[baneand]

I don't think this is strict rule...I am currently enjoying the Grand Maestro on OTL tube amp (Euforia I think output impedance of 25) which I think don't quite fit this equasion but the sound is perfect, best low end I ever heard, balanced grinding, deep extension (or one can argue I am not experienced audiophile ). I also used the audeze MM-500 on the same amp (I think it was 15 ohms), also sounded great, but I did noticed distorsion as I increase volume to unlistenable levels.
But I am lurking this topic because I like daps without Android.

 

[sofastreamer]

Damn. First time I am hearing about this rule of 8.Thanks for the heads-up, Sofastreamer.

Just ran the calculation against my Edition 8s. At 30 ohms, the Shanling would need to be less than 3.75 ohms on the unbalanced to satisfy the Edition 8 and the rule of 8. That's 0.95 over the limit according to the specs.

Sigh. Guess the search continues.

With dynamic over ears and only 0.95 ohms over the perfectly flat frequency response, the differences might probably not be noticable. There might be a little dip or push somewhere of about 2-3db. Nothing to worry about too much.

 

[sofastreamer]

I don't think this is strict rule...I am currently enjoying the Grand Maestro on OTL tube amp (Euforia I think output impedance of 25) which I think don't quite fit this equasion but the sound is perfect, best low end I ever heard, balanced grinding, deep extension (or one can argue I am not experienced audiophile ). I also used the audeze MM-500 on the same amp (I think it was 15 ohms), also sounded great, but I did noticed distorsion as I increase volume to unlistenable levels.
But I am lurking this topic because I like daps without Android.

Tube amps are another story, as they are made for adding distortions and bend the frequency response anyways. Some people find that more musical and thats fine. Tho if someone is using them, he probably doesnt care too much about hearing the intended tuning of the headphone

 

[Bloodflowerz]

With dynamic over ears and only 0.95 ohms over the perfectly flat frequency response, the differences might probably not be noticable. There might be a little dip or push somewhere of about 2-3db. Nothing to worry about too much.

Sweet. I may give it a shot then. Thanks!

 

[Shanling]

i own several of your products but none have such high output impedance. your devices usually have close to zero or at least around 1ohm output impedance, at least the portable ones and this is what pretty much every manufacturer aims at. some do better some do worse. you can check the impedances of your devices yourself in specs.

also the output impedance has nothing to do with tuning! every headphone depending on its own impedance and wether it uses a crossover or not (iem) will react differently to high output impedance. thats why i said its unpredictable. i like that you are responding, but its technically wrong.

you can learn more about it here for example: https://www.headphonesty.com/2019/04/headphone-impedance-demystified/
Or here in shorter easier words: https://hifigo.com/blogs/guide/the-importance-of-impedance

As a general rule its said that the source impedance should be at least eight times lower than the headphone impedance, if the headphone should sound the way it was intended to. So headphones with an impedance lower than around 48 ohms will sound wrong on an output impedance of 6,x ohms. easy as that.
for iems you can look at this: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/output-impedance-and-iem-impedance.964701/

Last not least an article from the godfather of headphone amplifiers which might be worth reading for everyone, as he also shows some measurements: https://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/02/headphone-amp-impedance.html

I'm very well aware of these discussions and "rules of 8" for impedance. Over my long years in Headphone space (soon to be 20 years), I personally learned that the important aspect is the impedance curve of the headphones/IEMs. For things like Shure 846, Campfire Andromeda or recently Crinacle Zero:Red, different output impedances result in significantly audible and measurable different responses. And for these I would always recommend to pick the source and even cable very carefully.

For the other aspects, we are more into the subjective section of Hi-Fi.

So headphones with an impedance lower than around 48 ohms will sound wrong on an output impedance of 6,x ohms. e

Like this, what exactly means "sound wrong" in this context and what makes it automatically applicable for all headphones by simple sharing the 48 Ohm specification (not even discussing that it's normally stated just at 1kHz). Even your linked article from Headphonesty puts the limit starting at 2.5:1 already.


We publish output specifications for our models, so the customers can make their purchasing decision based on that, ideally in accordance with recommendations by the headphone manufacturer. Our engineers simple believe that the sound we can achieve with the TPA6120 on some of our models is worth the drawback of increased output impedance.


Last year we released H5, running similar amplifier to M5 Ultra, based on TPA6120 and also running at 4.7/6.6 Ohm impedance. And the feedback on sound is great, even for people using low impedance IEMs. As many things in Hi-Fi, it's often more complicated than just one general rule.


One last thing, different hi-fi communities put different weight on this. For example, on our domestic Chinese market, the output impedance is not really discussed topic and our Chinese website doesn't even include it in specifications:
H2 page: https://www.shanling.com/product/4691
M5 Ultra page: https://www.shanling.com/product/4696

 

[Bloodflowerz]

I'm very well aware of these discussions and "rules of 8" for impedance. Over my long years in Headphone space (soon to be 20 years), I personally learned that the important aspect is the impedance curve of the headphones/IEMs. For things like Shure 846, Campfire Andromeda or recently Crinacle Zero:Red, different output impedances result in significantly audible and measurable different responses. And for these I would always recommend to pick the source and even cable very carefully.

For the other aspects, we are more into the subjective section of Hi-Fi.

