The
M is so much more than just a nice DAC implementation:
- It is (following the decision to incorporate a fullsize SD slot) a serious contender as a high-capacity DAP / portable transport (448gb).
- It has an excellent UI, with proper support for tagging, multiple dynamic playlist creation, etc.
NO other DAP has yet successfully combined these features.
The Calyx team are to be applauded for this accomplishment.
This is why, in addition to serving as an excellent standalone DAP, it has (or rather,
had...) the potential to be a groundbreaking portable digital transport, too, with only the addition of a humble digital-out, present on devices ranging from the X5 to those directly in competition with the
M. It's hardly an outlandish or disrespectful feature request. Even some extremely high-end CD players still offer a digital-out on the rear of the chassis.
No one is suggesting to use the
M only by bypassing its DAC. It could be
wonderful used with CIEMs, in its own right,
and then used, when not out walking/commuting, in an expanded set-up, via a Hugo, with cans or fullsize system.
If I bought an Apple Powerbook, with a retina screen, would it be 'disrespectful' to Apple, if I wanted to plug it into a 27" Cinema display and/or connect one or more 3 terrabyte HDDs to it? Would that somehow undermine the legitimacy of buying a Powerbook, with its beautifully-implemented retina screen and SSD, rather than a desktop Mac?
Would I be 'wasting' the retina screen? How about adding an audiophile USB DAC-Amp? Is that disrespecting Apple or 'wasting' the internal soundcard?
No, because I like to use a Powerbook on its own, whilst travelling, and it performs that function fantastically-well
and performs fantastically well, at home, when connected to a 27" screen, desktop HDDs, and USB DAC-Amp.
That's why a USB or thunderbolt port is a legitimate inclusion, even though a Powerbook is a great device when used solo. It's still a fantastic engineering accomplishment in its own right, with full respect to the team that created it, and consequently still deserves its asking price.
A co-ax Digital-Out port is very much an analagous thing on a DAP.
- no perceived 'sleights' towards engineers
- no perceived 'illegitimacy' involved.
- no 'wasting' of well-implemented internal components
It's just a wonderful way to multiply the usefulness (and net value for money) of a device.
With
no disrespect to the ES90182m chip,
or to the Calyx team's skilled implementation of it, the DAC in the Hugo is making waves, not just in portable terms, but even as a
true reference in
uber-high-end fullsize stationary hi-fi gear circles. It's not 'just a different flavour of DAC from the ES90182m'. It's an
evolution in DAC performance,
period.
There is a
very reasonable application of a DAP like the
M, to portably feed the Hugo, for those who listen
not only with CIEMs (direct out of the
M's no-doubt wonderful HO), but
also with fullsize cans, and through their home hi-fi, or, frankly, in almost any situation one cares to mention.
Does that mean that the
M is obligated to be made to cater for all usage scenarios? No, of course not, but it
could cover many more bases
better than
any of its current competitors (and in fairness, it still
will cover many bases better than any of its current competitors). For those of us who have no interest in external DACs, the
M will take 'Gold medal', but for those of us who have an eye on the Hugo (which looks set to sell in
very substantial numbers), the
M will maybe have to share the TOTL DAP podium with a competitor that does offer D-O. Certainly still on the podium, but not with a Gold medal.
So, we're not getting a D-O, and that's just the way it is, but it's not due to lack of legitimacy, even in the face of the 24/192 limitation.
Will the
M still be a great DAP, worthy of its asking price -
yes, I'm confident that it will be, and I'm also confident that it will sell rather well, just as it rightly deserves to, considering the innovation in creating such a well-rounded user-experience as this DAP looks set to offer its customers.
Again, the above discussion isn't in the spirit of 'forcing the issue'
(I've already reluctantly given up on the hope of a D-O being included) - if you look back through the thread, you'll see I did as promised and dropped the issue, but for others to then belittle the issue... well...
I've truly dropped
asking for the feature, but please drop bashing the
legitimacy of the feature.