[TheMaestro335]

EQ off. I also tried putting EQ On, +6 across the board, in line with earlier suggestions but still prefer the sound of 1.2.6.

As an aside, before all the debate about the differences between 2.6. and 2.7 had taken place, it's worth noting that I had noticed quite a notable difference going from the one to the other. I walked to work enjoying the hell out of Haim's album, which I got halfway through before getting to the office This was on 1.2.6. I then upgraded the FW whilst at work, then completely forgot about it.

When I walked back from the office, I listened to the second half of the Haim album - and didn't enjoy it anywhere near as much. It was less detailed, muddier and narrower - i.e. exactly what others have noted. I then remembered that I had changed the FW, and subsequently checked the forums to find others reporting the same findings. Big conicidence!

I did wonder if it has something to do with HOW we use the DX50? I primarily listen to it on the go, via HO on my IEMs. No additional amp required. I see a lot of people here amping their DX50s and reporting no change in SQ - just a thought....

I've now gone back and forth a couple of times, but think that I will stick with 1.2.6 for now.

Hello,
Ditto! This is what I have been saying since I tried 1.2.7.

 

[OddJobs]

   
EQ off. I also tried putting EQ On, +6 across the board, in line with earlier suggestions but still prefer the sound of 1.2.6.
 
As an aside, before all the debate about the differences between 2.6. and 2.7 had taken place, it's worth noting that I had noticed quite a notable difference going from the one to the other. I walked to work enjoying the hell out of Haim's album, which I got halfway through before getting to the office This was on 1.2.6. I then upgraded the FW whilst at work, then completely forgot about it.
 
When I walked back from the office, I listened to the second half of the Haim album - and didn't enjoy it anywhere near as much. It was less detailed, muddier and narrower - i.e. exactly what others have noted. I then remembered that I had changed the FW, and subsequently checked the forums to find others reporting the same findings. Big conicidence!
 
I did wonder if it has something to do with HOW we use the DX50? I primarily listen to it on the go, via HO on my IEMs. No additional amp required. I see a lot of people here amping their DX50s and reporting no change in SQ - just a thought....
 
I've now gone back and forth a couple of times, but think that I will stick with 1.2.6 for now.

I don't see the point in turning EQ on and raising all sliders +6 why not just keep all at zero if you want flat response?  

 

[RestoredSparda]

Hello,
Ditto! This is what I have been saying since I tried 1.2.7.

Agreed 100%. I didn't believe the firmware "audio quality" changes myself until changing to 1.2.7. Really took most of the enjoyment out of listening to the DX50. I also received a new Schiit Vali a little while after getting 1.2.6 and was blown away by the sound. (I attributed the sweet euphoric sound to the new amp, but after trying 1.2.7 I have to give more credit to the sound of 1.2.6 than to the Vali. Just my 2 cents.
 
Even though 1.2.7 fixed a lot of errors and fixed gapless for me, I will still be sticking with 1.2.6. It's that good.

 

[ratinox]

So I don't think the volume is implemented in the firmware

iBasso has stated otherwise. I leave it to the reader to use the forum search function.

Edit:
It's possible that I'm conflating EQ with volume control:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/679473/the-ibasso-dx50-thread-latest-firmware-1-2-7/8535#post_10062691

That's not to say that volume isn't handled in software, just that EQ most definitely is handled in software.

 

[ratinox]

artist > album > disc 1, disc 2...

If there are 2 discs, and the first disc has 11 tracks, then the first track of the second disc should be numbered "12", not "disc 2/track 1".

Edit:
Mp3Tag has a function that will do this automatically for all selected tracks with a check box to reset the counter for each new directory. It takes longer to scan the library and save the changes than it does to renumber everything.

 

[OddJobs]

 
Agreed 100%. I didn't believe the firmware "audio quality" changes myself until changing to 1.2.7. Really took most of the enjoyment out of listening to the DX50. I also received a new Schiit Vali a little while after getting 1.2.6 and was blown away by the sound. (I attributed the sweet euphoric sound to the new amp, but after trying 1.2.7 I have to give more credit to the sound of 1.2.6 than to the Vali. Just my 2 cents.
 
