[Rozenberg]

Mine has been fixed and only light crash once. A lot better than before where it almost always crashed whenever I used it.
FW1.5 is also pretty stable, though I sometimes have problem where it keeps displaying 00:00 although music is playing. Have to restart to get it back working.
Well, I'll expect next firmware. Been enjoying my i5 too much now 

 

[bclark8923]

Any reviews on the SQ vs something like the Chord Mojo or Onkyo DP-X1?

 

[BartSimpson1976]

not many reviews yet - believe more coming in soon as there is a US dealer for the i5 now.

 

[DevilofLife]

Still a lot of crashes playing iso sacd files better convert it to dsf files before transferring to I5

 

[earfonia]

  Any reviews on the SQ vs something like the Chord Mojo or Onkyo DP-X1?

 
I didn't have enough time to properly compare them with my Mojo and DP-X1 when I tried them a while ago. Was a very short time.
Waiting for the tour program in Singapore, when I got the chance, I will compare it with Mojo and DP-X1. I guess Andy waits till most of the issues are sorted out before starting the tour.

 

[Rozenberg]

  Any reviews on the SQ vs something like the Chord Mojo or Onkyo DP-X1?

I've tried to compare them briefly back then but it was still prototype i5.
The Mojo bested both with its detailed sound yet keeping it smooth overall.
The prototype sounded crazy detailed but could be a bit harsh.
The DP-X1... Well, I felt nothing special, it's just smooth but tbh just that. But haven't tried the balanced out.
 
Though according to my friend who owns a DP-X1, he prefers it to the i5 (current version) because it seemed to him the i5 has smaller soundstage but the bass felt really nice.
Well, I agree with the bass being nice. It's thicker and has nice slam, which is why I kinda felt empty when I returned to my X3 while my i5 was being fixed.
As for soundstage, can't really say if it really became smaller because my CIEM already has big enough soundstage. 

 

[Andykong]

Some expected problem were identified during the internal validation of v1.8 international version firmware, we have been working round the clock trying to solve the problem, we sincerely apology for the delay, will keep this post update as soon as we have the final build for v1.8 release.

 

[petrovsky13]

Some expected problem were identified during the internal validation of v1.8 international version firmware, we have been working round the clock trying to solve the problem, we sincerely apology for the delay, will keep this post update as soon as we have the final build for v1.8 release.

Hi Andy,
 
any reasonable timelines when the final 1.8 can be expected?

 

[Andykong]

I think it's under 1 ohm, forgot the exact value.

You are referring to the output impedance of the i5, right? Below 1ohm is the correct figure for output impedance, this will affect the "damping factor" of a headphone system, which affect the control aspect of the headphone but not the driving capability directly.

I am looking for a new DAP and the i5 looks great. Can anyone tell me what the headphone impedance range is for this DAP? I can't seem to find it anywhere and one site quoted 0.1 - 32ohms which surely is an error? Apologies if this has already been discussed in this thread.

According to the description of the product specification, i5 can pair with headphones from 8ohn to 300ohm, but this is a generic description and the result will depends on a lot of other factors such as sensitivity of the headphone or the technologies (driving requirements) involved. Having said that, we do have users using the i5 with 300ohm headphone such as HD800 in this thread, so the figure is correct to certain extend, but you just can't and shouldn't judge the driving requirement based on one simple figure.

Let me give you two examples for reference:

Audeze LCD-X Planar 22ohm 96dB
Ultrasone ED8 Dynamic 30ohm 96dB

While the specification of these two headphone are very similar, but the driving requirement is complete different. i5 can handle the ED8 fairly well, but is below satisfactory when deal with the LCD-X. So in reality, I do not recommend you use these figures as rule of thumb as-is. I suggest you list the headphones that you owned (or considering) and ask the opinion from the users, and ask if someone have actually tired this paring before.

 

[Andykong]

Hi Andy,

any reasonable timelines when the final 1.8 can be expected?

I am expecting a new submission tomorrow morning (+8 time zone), will keep you informed in regardless if this submission will work out or failed.

 

[Andykong]

Mine has been fixed and only light crash once. A lot better than before where it almost always crashed whenever I used it.
FW1.5 is also pretty stable, though I sometimes have problem where it keeps displaying 00:00 although music is playing. Have to restart to get it back working.
Well, I'll expect next firmware. Been enjoying my i5 too much now 

Well, I can per-announced that the i5 World Tour will open for application just before the RMAF.

