[bruce1967]

 
I agree.  
 
I have been less than impressed with the equalizer on the x3ii.  Could have really helped with brighter IEM's.

Absolutely it could have helped...I think too I prefer the simplicity of having just bass and treble.

 

[Spidworthy]

A quick question about using Replay Gain on the X3ii (after retagging with MP3Gain):
 
To take advantage of FiiO's replay gain ability, and to finally stop having to leap up in shock when a rogue high-volume MP3 track blasts out from my system, I'm using MP3Gain to re-tag all my music to around 89 dB, using its Track setting.
 
I assume the resulting tracks will work properly on the X3ii, and that 89 dB is a good level to use?
 
One exception: I'm NOT using that Track setting for my classical music collection after reading all sorts of comments and the Help file, but rather the Album setting, to preserve the higher dynamic range (between very soft and very loud) which is a feature of classical music. Again, is this right?
 
I'd appreciate confirmation from anyone who's done this. Thankx!

 

[triplew]

Absolutely it could have helped...I think too I prefer the simplicity of having just bass and treble.

IMO the EQ could have more band so that can adjust more precisely, some IEM does have uneven or certain drop/peak at particular frequency, in that case EQ is very helpful to rescue my IEM, like my Titan 1es, which is not acceptable due to strong mids emphasis (refer to Hifichris review), luckily with advice from hifichris, after I adjusted the EQ I'm enjoying it now instead of keep it in drawer. I think with simple treble adjustment i could not have remedied it, because it need to lower the mid and increase the high at the same time.
Anyway I understand what you prefer, it's the best of FiiO can offer both haha.

 

[bruce1967]

IMO the EQ could have more band so that can adjust more precisely, some IEM does have uneven or certain drop/peak at particular frequency, in that case EQ is very helpful to rescue my IEM, like my Titan 1es, which is not acceptable due to strong mids emphasis (refer to Hifichris review), luckily with advice from hifichris, after I adjusted the EQ I'm enjoying it now instead of keep it in drawer. I think with simple treble adjustment i could not have remedied it, because it need to lower the mid and increase the high at the same time.
Anyway I understand what you prefer, it's the best of FiiO can offer both haha.

Yes if they could offer both I guess that would be the ultimate solution...I don't think we'll be seeing hardware bass & treble again though.

 

[JaZZ]

  Yes if they could offer both I guess that would be the ultimate solution...I don't think we'll be seeing hardware bass & treble again though.

 
Fortunately not! Hardware equalizers are the EVIL – unnecessary electronics components in the signal path reducing transparency. In turn simple bass and treble adjustment in the digital domain would be easy to implement. On the other hand, you can acheive corresponding curves with the exicting octave equalizer. Maybe the limitation to +/– 6 dB is the culprit? Personally I could live with +/– 12 dB.

 

[bruce1967]

   
Fortunately not! Hardware equalizers are the EVIL – unnecessary electronics components in the signal path reducing transparency. In turn simple bass and treble adjustment in the digital domain would be easy to implement. On the other hand, you can acheive corresponding curves with the exicting octave equalizer. Maybe the limitation to +/– 6 dB is the culprit? Personally I could live with +/– 12 dB.

I didn't realize hardware equalizers reduced transparency. Is this true of the bass and treble controls on the original X3?

 

[JaZZ]

Yes, every hardware electronics component alters the signal to some degree. It may be minor compared to sound tranducers, but audible nonetheless, especially in the case of multiband equalizers.

 

[Dobrescu George]

  Yes, every hardware electronics component alters the signal to some degree. It may be minor compared to sound tranducers, but audible nonetheless, especially in the case of multiband equalizers.

 
Actually, I was running some tests on this 

 
The amount of effects possible to add in the signal path digitally is considerably larger than it is using hardware modifiers. 
 
When recording / mastering / producing music, artists would sometimes want certain type of effects and alterations, but as music listeners we want the least amount of distortion, so just a little bit of digital EQ with a well thought way of applying it in mind is enough to compensate for most headphones. 
 