Even though 1.2.7 fixed a lot of errors and fixed gapless for me, I will still be sticking with 1.2.6. It's that good.

Is this with EQ on and flat or with Off which is about the same as EQ on with all fader maxed out. Just trying to figure out if it is changes to EQ that Ibasso is making or before EQ.

 

[Varoudis]

Is this with EQ on and flat or with Off which is about the same as EQ on with all fader maxed out. Just trying to figure out if it is changes to EQ that Ibasso is making or before EQ.

All faders up is very bad eq ing not volume adjastment!
With eq on , for protection, ibasso lowers the volume. If you put all faders up to make more volume sounds wrong!

If you want volume use the volume buttons.

 

[Lilfurbal]

After reading through much of the discussion in regards to sound quality differences between firmware 1.2.2 and 1.2.7, where 1.2.2 being more detailed, in my experiences I can't stress enough how much I disagree with this.  1.2.2 sound is a downgrade in clarity and details for me, since the EQ in 1.2.7 lets me bump the treble frequencies up higher than what the base treble in 1.2.2 even is.  I've become spoiled with the new found clarity and dynamic nature of firmware 1.2.7 that this firmware, with its new EQ, is the single best upgrade in sound signatures they've released to date between firmware versions.  1.2.2 to ME sounds quite muddy compared to how I can make 1.2.7 sound.  So yeah, I'd much rather have the latest features of the latest firmware, with the ability to make the sound signature how I want, vs to more buggy firmware with more limiting ways to make it sound how I want.  
 
In firmware 1.2.2 there's a cap to the amount of detailed highs you are possibly able to get.  You can exceed that cap in firmware 1.2.7.  If you're purely basing the frequency response on what it sounds like with the EQ turned off I would have to question as to why?  iBasso can't make a single base EQ that pleases 100% of everyone, so there's no reason for them to try to.  But they pimped out the user EQ more so users can alter the sound to their liking.  And it works very well.  Particularly with my headphones, I can no longer use the DX50 without the EQ as I need to change the sound signature of my headphones to be better.  And they're a LOT better now.  Even more so in firmware 1.2.7 as I was able to add more clarity, so now they're super crisp and detailed.  Never heard my headphones sound this good before.  Can only imagine what a new pair of better headphones does for me, and that is in the works.  

 

[nihontoman]

If there are 2 discs, and the first disc has 11 tracks, then the first track of the second disc should be numbered "12", not "disc 2/track 1".

Edit:
Mp3Tag has a function that will do this automatically for all selected tracks with a check box to reset the counter for each new directory. It takes longer to scan the library and save the changes than it does to renumber everything.

thanks for clarifying. I guess I'll try that when I have some more free time... but yeah, wish ibasso could just resolve it themselves

 

 

[headwhacker]

  After reading through much of the discussion in regards to sound quality differences between firmware 1.2.2 and 1.2.7, where 1.2.2 being more detailed, in my experiences I can't stress enough how much I disagree with this.  1.2.2 sound is a downgrade in clarity and details for me, since the EQ in 1.2.7 lets me bump the treble frequencies up higher than what the base treble in 1.2.2 even is.  I've become spoiled with the new found clarity and dynamic nature of firmware 1.2.7 that this firmware, with its new EQ, is the single best upgrade in sound signatures they've released to date between firmware versions.  1.2.2 to ME sounds quite muddy compared to how I can make 1.2.7 sound.  So yeah, I'd much rather have the latest features of the latest firmware, with the ability to make the sound signature how I want, vs to more buggy firmware with more limiting ways to make it sound how I want.  
 
