[goodvibes]

I only listened for a few minutes but I brought my JH13s along to get a good take. I preferred the 901, sound and UI. The UI was genuinely good. That said, the Studio continues to surprise for what it is and costs. The Studio has a tangibility to it that's unique but the 901 has an extremely refined character to it. The amount of unenhanced res and texture (admittedly HiDef)  was impressive. I though it could have had a bit more PRaT but honestly, with IEMs, a bit relaxed is generally better than a bit too aggressive. It also didn't seem to have any impedance induced niggles. Again, I don't mind commenting but I will defer to Jamato as my listen was very uncontrolled and short.

 

[Retrias]

Thanks goodvibes , so another one of audiophile player would have a good ui then? compared to the usual rather half done ui of these players

 

[fzman]

I'll say that's a long burn-in time - nearly 100 years!  It's even more amazing that the batteries held up for that long.  Now the real question is:  "Are you from the future,  or just a time-traveler?"  

Quote:

Today I received a review sample of the HM-901. .......
More as this develops. .......
2 23 2113
This is one of the longer burn-ins to get a handle on the sound. Not that other devices I have listened to haven't taken some time but for me, the 901 has gone through some strange musical contortions.

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

I'll say that's a long burn-in time - nearly 100 years!  It's even more amazing that the batteries held up for that long.  Now the real question is:  "Are you from the future,  or just a time-traveler?"  

Ah,. . . I've been caught. lol  Hey it is great here in 2113. Battery? Don't use those any longer and for what you call a DAP.,  well lets just say, things have changed. :^)

 

[Retrias]

did they get thicker? or did they have no memory expansion nor screen and only one file format?

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

did they get thicker? or did they have no memory expansion nor screen and only one file format?

Did what get thicker? I am not sure what you are asking. 

 

[jamato8]

One thing I have to say about the 901, it gets piano right and that is hard. Home systems, speaker systems for most all, getting piano to sound like a piano is not easy but so far the 901 is like a fine tube amp rendering a very tuneful and truthful tone and correct size for imaging, when it is a good recording. 

 

[hautlord]

Can't wait to hear this for myself.  I'm sure you're all sick to death of hearing this question but does anyone have any idea when this thing is supposed to be available?

 

[LarsHP]

Quote:

Can't wait to hear this for myself.  I'm sure you're all sick to death of hearing this question but does anyone have any idea when this thing is supposed to be available?

This month, but if I remember correctly it is said to be delayed. Delay has been about half a year - if not almost a year now. My advise is not to keep looking for it, but rather be surprised to find it when it actually is there ...

 

[goodvibes]

A healthy perspective.

 

[kenz]

Quote:

One thing I have to say about the 901, it gets piano right and that is hard. Home systems, speaker systems for most all, getting piano to sound like a piano is not easy but so far the 901 is like a fine tube amp rendering a very tuneful and truthful tone and correct size for imaging, when it is a good recording. 

 
Oh. Does the HM-901 gets the piano better than iBasso DX100?
With my JH13 and DX100, a good recording has the piano sounds as real as it can get, almost there compared to a real life listening.
And yes, getting piano right is very very hard. Have never been satisfied with how piano sounds till the DX100 came along.

 

[ianmedium]

One thing I have to say about the 901, it gets piano right and that is hard. Home systems, speaker systems for most all, getting piano to sound like a piano is not easy but so far the 901 is like a fine tube amp rendering a very tuneful and truthful tone and correct size for imaging, when it is a good recording. 

I wonder if this is a HiFiman trait as I am finding the ability to convey the texture and tone of non-electrified instruments the best I have heard from a portable and up there with vinyl after my comparing tracks with the line out and in high resolution from my 801 into a McIntosh amp at a local audio dealer yesterday.
The deck was an SME model10 and we were all so surprised how the 801 kept up with the vinyl front end playing classical harp, guitar and piano music and also Dusty Springfields Dusty in Memphis album in 24/96.

I am very much looking forward to hearing more thoughts on this player and to see comparisons with the 801 of which I am very very happy with.

 

[jamato8]

Comparing the 901 to the AK100 (22ohm resistor bypassed):
 
I find the 901 projects a better since of distance from the performance. It gets the music more out of your head. The placement of instruments is better defined with more sense of air around them. Also there is a great degree of vibrancy and life to the sound. This is not to say I do not enjoy the AK100 but to my ear, the 901 is better at rendering the pace and life of the recording. Bass has a better foundation and drive and is better focused. Mids are well fleshed out, with both male and female voice sounding realistic.

 

[LarsHP]

jamato8, are these differences very subtle or are they relatively easy to hear? And how does the DX100 do in comparison?

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

jamato8, are these differences very subtle or are they relatively easy to hear? And how does the DX100 do in comparison?

I am comparing one at a time. To me, the difference is not small but it is not like the AK100 is crushed, I just hear the differences described and enjoy the greater musicality of the 901 over the AK100 but, I also enjoy the AK100.