[cooperpwc]

  So they use 2M version of Sabre chip and still get only 7 hours of battery life? *sigh* When I saw the Sabre chip and 7 hours, I thought they were using the desktop chip version one, the one we seen in DX100.

 
Correct me if I am wrong but the DX100 was designed before the 2M version of the Sabre chip was released. Today Hifiman would use it as will all DAP designs using the 9018 chip moving forward. (See iBasso DX90...) There is no reason to have 8 channels (i.e. Dolby 7.1 support) in a stereo DAP. There is also no reason to assume that the 2M chip will burn less electricity than the regular chip running just two channels.
 
As for battery life, that "absolute minimum" would be decoding 24/383 DXD files. I don't have too many of those yet. 10 hours for more common files seems likely which puts it on par with the DX50 which has a Galaxy S3 battery - also 2100 mah. This is the point that is being missed in some of these criticisms: the Calyx M is incredibly thin. It's battery life is going to be limited by the size of the battery given the intensity of the electronics.
 
These guys know how to use the Sabre chip. The OS looks to be the best yet on any DAP: Rockbox-like active playlist control with a beautiful color interface and unprecedented high-res support together with insane THD numbers.
 
If the SQ is what Calyx are capable of, It looks like an absolute winner to me.

 

[AmberOzL]

   
Correct me if I am wrong but the DX100 was designed before the 2M version of the Sabre chip was released. Today Hifiman would use it as will all DAP designs using the 9018 chip moving forward. (See iBasso DX90...) There is no reason to have 8 channels (i.e. Dolby 7.1 support) in a stereo DAP. There is also no reason to assume that the 2M chip will burn less electricity than the regular chip running just two channels.
 
As for battery life, that "absolute minimum" would be decoding 24/383 DXD files. I don't have too many of those yet. 10 hours for more common files seems likely which puts it on par with the DX50 which has a Galaxy S3 battery - also 2100 mah. This is the point that is being missed in some of these criticisms: the Calyx M is incredibly thin. It's battery life is going to be limited by the size of the battery given the intensity of the electronics.
 
These guys know how to use the Sabre chip. The OS looks to be the best yet on any DAP: Rockbox-like active playlist control with a beautiful color interface and unprecedented high-res support together with insane THD numbers.
 
If the SQ is what Calyx are capable of, It looks like an absolute winner to me.

Don't get me wrong, my point was just simply, DX100 was using the desktop version and providing 7 hours, so I thought they also use the same one.
 
As for comparison between two chips, ClieOS wrote nice explanations in DX90 thread. However as we all know, if they implement it good, that's what matters. I agree with you on Calyx's experience, sure they know how to play with it, so let's hope it delivers an unmatchable SQ.

 

[cooperpwc]

^ I really am hoping. We will find out soon enough...!

 

[bmichels]

Still no answer to my mail asking if a 128Gb & 256Gb version will be available !!  this is Not very professional ! 

 

[AmberOzL]

  Still no answer to my mail asking if a 128Gb & 256Gb version will be available !!  this is Not very professional ! 

Same here, no answer to me either.

 

[cooperpwc]

Keep the pressure on them. 
 
(I do not think that there is any hope of a 256 GB model. I doubt that there is even room for that in their current design. However even a 128 GB model would be very nice.)

 

[musicheaven]

They seem pretty set for their 64gb+64gb implementation, I have to say I really like their user interface, really looks polished.

 

[CosmicHolyGhost]

I feel that it is a little bit insensitive to keep on pressing them for a higher capacity model when their first DAP is not even out in the market. They are probably busy finalizing the release now thus I do not feel slow email response at this time is unprofessional. Once this is released and receive good response and sales, it is only logical that they will be planning for future product...
 
Anyway, it is a free world

 

[EtymoticFtW]

+1

 

[VisceriousZERO]

Guys, CES just ended so they're probably just getting back to their emails. Also if you email too much you become
 

 

[T.R.A.N.C.E.]

I think we all know we will be getting the DX90 over this

 

[AmberOzL]

  I think we all know we will be getting the DX90 over this

2 Sabres > 1 Sabre you say?
 
Insert " but the implementation is what matters " quotes in here.
 

 

[VisceriousZERO]

GET BOWTH???? haha.

 

[T.R.A.N.C.E.]

 
2 Sabres > 1 Sabre you say?
 
Insert " but the implementation is what matters " quotes in here.
 

 
lol, I think we can trust ibasso to implement the heck out of the ESS chips in the dx90 plus ibasso track history for daps is two big success's so far, not to mention that all their DAC's are dual implementations (albeit of WM8740). I'm ready to put my money on DX90 sounding better, and at half the price of the Calyx, any takers? 

 
 
Plus lets look at the other specs, the power output of the Calyx is 70+70mW, this is similar to the DX50, so we can assume the DX90 will be same or better I think. And battery life of the Calyx is looking worse than the DX50 atm, but its hard to say what the DX90 will be like. Either way, at 1k the Calyx just looks redundant with the DX90 around. But at least its not 2.4k :/

 

[AmberOzL]

   
lol, I think we can trust ibasso to implement the heck out of the ESS chips in the dx90 plus ibasso track history for daps is two big success's so far, not to mention that all their DAC's are dual implementations (albeit of WM8740). I'm ready to put my money on DX90 sounding better, and at half the price of the Calyx, any takers? 

 

Well I am gonna choose between X5 and DX90. Calyx M is nice and all but it lacks some important things for me. It's their first dap so probably M's successor would be the dap I will be interested to buy.