When applying DSP for music mastering I can be pretty aggressive since I want results, but when listening I want to hear what the original idea was. 
 
Today's devices and software permit for heavy DSP digitally, but the more one applies the less compatible the sound generally is with more music unless the headphones / speakers / IEMs were really far from ideal (recently played with some bad speakers that became quite good after having a heavy DSP table over them. They did not become the best, but separation, soundstage and range reproduction went from really poor to quite good (200-300$ headphones comparable sound). The downside was that the max volume was not that hight, but I suspect this was a hardware limitation of the drivers.)
 
I am a fan of FiiO implementing more and more software EQ since it provides somewhat clearer / better results. Like no bass bleeding into mids when altering only the bass, except for the shape of the EQ slope 

 

[Rdwng1975]

How does the x3ii's bass compare to the x5ii?

 

[Dobrescu George]

How does the x3ii's bass compare to the x5ii?

 
To my ears, X5ii has tighter bass, more controlled, but it hits very hard when it's called for. 
 
X3ii has a very natural decaying bass, a bit more relaxed. 
 
(Differences are not sky and earth but exist.)

 

[Rdwng1975]

To my ears, X5ii has tighter bass, more controlled, but it hits very hard when it's called for. 

X3ii has a very natural decaying bass, a bit more relaxed. 

(Differences are not sky and earth but exist.)

So would you say the x3ii has in general more bass quantity?

 

[Brooko]

I have both. Just did a volume matched side-by-side comparison. Can't say I noticed any difference in bass specifically. I would take comments about noticeable differences with a grain of salt.

George - did you side-by-side compare? How did you volume match? Same files?

 

[Dobrescu George]

I have both. Just did a volume matched side-by-side comparison. Can't say I noticed any difference in bass specifically. I would take comments about noticeable differences with a grain of salt.

George - did you side-by-side compare? How did you volume match? Same files?

 
I apologize, Paul. Only tested the same tracks and headphones, but volume matching was as close as the ear could tell using the same track (so it might have been a relative difference in volume too).
 
It felt to me like X5ii has a better PRaT, like the bass recovers faster after a note (Some kind of smaller decay on all musical notes, better precision if we can call it that way), not necessarily the quantity of bass or treble being different, but it rather felt like it had slightly better control over headphones. It's quite hard to explain how the differences sound like, but those are not two totally different DAPs necessarily. 
 
I personally felt the same effect even when testing X7+AM1 against X5ii, AM1 had a longer decay on notes, natural presentation, and a somewhat better tonality especially in the mid range, where X5ii felt faster sound wise, better precision.
 
All those impresions of mine made AM1 sound similar to X3ii while x5ii felt slightly different. 
 
All those differences were much more remarkable on ie800, while ultrasone dj one pro didn't show any of those differences when testing. Ie800 is especially bright and it might also have been a synergy difference.
 
Out of curiosity, Paul - how would you describe the differences between X5ii and X3ii?
 
(Read your reviews and know that you found them close and similar, but if I were to describe the exact differences, this is about how they would sound like)

 

[Brooko]

  Out of curiosity, Paul - how would you describe the differences between X5ii and X3ii?

 
Funny thing is that although I have better gear to test with nowadays - the differences again are more feature based rather than sound based.  The only real difference I get after volume matching is in perception of sound stage - and this might be related to imaging/background.  X5ii gives the impression of very slightly more spaciousness / blacker background / better imaging.  Other than that (to me anyway), they are tonally extremely similar.
 
What makes it more interesting is that if I do it blind (get my daughter to help with switching) I find it very difficult to tell the two apart.  But when you are looking at two devices with very similar specs - there shouldn't be a huge difference anyway.  Biggest reasons to choose the X5ii are power output and the dual cards (double the potential space).

 

[Jayden16]

How is the software on the X3ii these days? How does it handle a 11,000+ song library? I'm getting impatient waiting to buy the X1ii - no gapless playback as of yet plus a bunch of other bugs are putting me off. Thanks in advance