Latest Thread Images

The Fiio X5 Thread
Oct 14, 2013 at 7:45 PM Post #1,366 of 19,652
Darn this thread... I was set on the X3 but now it looks like I gotta wait and spend $200 more lol. (Mainly because the dual SD will allow me to fit all my music). But I just realized that the X3 does not support replaygain. This is one feature I MUST have on the X5. James, any comment on whether or not it will have replaygain? Also, support for playlist files such as m3u would be greatly appreciated. I suppose I can use the genre ID3 tag to get around playlist functionality, but replaygain is a deal breaker for me. James, if you can add replaygain on the X5 then I will most definitely be purchasing one when my bank account allows :)
 
Oct 14, 2013 at 11:37 PM Post #1,370 of 19,652
skinnygamer12 said:
Darn this thread... I was set on the X3 but now it looks like I gotta wait and spend $200 more lol. (Mainly because the dual SD will allow me to fit all my music). But I just realized that the X3 does not support replaygain. This is one feature I MUST have on the X5. James, any comment on whether or not it will have replaygain? Also, support for playlist files such as m3u would be greatly appreciated. I suppose I can use the genre ID3 tag to get around playlist functionality, but replaygain is a deal breaker for me. James, if you can add replaygain on the X5 then I will most definitely be purchasing one when my bank account allows
smily_headphones1.gif
Click to expand...

 
It's microSD, right?
 
Oct 14, 2013 at 11:58 PM Post #1,372 of 19,652
Hi, I'm new to head fi and this is my first post so please bear with me. I've been following the development of the x3 and it's updates avidly and even recommended the purchase of the x3 to my friend who is into analogue but was ready to make the transition to hi res digital. He bought the x3 primarily to use as a transport into his Jadis DAC. His experience with the x3 as a transport seems less than optimal. The hope was that 24/96 files would and should definitely sound better than stock red book cd's, but the overall impression was that hi res files thru the coaxial out sounded a bit constricted with less dynamics than the same music from a red book cd. Now, the wonderful thing about the x3 and the forthcoming x5 is that they can be used as transports, thus theoretically enabling us to relegate our cd collections to the basement. However this is only possible if the coaxial out can deliver the resolution expected of it. I understand that bits are bits and my logical brain tells me that 24/96 should and must sound better than redbook. So what's going on? I've searched head fi forums for anyone who's done a coaxial 24/96 from x3 to red book cd comparison but so far it seems that everyone is enjoying the x3 as a portable device only. Pity, since it opens up enormous possibilities in ones main rig. I've put off my purchase of the x3 in the hope that the coaxial out will have a better implementation in the upcoming x5.
James, would you care to comment?:evil:
 
Oct 15, 2013 at 12:35 AM Post #1,374 of 19,652
luvdac said:
Hi, I'm new to head fi and this is my first post so please bear with me. I've been following the development of the x3 and it's updates avidly and even recommended the purchase of the x3 to my friend who is into analogue but was ready to make the transition to hi res digital. He bought the x3 primarily to use as a transport into his Jadis DAC. His experience with the x3 as a transport seems less than optimal. The hope was that 24/96 files would and should definitely sound better than stock red book cd's, but the overall impression was that hi res files thru the coaxial out sounded a bit constricted with less dynamics than the same music from a red book cd. Now, the wonderful thing about the x3 and the forthcoming x5 is that they can be used as transports, thus theoretically enabling us to relegate our cd collections to the basement. However this is only possible if the coaxial out can deliver the resolution expected of it. I understand that bits are bits and my logical brain tells me that 24/96 should and must sound better than redbook. So what's going on? I've searched head fi forums for anyone who's done a coaxial 24/96 from x3 to red book cd comparison but so far it seems that everyone is enjoying the x3 as a portable device only. Pity, since it opens up enormous possibilities in ones main rig. I've put off my purchase of the x3 in the hope that the coaxial out will have a better implementation in the upcoming x5.
James, would you care to comment?:evil:
Click to expand...

