[gLer]

And does the pop sound issue still exist?

The pop sound issue seems to have only affected one or two users, so as far as I can tell it's not an 'issue'.

 

[DBaldock9]

And does the pop sound issue still exist?

As i said the other day - https://www.head-fi.org/threads/cay...oax-out-for-150.833932/page-237#post-13664747
- my N3 just began having quiet pops between tracks, after a couple of months of playing the same tracks, from the same memory card, without pops.

It's not annoying enough to spend much time troubleshooting it, before the next Firmware release.

 

[Zyder]

Thanks gLer and DBaldock!

Still considering if i should drive it. Looking at the DAC chip (same as Zishan Z2 which is my current fav) hoping its the same SQ

 

[DBaldock9]

Thanks gLer and DBaldock!

Still considering if i should drive it. Looking at the DAC chip (same as Zishan Z2 which is my current fav) hoping its the same SQ

If you're just interested in the AKM4490 DAC, then even the $43 (screenless) Zishan Z2 uses that chip.

 

[Zyder]

If you're just interested in the AKM4490 DAC, then even the $43 (screenless) Zishan Z2 uses that chip.

Yup i am using Z2 now. Just thinking will N3 sound better

 

[Oliverw]

Hi Everyone

Im a new user of cayin n3 and would like to ask some questions. after i lost my Hd25 i bought a Beyer dt 770 32ohm. I was using only my phone to drive it (honor 6), but had the feeling it does not have enough power. So i decided for an upgrade. I was thinking Cayin n3 or dragonfly black/red. Because the cayin was difficult to get i bought a DfB. The sound was amazing, unfortunately it was glitching with my phone so i returned it and ordered the N3 from Spain. Well, the difference in sound is very striking. The DfB had a lot of body and i have to get used to to sound of my Cayin. I really like the big soundstage and separation.
So my questions:
1, When i changed the eq i heard very little difference. Is the eq this subtle?
2, I tried to connect it to my phone and use it as a dap. I have an micro usb to usb otg cable and i connected it to the included cayin usb-c cable. My phone recognised it, but the sound is interupted every few seconds, because the N3 starts to charge. What kind of cable i need to use it without it starting to charge?

My first impressions werent that good. I missed the body of the Dfb, but now im starting to like it. As a rookie in hifi its a good start and already intreduced my to real time meaning of words like big soundstage, seperation and body. Its good to know there are these kind of devices for this price.

 

[julianlopez85]

Hi, the N3 doesn't support surround sound SACD (and definitely not dts). If you have an SACD ISO with both 2.0 and 5.1 tracks, you have to extract the 2.0 files as dff or dsf files first (Google 'Sonore ISO2DSD' for a free tool that does this for you). Hope this helps.

ok thanks so much for your help : )

 

[MajesticSquirrel]

@Oliverw Hi, I am quite new to Cayin and honestly didn't have good first impression too, but I think I managed to set it to my liking. My headphone is 32 ohm too, so chances are the settings will be good for you too. So, I set:

1) Medium gain. Sounds more crisp, clear and punchy to me than low gain. And, as far as I tested, high gain gives noticable noise/distortion.

2) "Slow" digital filter. I think it stands in the middle of echo, detail and naturality, which makes it the universal filter for me. Slower filters gives more echo to everything and more naturality to real instruments and vocals, but sacrifies details. Sharp filters give more details to make electronica sound more accurate, but sacrifies echo, and real instruments and vocals sound too artificially detailed. For eample, I can be tempted to change to "short delay slow" or "super slow" for piano and to "short delay sharp" or "sharp" for complex electronica. But I am lazy enough to leave "slow", because nothing sounds bad with it. And so far I've found one piece (White Stripes - Ball and Bisquit), where no other filter manages to turn me on so much. Many people could have a different opinion, so it's always the best to try yourself. Finally, you may find useful http://fiio.me/data/attachment/forum/201703/07/105248t0undeybtzovlezo.png

Didn't touch other settings, EQ is off, replay gain is off.

Not experienced with USB DAP.

