Quote: low
At 98.2 Mw per channel, the Calyx M is more than 6 times as powerful as the Sony NWZ-ZX1 (15 Mw per channel). That also influences battery life.
Simple power figures can be misleading, there are fluctuations in power output for different parts of the frequency range (severely across multi BA, but bass in dynamics also) as well as other design elements to consider. For example the ZX1 uses Capacitors to make its power delivery more "robust" and less prone to variations in frequency response. The simple way to put is, the ZX1 sounds more powerful than the specs would let on. Another example of this same Capacitor enhanced power stage design is in the Dx90. The X5 has been shown to have over 150mW more power than the DX90 at high impedances, yet many impressions on Head-Fi have stated that the DX90 can power phones like the HD800 and HE-500 better than the X5. Why? Even though it has less power, it has a more robust and stable power delivery (better power reserves due to the capacitors, meaning in high stress situations it has an advantage, similar to the ZX1.
Taken from a Russian comparison for example of driving a difficult load, in this case a tricky low 8 ohm load:
"To assess surge capacity were taken some of the "tight" and require high current due to the impact resistance of 8 ohms
. DX 50 on medium goes into overload mode.
X5 and DX 90 develop sufficient volume without distortion, but headroom in DX 90 above, since X5 begins to choke at maximum volume."
From impressions is the DX90 can power tricky low, and heavy high loads better than the X5. Even though it has been tested as having significantly less power output at both low and high impedances. Conclusion is we cannot take power specifications at face value!
If these hear say impressions are not enough for you, I have personally compared my ZX1 to my DX50. The DX50 has 2 times more power at 16 ohm than ZX1. Then how is it that the ZX1 has more usable volume at 16 ohm? How is it that the ZX1 is more airy, more dynamic while using 20-30% of its total volume, compared to the DX50 on high gain where I had to use 70-80% of its total volume? Power stage design makes a difference! Numbers are not everything! The DX50 also uses caps in its power stage, but this advantage is negated because the DX50 also uses output coupling caps, which the DX90/ZX1 do not. The X5 does not use any caps in its design. We have no idea what Calyx are going to do, and I doubt we ever will, as the M looks mighty hard to open up to see its inside.
Quote:
Is the ZX-1 even able to adequately drive multi-BA ciems? I like everything about the ZX-1 except the lack of a mSD slot, but this really gives me pause.
It can drive the 6 BA Noble very well, I can only use less than 50% volume, and that's for extremely loud. So I'd wager it can drive 8-12 BA iems with no problems.
Quote:
I have the dx90. Ia the calyx m worth the upgrade?
Its up to each persons sound signature preferences. Not enough impressions to make an informed decision at the moment. From some impressions, it seems several people find the Calyx M less neutral/natural than the DX90. But I would wager that has a lot to do with their sound preferences and the music they listen to. I'm sure some impressions will come along with praise for the M soon enough.