the multicore CPU computing power while encoding or converting even a single file into TAK.
-good circuitry for implementation of USB DAC feature, maybe a good dedicated USB signal receiving chip (VIA VT1731, for example) with good jitter suppression 
-SPDIF out with reasonably low jitter (I don't want to say that X5 coax out has high jitter, actually I don't know, but there is always a room for improvement
-good TCXO chip for SABRE ESS 9018 DAC
-high-contrast IPS screen (2,4-3" max)
-don't really care about X7 amplifier's output power,only about it's transparence cause I, as many people, use eartbuds. Don't think it's worth chasing for high output power
-software-wise: firmware with all the android useless system services (if X7 is to have an android-based firmware), which only draw power from the battery and consume CPU cycles, meticulously excluded from it by FiiO's firmware developers
-if there is a chance of android applications support, then I would even pay somebody for writing a Dynamic Range meter application for X7 (an analogue of Dynamic Range Meter plugin for Foobar2000)  

Click to expand...

A little extra work to the circuitry on a multi-hundred dollar player isn't asking too much in this range I'd say.

so far, because of the price drops, iBasso products are higher in value than fiio products.
my dream dap is something that kills the DX90 and DX100, has the capabilities of the Sony Walkman NW-ZX1 (not in terms of sound but everything else such as web browser etc), and is priced under what the DX100 costs
Unrealistic? maybe
but dreams are dreams
 
but this would fix the problems of:
-iBasso products having better price-to-value ratio (for example, DX90 currently selling for $360 has a better price-to-value ratio than the X5 which is still priced at $350 because there is a lot more you get in the DX90 for only $10 more than the X5)
-the aspects of the NW-ZX1 would make the X7 more versatile as it would have more uses, no longer a dedicated player but for the high price you are paying for it, all these features make it more worth it
-pricing it under the DX100 gives it a higher price-to-value ratio
 
just some quick ideas i had 

insatiable one said:

  so far, because of the price drops, iBasso products are higher in value than fiio products.
 
but this would fix the problems of:
-iBasso products having better price-to-value ratio (for example, DX90 currently selling for $360 has a better price-to-value ratio than the X5 which is still priced at $350 because there is a lot more you get in the DX90 for only $10 more than the X5)
-the aspects of the NW-ZX1 would make the X7 more versatile as it would have more uses, no longer a dedicated player but for the high price you are paying for it, all these features make it more worth it
-pricing it under the DX100 gives it a higher price-to-value ratio
 
just some quick ideas i had 

Click to expand...

As I understand, iBasso DX90 stock price is still $409.50 (mp4nation) or $362.00 minimum for the used one on ebay, $359.95 minimum on amazon and FiiO X5 is priced under $350. The lowest prices offers are just a few, the stock price of DX90, considering the prices listed on ibasso official site and mp4nation, hasn't changed. So there is still a gap of some $20-50 between X5 and DX90.
I would argue about getting "a lot more" from DX90 than from X5 (again, considering the lower stock price of X5): both DAPs have the same functionality (headphone out, line out, coax out, usb DAC feature), the same range of formats supported (neither DX90, nor X5 supports native DSD playback). The main differences between the two: sound signature, DX90's having a user replaceable battery,though of less capacity (if to take the standard and not the oversized and enhanced one) than the X5's one, X5's being wider and not having a touch-screen. Don't get me wrong, I like my DX90, which I chose over X5 because of many people stating that X5 had too bright and fatiguing treble. Unluckily, I didn't have a chance to audition X5 (nor DX90) at the time of purchase, so I may change my mind after personal audition 
IMO: it is not the pricing of X7 under the DX100, which makes me interested in X7, it's the possibility of X7's becoming the DAP the DX100 failed to become: not bulky, having a good battery life (8 hours are not enough) and an ability of charging the DAP's battery through USB (which DX100 doesn't have), fully utilizing the caps of ESS 9018 DAC chip (much spoken of and, probably, overrated native DSD support), decent minimalistic firmware, which doesn't affect the sound signature (and it really shouldn't, all those software cheap effects actually only deteriorate the sound quality) and is free of the problems caused by android system (excessive battery consumption, DAP "freezing", applications crashing) 

My dream player would look exactly like Fiio E12. Similar size and design. No display. No coax. No line. No USB DAC. No EQ. No bass. No treble. Knob for volume/power. One for lock. One button for folder switch. One button for song switch. One micro sd card slot. No built-in memory. Battery duration at least 15 hours. Support for flac in 192/24. Powerful sound chips to deliver sound better than x5.
 
Maybe when Fiio satisfies mainstream with x7 with big display and million functions, they could do this to please audiophiles, who want something simple.

I think storage is an area that can make a higher end unit stand out. I marvel at the demand for a1 TB DIY ipod mod. So that makes me suggest that a high end unit should at the minimum support SD cards (which currently top out at 256mb) or better yet a mSATA card (up to 1 TB).

I would keep the user interface simple like the X1, but deeper in the menus as DAC support for PCs, Macs, and phones (IOS and Android).

It certainly should have a nice DAC/ Amp Maybe even a 3.5mm input option to turn the unit into an amp like the E07. So it would be a superset machine of all FIIO DAC and integrated player units.

Maybe APTX bluetooth and some other high end wifi streaming options might make sense.

What about including the audiophile version of bluetooth?  Just someone mentioned it in the hall at work.  Is that bluetooth 4.1 they are referring to?  And if so maybe something for the x7?