 

[julianlopez85]

Anyone known if aune m1s and n3 who's sq is better?

ok so i auditoned both before i bought my n3...i'm new to the hobby so i can't really give you much audiphoile jargon but here's the thing the m1s sounds flat to me and no it doesn't have an eq to fix it and no it doesn't have the bluetooth capabilities the n3 has but if you're not into the whole bluetooth thing and want a player that only focus's on sq then the m1s would be better only in balanced output...i prefer the n3 on single ended this signature really appeals to me...i auditioned both with my audio technica e40 which is a rather neutral iem ( at least i think so) the balanced out was auditioned with the store supplied qdc triple balanced armature iem with was stellar...but considering i really wanted the bluetooth feature i felt that for now i rather stick with the n3 i's an amazing player for the price but then again you may want to audition them for yourself and see what you prefer...taste is subjective so YMMV...hope this helps

 

[Zyder]

ok so i auditoned both before i bought my n3...i'm new to the hobby so i can't really give you much audiphoile jargon but here's the thing the m1s sounds flat to me and no it doesn't have an eq to fix it and no it doesn't have the bluetooth capabilities the n3 has but if you're not into the whole bluetooth thing and want a player that only focus's on sq then the m1s would be better only in balanced output...i prefer the n3 on single ended this signature really appeals to me...i auditioned both with my audio technica e40 which is a rather neutral iem ( at least i think so) the balanced out was auditioned with the store supplied qdc triple balanced armature iem with was stellar...but considering i really wanted the bluetooth feature i felt that for now i rather stick with the n3 i's an amazing player for the price but then again you may want to audition them for yourself and see what you prefer...taste is subjective so YMMV...hope this helps

Thanks man. BT function is just a bonus for me and i dont use balanced too. So i assume N3 is the way to go?

 

[docholliday]

@Oliverw ...
2) "Slow" digital filter. I think it stands in the middle of echo, detail and naturality, which makes it the universal filter for me. Slower filters gives more echo to everything and more naturality to real instruments and vocals, but sacrifies details. Sharp filters give more details to make electronica sound more accurate, but sacrifies echo, and real instruments and vocals sound too artificially detailed. For eample, I can be tempted to change to "short delay slow" or "super slow" for piano and to "short delay sharp" or "sharp" for complex electronica. But I am lazy enough to leave "slow", because nothing sounds bad with it. And so far I've found one piece (White Stripes - Ball and Bisquit), where no other filter manages to turn me on so much. Many people could have a different opinion, so it's always the best to try yourself. Finally, you may find useful http://fiio.me/data/attachment/forum/201703/07/105248t0undeybtzovlezo.png
...

Actually, that is incorrect. The slower filters offer LESS echo as they smooth out the wave structure to reduce ringing. The slower filters also have a more gradual cutoff of high frequencies, but starting at an earlier frequency. Slower filters reproduce the sound more accurately to the analog or real sound. The side effect is that higher frequencies above the cut of beginning aren't as noticable, especially to people who can hear the higher frequencies and/or experience sibilance in the highs.

The sharp filters offer more of the pure wave energy producing more ringing. Sharp filters cut off very steeply, but do so at the high end of the response range. Sharper filters feel as to having a higher resolution, but is more digital or fake sounding. For those whose hearing isn't as good or has good resolution of the high frequencies, this provides more detail to material that offers tones in the high ranges.

"Slow" is the worst filter, as is it the worst of both worlds. It is extremely neutral in both highs and lows, as it mutes a lot of the higher frequencies, and introduces harmonic distortions into the audio stream. It does so with no empahsis on either end of the spectrum, so it could be considered a "flat" filter.

For symphonic or music made up mostly of "real instruments", Super Slow offers the most realism with a lot of warmth. But, it can cause some digital tones to have a weird warbling effect. Mostly in keyboards. It runs in a half sampling rate to do so.

For pure digital or mostly keyboard, such as techno, house, trance, Short Delay Sharp offers the cleanest of digital reproduction. It also makes cymbals and acoustic guitars sound tinny and feel like they were recorded through a gate filter with early cutoff.

Short Delay Slow gives back some of the lost tonality from Slow, without affecting the digital too much. It is a good compromise to start with.