In firmware 1.2.2 there's a cap to the amount of detailed highs you are possibly able to get.  You can exceed that cap in firmware 1.2.7.  If you're purely basing the frequency response on what it sounds like with the EQ turned off I would have to question as to why?  iBasso can't make a single base EQ that pleases 100% of everyone, so there's no reason for them to try to.  But they pimped out the user EQ more so users can alter the sound to their liking.  And it works very well.  Particularly with my headphones, I can no longer use the DX50 without the EQ as I need to change the sound signature of my headphones to be better.  And they're a LOT better now.  Even more so in firmware 1.2.7 as I was able to add more clarity, so now they're super crisp and detailed.  Never heard my headphones sound this good before.  Can only imagine what a new pair of better headphones does for me, and that is in the works.  

Which level do you set the sliders when you turn on EQ to get more details? I suppose all sliders are flat across all frequency range?

 

[GoldfishX]

As a personal rule, I never raise EQ bands. I only lower them. I agree to an extent, you need to turn up the volume on 1.2.2 to reveal more details. But regardless of firmware, I always find myself lowering the treble bands (ESPECIALLY with the HD800, EVERYTHING is too bright if I dont).

 

[Lilfurbal]

 
Which level do you set the sliders when you turn on EQ to get more details? I suppose all sliders are flat across all frequency range?

 
No.  I use the EQ to attempt to 'level' out the base EQ of my headphones.  If I don't, everything is equally muddy.  Lol.
 
My EQ on the DX50 with firmware 1.2.2 - 1.2.6 =
 
0 -1 -1 3 6 6 6 6
 
New EQ with firmware 1.2.7 =
 
0 -1 -1 3 6 7 7 7
 
Really love the way that sounds.  
 
To put into picture what I'm setting the EQ to counter, my headphones provide me with this lovely frequency response:
 
=2271&scale=30]http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=2271&scale=30
 
So my manually set EQ in the DX50 is sorta reversed / inverted from the EQ my headphones actively provide.  With treble capped at +6 it wasn't nearly as lively as it is with just the slightly tweak up to +7.  Then the bass and midrange pushed down.  My new headphones will have a different frequency response, one described as very neutral, my EQ in the DX50 will most likely change dramatically when I receive those.

 

[RestoredSparda]

 
Is this with EQ on and flat or with Off which is about the same as EQ on with all fader maxed out. Just trying to figure out if it is changes to EQ that Ibasso is making or before EQ.

I have never used the EQ. My opinions are regarding the EQ being OFF on both firmwares.    To clarify, my setup is as follows:   DX50 Firmware 1.2.6 > Line out audioquest cable to Vali > Sennheiser HD600.  Volume set at 228 on DX50.  

 

[headwhacker]

   
No.  I use the EQ to attempt to 'level' out the base EQ of my headphones.  If I don't, everything is equally muddy.  Lol.
 
My EQ on the DX50 with firmware 1.2.2 - 1.2.6 =
 
0 -1 -1 3 6 6 6 6
 
New EQ with firmware 1.2.7 =
 
0 -1 -1 3 6 7 7 7
 
Really love the way that sounds.  
 
To put into picture what I'm setting the EQ to counter, my headphones provide me with this lovely frequency response:
 
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=2271&scale=30
 
So my manually set EQ in the DX50 is sorta reversed / inverted from the EQ my headphones actively provide.  With treble capped at +6 it wasn't nearly as lively as it is with just the slightly tweak up to +7.  Then the bass and midrange pushed down.  My new headphones will have a different frequency response, one described as very neutral, my EQ in the DX50 will most likely change dramatically when I receive those.

 
Thanks you gave me an idea. This is what I set my EQ when I turned it on.
 
6 6 6 6 8 9 12 12
 
With this combo DX50 > UHA-4 > JH16. It appears it raise the details in the highs and seem to have widen the soundstage and for some reason it tightened the bass a bit more. This is with greenday songs. Let's see it this setting won't have any negative impact on others.

 

[Sorensiim]

   
Thanks you gave me an idea. This is what I set my EQ when I turned it on.
 
6 6 6 6 8 9 12 12
 
With this combo DX50 > UHA-4 > JH16. It appears it raise the details in the highs and seem to have widen the soundstage and for some reason it tightened the bass a bit more. This is with greenday songs. Let's see it this setting won't have any negative impact on others.

More volume ≠ more details.
 
Just louder.