 

[bartzky]

You are referring to the output impedance of the i5, right? Below 1ohm is the correct figure for output impedance, this will affect the "damping factor" of a headphone system, which affect the control aspect of the headphone but not the driving capability directly.
According to the description of the product specification, i5 can pair with headphones from 8ohn to 300ohm, but this is a generic description and the result will depends on a lot of other factors such as sensitivity of the headphone or the technologies (driving requirements) involved. Having said that, we do have users using the i5 with 300ohm headphone such as HD800 in this thread, so the figure is correct to certain extend, but you just can't and shouldn't judge the driving requirement based on one simple figure.

Let me give you two examples for reference:

Audeze LCD-X Planar 22ohm 96dB
Ultrasone ED8 Dynamic 30ohm 96dB

While the specification of these two headphone are very similar, but the driving requirement is complete different. i5 can handle the ED8 fairly well, but is below satisfactory when deal with the LCD-X. So in reality, I do not recommend you use these figures as rule of thumb as-is. I suggest you list the headphones that you owned (or considering) and ask the opinion from the users, and ask if someone have actually tired this paring before.

I measured an output impedance of 0.77 Ohm.
But I wonder about the power rating which says 180 mW in 32 Ohm if I'm not mistaken. My own measurement results 3.46 Vrms in 30 Ohm which calculates to roughly 400 mW in 30 Ohm. 30 Ohm is not 32 Ohm for sure, but the numbers should at least be similar. So is the 180 mW specification the power output with <1% THD?
I often obtain different power ratings than the manufacturer claims, but they're usually smaller not bigger 

 

 

[earfonia]

  I measured an output impedance of 0.77 Ohm.
But I wonder about the power rating which says 180 mW in 32 Ohm if I'm not mistaken. My own measurement results 3.46 Vrms in 30 Ohm which calculates to roughly 400 mW in 30 Ohm. 30 Ohm is not 32 Ohm for sure, but the numbers should at least be similar. So is the 180 mW specification the power output with <1% THD?
I often obtain different power ratings than the manufacturer claims, but they're usually smaller not bigger 

 

 
Wow! 400 mW @ 30 ohms is really high output

. That is at 1% THD right?

 

[bartzky]

Wow! 400 mW @ 30 ohms is really high output :eek: . That is at 1% THD right?

No, I don't know the THD at that level, sorry.
It's really high indeed, so I'm not sure if I maybe made a mistake.
With no load the i5 manages to put out 4.67 Vrms btw. Line-out does about 1.22 Vrms - about the same number as specified by Cayin.

 

[Andykong]

I measured an output impedance of 0.77 Ohm.
But I wonder about the power rating which says 180 mW in 32 Ohm if I'm not mistaken. My own measurement results 3.46 Vrms in 30 Ohm which calculates to roughly 400 mW in 30 Ohm. 30 Ohm is not 32 Ohm for sure, but the numbers should at least be similar. So is the 180 mW specification the power output with <1% THD?
I often obtain different power ratings than the manufacturer claims, but they're usually smaller not bigger   

This is the specification of i5 as published at the date of product launch:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/802382/cayin-i5-lossless-android-dap-with-akm4490-dac-supporting-32-384-pcm-64-128-dsd/375#post_12638036



This is a very sensitive topic as eventually this will bring up one question ultimately: how trustworthy are the published specification?

The measurement from Cayin are based on a "consistent" assumption. We believe this is the most natural and meaningful approach on product specification.

The power rating of our DAP are measured with reference to our THD+N specification. In the case of i5, The power rating is 190mW+190mW @32Ω (yes, we revised the figure to 190mW for the final production version), and the THD+N is 0.006%（1kHz，Fs=44.1kHz；20Hz-20kHz,A-Weighted), so the power rating is obtain by ：

1. measuring the physical stuffed PCB with an AP;
2. with 32ohm loading;
3. using 1KHz test signal;
4. THD+N ≤ 0.006%.

We think it is not meaningful to quote an unloaded measurement for anything, be it power rating, cross talk or dynamic range, and when we said our product is rated at a certain THD+N, the other specification must also be measured within this stated condition well. The figures will become inconsistent (and not truly representative) if we said the THD+N is 0.006%, but we measure the power rating at THD+N <1%. Unfortunately these figures becomes very conservative today's market practice, and put Cayin into disadvantage when placed alongside against competing products.