Really hope we get some updates, or something, about the X7 soon

Guys, don't hold your breath. According to Matt on the FIIO forum (who obviously works for FIIO), X7 is likely one year away ("Fall 2015")  

pekingduck said:

  Guys, don't hold your breath. According to Matt on the FIIO forum (who obviously works for FIIO), X7 is likely one year away ("Fall 2015") 

 

Click to expand...

If it is so, then X7 just has to be as close to perfection as a DAP can be (at least ESS 9018 DAP)

Please, please, please, NO TOUCHSCREEN!
Plenty of physical controls, easy to reach even with the PORTABLE player in our jacket.
No need of an analog volume knob.
Separate channel management & DAC.
Very good quality screen (OLED would be the best).
Optical/SPDIF output.
Digital clock. (Fiio X1 doesn't have it)
Silicon case in the box.
Good and versatile GUI
Good tactical feeling (brushed metal would be the best)
 
That's all, simple as that. No need of fireworks or integrated games or widgets.
 
Thanks

realaudiophile said:

  1) Please, please, please, NO TOUCHSCREEN! 
2) Plenty of physical controls, easy to reach even with the PORTABLE player in our jacket.
3) No need of an analog volume knob.
4) Separate channel management & DAC.
Very good quality screen (OLED would be the best).
Optical/SPDIF output.
5) Digital clock. (Fiio X1 doesn't have it)
Silicon case in the box.
Good and versatile GUI
Good tactical feeling (brushed metal would be the best)
 
That's all, simple as that. No need of fireworks or integrated games or widgets.
 
Thanks

Click to expand...

I would also second the paragraphs 1) and 2)
3) Is kind of needed, as developers consider it necessary for native DSD playback implementation (DAC digital volume control, as it seems, does not allow for "pure" DSD playback) 
Could you explain the meaning of paragraphs 4 and 5? 

An analog volume knob it's my life

First of all I'm sorry for my english... Im Italian, I'll do my best to explain myself.
 
5) it is always very handy to have a digital clock on the display, I found very annoying not to have a clock on the Fiio X1 (but I LOVE it anyway...)
 
4) The ideal player does have two separate processors and amplification, like the IBasso dx90, to manage the right and left channel independently.
 
Oh, and in my previous post I forgot to mention: separate volume trimming (Fiio X1 does have it) and separate equalization for both channels, just in the case that the listener could have a slightly different hearing thresold...
That's it.
 
Sorry for my English, my Italian is much better

realaudiophile said:

  First of all I'm sorry for my english... Im Italian, I'll do my best to explain myself.
 
5) it is always very handy to have a digital clock on the display, I found very annoying not to have a clock on the Fiio X1 (but I LOVE it anyway...)
 
4) The ideal player does have two separate processors and amplification, like the IBasso dx90, to manage the right and left channel independently.
 
Oh, and in my previous post I forgot to mention: separate volume trimming (Fiio X1 does have it) and separate equalization for both channels, just in the case that the listener could have a slightly different hearing thresold...
That's it.
 
Sorry for my English, my Italian is much better

Click to expand...

It's ok, you don't have to apologize! Mine is not perfect either))
Clock on the display-great idea! I also think that being able to check the time while looking at DAP's display is cool and easy to implement
I would argue, though, about the necessity for the ideal DAP to have 2 processors and amplification. And by "two processors" one can mean either 2 DSPs (chips that do the digital processing of the signal before feeding it further to DAC) or 2 DACs (chips that do the digital-to-analog conversion itself, which, along with the amplifier, heavily influences the resulting sound signature). While DX90 has both dual core DSP and two ESS 9018 K2M DAC chips, I don't think that the former operates in one core per channel mode, dual core DSP just enables the distribution of the workload between two cores and allows for using a greater computing power (correct me if I'm wrong); and the latter (DUAL DAC) to be necessary at all. While using a stereo ESS 9018 K2M DAC in mono mode allows for some THD and S/N parameters improvement, the improvement, as the practice shows, is inaudible and is killed by the imperfections of further elements of the system (AMP). So dual DAC scheme turns out to be much more of a marketing trick than a useful design solution. Besides, ESS 9018 DAC, which is to be used in X7 has 8 channels, which can be paired in 2 channels-4 initial channels for each resulting stereo channel (while there are "only" 2 initial channels per each resulting stereo channel from two ESS 9018 K2M DAC chips in ibasso DX90). James has already mentioned that, anyway.
And the amplification is done separately for each channel in the majority of modern DAPs. My personal hopes and apprehensions in the aspect of amplification concern the overcomplexity of the amp part. There is a vast discussion of whether implementing the "longer" amp (including more elements, like capacitors and opamps) circuit has benefits comparing to the simpler and shorter one. Many people, including those having a large practice and experience in circuit engineering, agree on shorter circuit with well-thought over selection of elements to be better than the longer one, especially when the elements are not thoroughly considered (the same as with dual DAC scheme). Simply speaking, each circuitry elements deteriorates and adds its specific distortions and coloration to the resulting sound. Therefore, the fewer elements(high-quality ones)-the better.
Dear FIIO, please, don't try to put as many opamps and capacitors in X7's compartment as you possibly can! Just do the appropriate engineering and design a simple and effective circuitry, which results in better, more neutral and transparent sound while preserving the ESS 9018 DAC signature