[borrego]

  Because going through a 2nd A2D-D2A conversion is preferred? There are no free lunches here and a device that doesn't show noise under normal operating conditions has chosen the correct approach which is also less complex.

 
One example of what is possibly a defective PS does not prove the rule. You can have your opinion but it's a limited view as you seem unwilling to accept other's conflicting experiences or topology discussions. Amp stages always run at a fixed gain and the DX90's is not excessively high. Putting an additional and required dig or analog V control in front of it doesn't change that and you certainly can't put it after. Your argument isn't sound, IMO.
 
You're worried about induced noise of a unique PS but advocate a noise inducing and effectively compressing circuit like crossfade. Where in the circuit of your favored Arrow do you think the analog V control resides?

 
There are many "Digital Volume Control" chips which does not need another AD-DA conversion. This PGA2311 is a popular one. There will be another Chinese DAP QLS QA360 coming out using this chip.
 
I have just mentioned "Listening is Believing" in my previous post. Taking out my noise IPAD 4 PS, and just running the DX90 in battery mode with the Arrow 4G and with crossfeed level 1 turned on, I can experience better noise/instrument separation/sound stage with my combo
 
I have repeatedly state the setup and conditions where my impression comes from: Using Yamaha EPH-100 and PK1 clone with my DX90 (max LO volume) + Arrow 4G, comparing to the same phones with just the DX90 with volume set at volume 160. These is my setup and my impression. And I believe my setup are quite common (judging from other portable DAP threads) and so I would like to share my view.
 
You are free to say "No one listens to the DX90 internal amp at volume 160, I never listen below volume 225...", or "The Arrow 4G is noisy as hell at high volume/gain setting...". Because that will be your setup and you are free to give those impression using difference setup. If the other readers use similar setup then they will learn from you.
 
It is also the exact low noise floor and expanded soundstage of my "DX90 + Arrow G4" allowing me to enable your so call "noise inducing and compressing circuit" of crossfeed. The crossfeed is for "correcting" the soundstage to me. Please don't hijack 1 sentence in my post and try misleading other readers that I use crossfeed to lower noise.

 

[SDBiotek]

There are many "Digital Volume Control" chips which does not need another AD-DA conversion. This PGA2311 is a popular one. There will be another Chinese DAP QLS QA360 coming out using this chip.

I have just mentioned "Listening is Believing" in my previous post. Taking out my noise IPAD 4 PS, and just running the DX90 in battery mode with the Arrow 4G and with crossfeed level 1 turned on, I can experience better noise/instrument separation/sound stage with my combo

I have repeatedly state the setup and conditions where my impression comes from: Using Yamaha EPH-100 and PK1 clone with my DX90 (max LO volume) + Arrow 4G, comparing to the same phones with just the DX90 with volume set at volume 160. These is my setup and my impression. And I believe my setup are quite common (judging from other portable DAP threads) and so I would like to share my view.

You are free to say "No one listens to the DX90 internal amp at volume 160, I never listen below volume 225...", or "The Arrow 4G is noisy as hell at high volume/gain setting...". Because that will be your setup and you are free to give those impression using difference setup. If the other readers use similar setup then they will learn from you.

It is also the exact low noise floor and expanded soundstage of my "DX90 + Arrow G4" allowing me to enable your so call "noise inducing and compressing circuit" of crossfeed. The crossfeed is for "correcting" the soundstage to me. Please don't hijack 1 sentence in my post and try misleading other readers that I use crossfeed to lower noise.

The argument over noise floor, chips, etc. can be continued via PM, if you two don't mind. This thread is for listening impressions. Thanks.

As good as the DX90 sounds directly driving my headphones and iems, I really am enjoying using the line out with the Just Audio AHA-120.

 

[rptlead]

just got my re600 and wow does it turn into a real songbird with the DX90.  amazing separation and detail unamped straight from the phone out - nice presence and not shouty at all. looks like i've just found my unamped portable pair for now.

 

[goodvibes]

The argument over noise floor, chips, etc. can be continued via PM, if you two don't mind. This thread is for listening impressions. Thanks.

As good as the DX90 sounds directly driving my headphones and iems, I really am enjoying using the line out with the Just Audio AHA-120.

 

I agree that it should never have been mentioned in a 'sound impressions' thread. Digitally controlled analog volume is different than digital volume but whatever, on with sonic impressions.

 

[SDBiotek]

@goodvibes, yes, no worries. Anything causing this much debate must be a worthy product! The DX90 is another example of the current wave of very good sounding, but in other way, frustrating, portable DAPs on the market.

 

[jamato8]

I am surprised at how good the DX90 powers the HE-560. No restriction of dynamics or constrained soundstage. I am around 240 but the amp of the DX90 acts like it is just cruising along. I think they could have used an even higher gain but this is good. Crazy. 

 

[musicheaven]

I am surprised at how good the DX90 powers the HE-560. No restriction of dynamics or constrained soundstage. I am around 240 but the amp of the DX90 acts like it is just cruising along. I think they could have used an even higher gain but this is good. Crazy. 

Do you own the HE560? I was wondering how it'd measure up. Have you tried it connected to the DX90 LO wired to the Intruder? Just curious.

 

[Mython]

Do you own the HE560? I was wondering how it'd measure up. Have you tried it connected to the DX90 LO wired to the Intruder? Just curious.

 
 
Why is it that the name 'Intruder' always makes me think of a dildo, not an amp?   Just curious...

 
 
                                                                         

 

[musicheaven]

Why is it that the name 'Intruder' always makes me think of a dildo, not an amp?   Just curious...


                                                                         

Lol I guess it sounded suggestive haha, it's something intruding in your music rendition .

 

[Mython]

 it's something intruding in your music rendition .

 
 
Yeah, well we both know what that'll be!

 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/697035/ibasso-dx90-dual-sabre-1st-page-to-reformat-and-fw-download-interest-in-balanced-mod/5040#post_10553518

 

[Mython]

Seems the new firmware (2.05) has people divided, in terms of the adjusted sound-signature.

 

[musicheaven]

It's the same old DX50 firmware upgrade issue all over again, seems that iBasso hasn't learned their lesson yet; DX100, DX50 and now DX90. There is a saying that says never 2 without 3 so here we go. They need to solve this issue by either figuring out how to isolate UI and sound play functions and really one should not impact the other. It might be related to the famous Rockchip soc. Anyway best is to stay away until they got their act together, I have passed my quota for beta tolerance tbh.

 

[AndrewH13]

Two second problem disappeared on tracks played so far, but still boot up correctly then a second later get Scan/Browse message. Am I the only person getting this every single time?

 

[nc8000]

I dont get the scan/browse unless I insert a card

 

[headwhacker]

  Two second problem disappeared on tracks played so far, but still boot up correctly then a second later get Scan/Browse message. Am I the only person getting this every single time?

 
Good for you, I still detect a cut at the end but it's less than 2 seconds. This time it's consistent, I can reproduce it every time I try it. I'll send my sample to iBasso.