I imagine not many use the X3 in their main rig because there are better options. The x3 is designed to be primarily a portable player. If you don't need portability then a computer with digital output is a better option with infinitely more storage space (and if you are loading files onto the X3 then I assume that would mean you already own a computer with your music already on it)
 
Oct 15, 2013 at 1:48 AM Post #1,378 of 19,652
luvdac said:
He bought the x3 primarily to use as a transport into his Jadis DAC. His experience with the x3 as a transport seems less than optimal. The hope was that 24/96 files would and should definitely sound better than stock red book cd's, but the overall impression was that hi res files thru the coaxial out sounded a bit constricted with less dynamics than the same music from a red book cd.
Click to expand...

I am a noob to this hobby, but there is something I cannot get around my head with coaxial output. From my understandings,  this is a digital (flac) to digital (spdif) conversion and send out using Coaxial. In such conversion, does it really make a difference if the device is high end or low end?
 
Oct 15, 2013 at 2:20 AM Post #1,379 of 19,652
cosmicholyghost said:
  I am a noob to this hobby, but there is something I cannot get around my head with coaxial output. From my understandings,  this is a digital (flac) to digital (spdif) conversion and send out using Coaxial. In such conversion, does it really make a difference if the device is high end or low end?
Click to expand...

 
Remember that SPDIF digital signal is just a stream of bits as voltage ups and downs. It's not the same as copying a FLAC file on a PC, with error cross-checks and retry requests.
 
For something simple like a 44.1kHz/16bit music the SPDIF is mostly reliable, but when it speeds up as fast as 192kHz/24bit the cleanliness and timing accuracy of the individual voltage up-down becomes difficult to achieve. Signals get blunt, and the clock speed is inaccurate. Bad SPDIF signal is difficult to get to the destination accurately, especially with not-so-optimal SPDIF cables that many audiophiles choose to use (remember that signal reflects and bounces around within the cable, further ruining it).
 
Most modern expensive DACs try to fight this problem by having noise rejection, large buffers and clock regeneration etc but the best idea is to make sure the source SPDIF signal is as clean and powerful as possible so that it offers the best condition for the DAC to work with. Obviously some of the older DACs are hideously inaccurate and pays no effort to clean up the SPDIF signal, which really shows up as noise, or ultimately lose signal lock.
 
If you have a decent 192kHz/24bit DAC then chances are they have taken all possible precautions so the effect of SPDIF signal quality is minimal, so it is often not as important as choosing the appropriate power supply or the analogue amp section.
 
Oct 15, 2013 at 3:00 AM Post #1,380 of 19,652
sandalaudio said:
   
Remember that SPDIF digital signal is just a stream of bits as voltage ups and downs. It's not the same as copying a FLAC file on a PC, with error cross-checks and retry requests.
 
For something simple like a 44.1kHz/16bit music the SPDIF is mostly reliable, but when it speeds up as fast as 192kHz/24bit the cleanliness and timing accuracy of the individual voltage up-down becomes difficult to achieve. Signals get blunt, and the clock speed is inaccurate. Bad SPDIF signal is difficult to get to the destination accurately, especially with not-so-optimal SPDIF cables that many audiophiles choose to use (remember that signal reflects and bounces around within the cable, further ruining it).
 
Most modern expensive DACs try to fight this problem by having noise rejection, large buffers and clock regeneration etc but the best idea is to make sure the source SPDIF signal is as clean and powerful as possible so that it offers the best condition for the DAC to work with. Obviously some of the older DACs are hideously inaccurate and pays no effort to clean up the SPDIF signal, which really shows up as noise, or ultimately lose signal lock.
 
If you have a decent 192kHz/24bit DAC then chances are they have taken all possible precautions so the effect of SPDIF signal quality is minimal, so it is often not as important as choosing the appropriate power supply or the analogue amp section.
Click to expand...


Million thanks for this explanation! I now understand the scope of this problem.
 
 
I use this mini-coax cable: http://www.fujiya-avic.jp/products/detail20848.html
It is supposed to use the Oyaide FTVS-305 wire: http://oyaide.com/catalog/products/p-5173.html
 
Hope it is good enough for portable usage.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 16 (members: 0, guests: 16)
Back
Top