Latest Thread Images

IMG_2714.jpeg
IMG_4320.jpg
IMG_1842.JPG
20170811_140014_001[1].jpg
IMG_1831.jpg
DAPwidths-X7-CalyxM-AK380.png
20160928_093031_resized1.jpg 722066990328616823.jpg FiiO_X7_Chord_Mojo_D75_4623.jpg DAP-off-2016_Spring_FujiyaAvic-DSCF5592.jpg DAP-off-IMG_2387.jpg IMG_20160319_183715.jpg IMG_20160319_183722.jpg Shozy_Alien_Gold_DSCF5021.jpg image.jpg 20160217_205753.jpg image.jpg DAPComparison.png 20151219_213455.jpg
See full thread gallery...
DAP-off! Astell&Kern, Sony, HiFiMan, Chord, FiiO, Lotoo, Soundaware, Hiby, Cayin & others
Dec 23, 2014 at 8:57 AM Post #1,126 of 2,125
This thread is due for a reboot. I received the Calyx M back from Anakchan the other day with firmware 1.01 and the sound quality has jumped up a notch, taking it over and above the Aurender Flow, which is also excellent. 2015 is going to be very interesting...more to come.
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 9:38 AM Post #1,128 of 2,125
Calyx M firmware 1.01 changes:
1. Boot loader improvement: Turn-on while charging is improved.
2. Time-Domain, Minimum phase digital filter applied.
3. Improvement of sound at low volume level.
4. Improvement of gap-less function.
5. Fade-in disabled when the very first music is replayed.
6. Improvement of response of volume level and control.
7. More volume for DSD files.
8. Lower  2nd and 3rd harmonic distortions.
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 11:31 AM Post #1,129 of 2,125
At present, to my ears, the HM-901 is still significantly superior in overall sonics versus the Calyx M.
 
Calyx M on v1.01 has a brighter presentation, a little dry and "brittle" at the highs which is a little niggle to my ears.
With the HM-901, reaching the same highs was smooth, musical and effortless. 
 
Dec 23, 2014 at 11:52 PM Post #1,130 of 2,125
I wish Calyx's firmware also makes the player's battery usage much more efficient because 4 hours just don't cut it for most people out there willing to buy portable players.
 
Dec 25, 2014 at 1:58 AM Post #1,131 of 2,125
kenz said:
  At present, to my ears, the HM-901 is still significantly superior in overall sonics versus the Calyx M.
 
Calyx M on v1.01 has a brighter presentation, a little dry and "brittle" at the highs which is a little niggle to my ears.
With the HM-901, reaching the same highs was smooth, musical and effortless. 
Click to expand...

 
Was that with the balanced card? I noticed that it used OPA627s which do have an old-style smooth presentation which some people prefer. When I switched to another discrete card (I forgot which it was) it was clearer and revealed more of the DAC, somewhat more like the Calyx, which I didn't like as much.
 
Dec 25, 2014 at 2:07 AM Post #1,132 of 2,125
currawong said:
Was that with the balanced card? I noticed that it used OPA627s which do have an old-style smooth presentation which some people prefer. When I switched to another discrete card (I forgot which it was) it was clearer and revealed more of the DAC, somewhat more like the Calyx, which I didn't like as much.
Click to expand...
It was the "New Yellow One".
 
Dec 25, 2014 at 3:32 AM Post #1,133 of 2,125
currawong said:
   
Was that with the balanced card? I noticed that it used OPA627s which do have an old-style smooth presentation which some people prefer. When I switched to another discrete card (I forgot which it was) it was clearer and revealed more of the DAC, somewhat more like the Calyx, which I didn't like as much.
Click to expand...

 
Hi Currawong,
 
The HM-901 was with the IEM card. And based on memory, comparing with the new Discrete card, the IEM card to me is brighter (nt as bright as Calyx M), less warm tint to the sound presentation, and bass is tighter, more impact and sweeter. The discrete card has a warmer hint, vocals more intimate, bass a tad more rounded, less impact, more rumble. 
 
These were based on auditions with Earwerkz Legend R custom.
 
Dec 25, 2014 at 6:39 AM Post #1,134 of 2,125
I for one looking to read your thoughts on Lotoo PAW Gold. There is no one on this forum who currently has access to both RWAK240 and Lotoo PAW Gold. 
 
Dec 29, 2014 at 2:28 AM Post #1,136 of 2,125
Can someone shed some light regarding the new firmware from Calyx M? How does it compare now with HM 901?
About the battery life. Some say it plays for 6 hours, others say 8.  What about the HM 901, how long is its play time?
If someone would be kind enough to compare both DAPs in a few sentences, I would be grateful :)
 
Dec 31, 2014 at 1:48 AM Post #1,137 of 2,125
wlz12 said:
  Can someone shed some light regarding the new firmware from Calyx M? How does it compare now with HM 901?
About the battery life. Some say it plays for 6 hours, others say 8.  What about the HM 901, how long is its play time?
If someone would be kind enough to compare both DAPs in a few sentences, I would be grateful :)
Click to expand...

I do not have a unit with the old firmware so there is no way for me to formally attest to what I am about to say but the main difference to me was the sound, in particular the lower end which become more engaging than before without becoming more bass heavy. 
 
Dec 31, 2014 at 2:28 AM Post #1,138 of 2,125
audionewbi said:
  I do not have a unit with the old firmware so there is no way for me to formally attest to what I am about to say but the main difference to me was the sound, in particular the lower end which become more engaging than before without becoming more bass heavy. 
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion. Since the HM 901s is launching soon, i might just wait for it
 
Jan 1, 2015 at 11:38 AM Post #1,140 of 2,125
Does the HM-901s still have the scrollwheel and/or physical controls?  I was thinking about upgrading to the FiiO X7, but it has gone touchscreen mad. I think maybe the 901S could be the way to go, but I must know.  Or is it too early to ask yet?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top