Like this, what exactly means "sound wrong" in this context and what makes it automatically applicable for all headphones by simple sharing the 48 Ohm specification (not even discussing that it's normally stated just at 1kHz). Even your linked article from Headphonesty puts the limit starting at 2.5:1 already.


We publish output specifications for our models, so the customers can make their purchasing decision based on that, ideally in accordance with recommendations by the headphone manufacturer. Our engineers simple believe that the sound we can achieve with the TPA6120 on some of our models is worth the drawback of increased output impedance.


Last year we released H5, running similar amplifier to M5 Ultra, based on TPA6120 and also running at 4.7/6.6 Ohm impedance. And the feedback on sound is great, even for people using low impedance IEMs. As many things in Hi-Fi, it's often more complicated than just one general rule.


One last thing, different hi-fi communities put different weight on this. For example, on our domestic Chinese market, the output impedance is not really discussed topic and our Chinese website doesn't even include it in specifications:
H2 page: https://www.shanling.com/product/4691
M5 Ultra page: https://www.shanling.com/product/4696

Thanks for putting this into context. This is reassuring for my use case.

 

[droid23]

I guess nobody said that a high output impedance is generally something to avoid at all costs. As I understood, it is more a thing that the manufacturers tuning of certain low resistance IEMs and HPs might be off and then you might end up with a slightly changed sound signature different to what was intended by the audio engineers for this very HP. It's not that they don't work, they even might sound good for your ears, but people should just be aware that it can happen. So, in the end what can potentially happen here in the forum is, that someone is reviewing this DAP with such a headphone and it sounds different to what it sounds on his other gear, or you give your impressions on a HP paired with this device and you get another sound signature than the others and wonder why... if you don't know about this fact.

It's all good and you just have to know and try it out as @Shanling said. I'm pretty sure that the M5 Ultra will be an awesome device, with the Shanling house tuning and especially, with its USP that it is not based on Android. It will certainly find its happy customers. I'm looking forward to see reviews which will also address the output impedances.

 

[sofastreamer]

exactly! that is why i initally didnt tell any reason why i will skip it. i didnt want to bashh the device at all! just the opposite, i think overall it is an exceptionally good device specially in value! but i was asked what the background of high impedances is, so i answered what general consensus is. nothing more nothing less. didnt mean it in any offensive way and i still think everyone interested should try the player, as everything is very well thought out and Shanling knows how to do awesome hifi gear, thats why i own a couple of their devices myself. with that out of the way, i think everything is already said and transparent so we can move on from here and leave the impedance topic aside.

 

[Bloodflowerz]

Shanling - I recommend you simplify the current convoluted naming convention of your DAPs by separating the Android and non-Android lines.

Example, every Android can continue to be designated "M", and everything non-Android "P" (example for "pure").

Currently, it's extremely difficult to identify what OS a player is running from the naming convention alone.

Please pass this onto your marketing and sales teams. Ta.

 

[InvisibleInk]

Shanling - I recommend you simplify the current convoluted naming convention of your DAPs by separating the Android and non-Android lines.

Example, every Android can continue to be designated "M", and everything non-Android "P" (example for "pure").

Currently, it's extremely difficult to identify what OS a player is running from the naming convention alone.

Please pass this onto your marketing and sales teams. Ta.

Or Q, like the beloved Q1. Howa about Q5?

 

[Shanling]

Shanling - I recommend you simplify the current convoluted naming convention of your DAPs by separating the Android and non-Android lines.

Example, every Android can continue to be designated "M", and everything non-Android "P" (example for "pure").

Currently, it's extremely difficult to identify what OS a player is running from the naming convention alone.

Please pass this onto your marketing and sales teams. Ta.

It's normally among the very first points in specification / product pages.

We do not have any intention to be splitting this.

 

[Bloodflowerz]

It's normally among the very first points in specification / product pages.

We do not have any intention to be splitting this.

That's a shame. Cause navigating reseller sites and having to open every model in a new tab to scroll down and find the OS is a pain in the backside. Most brands are susceptible to this though, not just Shanling.

It's up to you, though I wouldn't be surprised in the future for Shanling to pay a 3rd party a boat load of money for the same advice, only later to do exactly what I suggested for free.

 

[tsktsk]

Oh, vendors showing in stock!

 

[HeartByte]

Does this player have track replaygain ?

 

[fish1050]

While I understand the attraction of an MTouch DAP like the M5 Ultra I would have loved an M2 Ultra first. I wouldn't be surprised if this time next year we see one released. I remember back in the Q1 thread towards the end I asked if they would be coming out with another MTouch DAP with a bigger screen. The response was something like if we go for a bigger screen then android makes a better choice. Fast forward a few years and we now have an MTouch Dap with a bigger screen.

For me an M2 Ultra could have addressed all the hardware shortcomings of the M1S. Namely moving the buttons back to the side, offering a larger screen and a larger battery for better battery life. I would have been willing to overlook the MTouch OS limitations for a DAP like that assuming maybe a $329 USD price vs $229 for the M1S. The M5 Ultra should sound amazing based on the hardware and Shanling's prowess on the hardware side. But the price is simply to high for me and alot to spend given the continuing MTouch OS issues and missing features.

Right now there is a software issue with the M1S where button presses aren't registering (not sure about the specifics). Shanling is apparently working on a software fix for the problem. Things like this clearly show Shanling is still struggling on the sofware side and why I don't want to spend $799 CDN on one of their DAP's.