[AmberOzL]

I am planning to use X5 will Tzar350 from heir. Also if I need an amp, I am not sure what should I choose, Heir's own Rendition1 or FiiO's own E12.
 
I think I will just wait and see how X5 handles with Tzar350 then I decide.
 
This DAP is so going to be legendary. I feel it 

 

[musicday]

I hope James will have a surprise for us with his X5 and will give dual DAC for lef+right channel.

 

[Achmedisdead]

Quote:

I hope James will have a surprise for us with his X5 and will give dual DAC for lef+right channel.

Is there any proof that this would really make a difference, besides sucking up more battery power?

 

[Retrias]

Quote:

Is there any proof that this would really make a difference, besides sucking up more battery power?

this is why the T51 is allegedly good , it have 2 DAC. Whether one DAC would sound the same as two , we may never know
 
people said it improve stuff like soundstages though

 

[Change is Good]

Quote:

2. X5 adopts PCM1794 DAC and accepts dual TF/microSD cards. op amp has not been determined but is expected to provide 50% more power than that of X3.

 
Ok, I am a bit confused. The only reason why I am picking the X5 over the X3 is because of it's apparent driving power.
 
On the X3 thread, however, James had this to say...
"The output power of X5 will around the same as x3, otherwise hard to control the size and battery life, and you can connect to our Mont Blanc /E12 which has plenty of power"
 
If this is true then I will be settling for the X3

 

[zzffnn]

Ok, I am a bit confused. The only reason why I am picking the X5 over the X3 is because of it's apparent driving power.

On the X3 thread, however, James had this to say...
"The output power of X5 will around the same as x3, otherwise hard to control the size and battery life, and you can connect to our Mont Blanc /E12 which has plenty of power"

If this is true then I will be settling for the X3

^ Nobody other than James @ Fiio knows solid details of X5. Others are speculations.

If you just want significantly more power than X3 provides, then do exactly what James told you at the X3 thread (which is to use X3's line out with your E12). Do the math and you will know E12 provides more than 3 times the power of X3. 3 folds more is significantly more, but 1.5 folds more may not make that much difference. James may not consider 1.5 fold significantly more (which was why he said X5 provides AROUND the same power as X3).

And X5 is expected to be a refinement over X3 instead of merely being more powerful.

 

[Bellyworshipper]

Quote:

this is why the T51 is allegedly good , it have 2 DAC. Whether one DAC would sound the same as two , we may never know
 
people said it improve stuff like soundstages though

Allegedly good. The purpose, as I can conclude from the info I've read on various audio forums (including a few Russian forums, which are frequented by DAP designers (Alex-Alexmod, for instance) and people who have a background in teaching circuit engineering or making DAP modifications) is either to improve the THD, Dynamic range and similar performance characteristics of DAP's output or to achieve better output current and impedance-wise performance (if I got it right). In the first case the improvement is hardly measurable using the measuring equipment, such as high-precision digital oscillograph, needless to say it's indiscernable, indistinguishable aurally (the difference between some dac while used in stereo mode-single chip and in dual mono mode-parrallel connection of two chips indicated in dacs datasheets are of thousandth's or even tenthousandth's magnitude). It's a marketing trick (the forthcoming Hifiman HM 901 has two Sabre DACs used in dual mono mode), because the implementation almost always brings these "improvements" to nought. Furthermore, the pure DAC line out signal is unavoidably degraded by amp and other circuitry and by the headphones themselves. It's funny to read about DAC's THD of some 0,00005 percent while the earphones (no matter what type, mega expensive multidrivers or super headphone monitors) have a THD of several percents, which is several magnitudes bigger than of the DAC line out. And it becomes obvious that modern DACs can deliver such "pure line out" performance that has a tremendous margin for many implementation scenarious. But, it seems that sometimes the implementation is poor enough to make even such a margin insufficient.   
In the second case the DAP vendor wants to mitigate some problems concerning the headphone compatibility or similar problems, so using two DACs in a DAP is somewhat justified (if not to take into consideration the choice of such "problem" DAC).
I wish that Fiio won't follow the modern foppish trend of using dual dacs and use one putting considerable effort to the implementation. 

 

[ClieOS]

No need to keep talking about dual DAC since the early spec is already pointing toward the PCM1794, or maybe its better sibling, the PCM1792. Neither support dual DAC configuration since they are already stereo DAC themselves. Even one chip should have no problem equal or outperform a dual WM8740.
 
Also, don't put to much stock in how many chip a device has. It is always down to the implementation. While WM8740 is considered by be outperformed by many of the new comer, I have recently heard a DAC with single WM8740 that sounds just as good as the ODAC. Again, it is the implementation that matters.

 

[phantompersona]

Quote:

No need to keep talking about dual DAC since the early spec is already pointing toward the PCM1794, or maybe its better sibling, the PCM1792. Neither support dual DAC configuration since they are already stereo DAC themselves. Even one chip should have no problem equal or outperform a dual WM8740.
 
Also, don't put to much stock in how many chip a device has. It is always down to the implementation. While WM8740 is considered by be outperformed by many of the new comer, I have recently heard a DAC with single WM8740 that sounds just as good as the ODAC. Again, it is the implementation that matters.

The Astel And & Kern AK120 has a WM8740,which Fiio X3 shares... and it's going to cost over $1.2k!!  Thank god for Fiio 

 

[JamesFiiO]

X5 will use PCM1792 if there are not any change in the future. and we are the biggest customer of WM8740 in China, and we started to use WM8740 in 2010 when our E7 launched market.

 

[HK_sends]

I plan on getting the X5...as well as the X3!
 
Cheers!

-HK sends

 

[zzffnn]

Quote:

X5 will use PCM1792 if there are not any change in the future. and we are the biggest customer of WM8740 in China, and we started to use WM8740 in 2010 when our E7 launched market.

Thanks James. I have amended the opening post accordingly to state PCM1792. The opening post will be kept current.

 

[Bellyworshipper]

Quote:

X5 will use PCM1792 if there are not any change in the future. and we are the biggest customer of WM8740 in China, and we started to use WM8740 in 2010 when our E7 launched market.

Thank you for the update, James! By the way, Asus Essence ST (STX) uses PCM 1792A DAC (almost the same as X5 will use) and sounds not bad, to my mind. Again, the implementation matters much, but all in all it would be very interesting for me (and not only for me, I think) to compare my Essence ST and X5 notwithstanding they are devices of different niches and types  

 

[AmberOzL]

James, you really are going to make a DAP which sounds high-end portable but doesn't burn the wallets like others. I do believe it will be a real killer.

 

[fearwhat]

Finally seems to be a Hi-end DAP that I can afford

 The waiting is killing me : 0