Firefox 5.0 Chromium 12.0.742.112 (0) Arch Linux current

Same problem, posted here before seeing your thread http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/563117/can-t-post-ff-or-chrome I'm also using linux.

Had a post for the For Sale forum, but when I press "Submit" nothing happens.

Quote:   Yeah, some of us have sigs turned off, makes for less clutter when reading. ;-)   Quote: Lead solder sucks, and you're right, it's a health hazard to use and also a hazard environmentally.   Good thing I never open my Hotaudio DAC anyway, I just listen to it. :-)

Another good review, thanks. I have the V-DAC too, and your comments are spot-on with my observations, as well. The two dacs are similar as far as general sound profile, but the V-DAC beats it for detail and upper end clarity. Not that the Extasy is any slouch - the V-DAC costs like twice as...

Good review, thanks. I have the DAC Extasy and really like it. I find it to be exceptionally clear, with good neutrality throughout the range and very realistic imaging. It's an exceptional value for the money. Very good DAC.   One point, since you mentioned your DAC Extasy review and...

did you try upgrading the firmware?

Quote:   That's interesting. In all cases, with the Clip, Clip+ and Fuze, I found the E5 to give a stronger bass boost but to impair detail. I concluded I would rather have the detail than the bass, which could be increased more than enough through EQ, so I don't even use the Fiio anymore.

Quote: Right, it attenuates from +4 down to zero, plus or minus 1n on the slider you adjusted. As I've pointed out many times.

So headphones are "digital" and don't distort? Wow, I guess I did learn something new today.   Quote:  

Quote: Sure they do, as the concepts of flat frequency response and distortion still obviously apply.   You're actually a hopeless case, apparently not even capable of understanding that a +4 boost of an audio signal across the board could introduce distortion, at the...

For those who are as in the dark as jazz appears to be, here are a couple of quick random links on CNRC from some speaker manufacturers:   "The National Research Council (NRC) is the home of ground-breaking psycho-acoustical research that has become the standard by which leading loudspeaker...

Quote: It's not speculation, it's fact. The guy who did the measurements said that the volume of the "Normal" setting was basically the same as the +4 setting. Is the +4 setting louder or quieter than the +1, +2, and +3 settings? Louder. Therefore, Normal is also louder than +1, +2, and...

It's no wonder you're confused about neutrality since you have never heard of the Canadian National Research Council work on acoustics in the 70s and 80s that influenced the entire audio industry, spawning renowned Canadian speaker makers like Paradigm and Energy. Google still exists, you know...

It's not a crude definition at all. It's actually a very sophisticated definition based on the acoustical research of the Canadian National Research Council in the 70s and 80s, which first quantified the elements of good sound related to frequency, dispersion, low distortion, etc.    ...

  Quote:   Which I've said all along.   Quote: See, notice how this person and all the others who think they know what they're talking about are wrong. The measurements show that the volume level of "Normal" is basically the same as +4. So that is not truly flat. The volume...

Quote:   Conclusive? They're not really conclusive, because he didn't include the very setting that was being debated: +4.   I'll be glad to take him at his word, however, when he says:     Quote:   Like I said all along: "Normal" is ***NOT*** true flat. He also just...

Quote: What misinformation? I just said the baseline EQ was not true flat, which accords with what he claims the measurements supposedly show. Although it's still not definitive, because he conveniently left out the measurements for +4. ;-)   But it's very telling at least that...

In while I read through the thread.   There is no problem with this player with linux, right? just drag and drop?

There's a lot of talk about that, on both the fuze and the clips. Essentially, it *is* EQd already. A lot of people seem to have trouble with the concept, but "Flat" doesn't really mean true flat when it comes to the fuze/clip, it means a custom Sansa EQ that they made and just synced to a flat...

E5 is a waste of money. Sansas sound better without it.

I have a v2 clip and an 8gb fuze. I agree, these are among if not the best players for the money out there - low price, good community support and virtually hassle free. They sound great, too.   At first I hated the wheel volume control, but now I love it. It's so much easier to reach into...

I've been listening to my PX100s almost exclusively for the past couple of months. I think they are *really* good headphones for the money. My references are Beyer DT880, MS1, and PK3 earbuds. I switched to the portable Senns because they were a little cooler in the summer than having full size...

It's pretty obvious to anyone who has ears. "Normal" isn't true-zero flat, the frequencies are all boosted. And if what appears to be "true flat" (all sliders on 0) sounds the same as "Normal," then that isn't true flat, either, but merely a software trick to sync it to the "Normal" setting.  ...

Actually, it's this Max F you shouldn't listen to, because what he says obviously makes no sense. Sansa did not develop their EQ with some sophisticated "cut" mechanism to "give more headroom" or avoid clipping, or all that other nonsense these guys are spouting. That would just be way to much...