The AKM chip isn't a very warm chip to begin with when compared to some of the BB/TI chips...

 

[eaglesgift]

Actually, that is incorrect. The slower filters offer LESS echo as they smooth out the wave structure to reduce ringing. The slower filters also have a more gradual cutoff of high frequencies, but starting at an earlier frequency. Slower filters reproduce the sound more accurately to the analog or real sound. The side effect is that higher frequencies above the cut of beginning aren't as noticable, especially to people who can hear the higher frequencies and/or experience sibilance in the highs.

The sharp filters offer more of the pure wave energy producing more ringing. Sharp filters cut off very steeply, but do so at the high end of the response range. Sharper filters feel as to having a higher resolution, but is more digital or fake sounding. For those whose hearing isn't as good or has good resolution of the high frequencies, this provides more detail to material that offers tones in the high ranges.

"Slow" is the worst filter, as is it the worst of both worlds. It is extremely neutral in both highs and lows, as it mutes a lot of the higher frequencies, and introduces harmonic distortions into the audio stream. It does so with no empahsis on either end of the spectrum, so it could be considered a "flat" filter.

For symphonic or music made up mostly of "real instruments", Super Slow offers the most realism with a lot of warmth. But, it can cause some digital tones to have a weird warbling effect. Mostly in keyboards. It runs in a half sampling rate to do so.

For pure digital or mostly keyboard, such as techno, house, trance, Short Delay Sharp offers the cleanest of digital reproduction. It also makes cymbals and acoustic guitars sound tinny and feel like they were recorded through a gate filter with early cutoff.

Short Delay Slow gives back some of the lost tonality from Slow, without affecting the digital too much. It is a good compromise to start with.

The AKM chip isn't a very warm chip to begin with when compared to some of the BB/TI chips...

When I looked at graphs for each filter, slow and super slow (no delay) didn't seem to be doing anything at the lower end of the frequency range, only the higher frequencies?

 

[docholliday]

When I looked at graphs for each filter, slow and super slow (no delay) didn't seem to be doing anything at the lower end of the frequency range, only the higher frequencies?

That is correct, mostly. The filters are designed as anti-aliasing filters for high-frequency roll off. But...because of the start of the roll off point (earlier for slower and later/non-existant for sharper), there are harmonics at play that can minorly affect other frequencies in the range. It doesn't affect the bass or low mids, but the filters can affect a harmonic of something like a tom/snare drumhead - it may sound more dull as the high cutoff (even though the drum is a lower frequencied instrument) causes the drum to lose some of the sound from the stick hitting the head.

Sharper roll offs, say at 19.5KHz allow almost all frequencies up to that point to remain the same energy. Slower ones start earlier, so a 19.5KHz roll off may start cascading down at 13KHz and reduce the energy of those in-between frequencies.

Super slow isn't a "no delay" filter - it's a half sampling rate filter. There are three bits that change the filters, one changes the fast/slow (SLOW) and another the short/standard delay (SD). A completely different bit ("SSLOW") engages the half sampling frequency bit. When it is engaged (set to 1), the 4490 ignores the first two bits. The AKM "consumer" graph/chart is pretty much marketing and useless. Look at the response graphs from the AKM design sheet for more accurate cutoff frequencies and response times.

 

[eaglesgift]

That is correct, mostly. The filters are designed as anti-aliasing filters for high-frequency roll off. But...because of the start of the roll off point (earlier for slower and later/non-existant for sharper), there are harmonics at play that can minorly affect other frequencies in the range. It doesn't affect the bass or low mids, but the filters can affect a harmonic of something like a tom/snare drumhead - it may sound more dull as the high cutoff (even though the drum is a lower frequencied instrument) causes the drum to lose some of the sound from the stick hitting the head.

Sharper roll offs, say at 19.5KHz allow almost all frequencies up to that point to remain the same energy. Slower ones start earlier, so a 19.5KHz roll off may start cascading down at 13KHz and reduce the energy of those in-between frequencies.

Super slow isn't a "no delay" filter - it's a half sampling rate filter. There are three bits that change the filters, one changes the fast/slow (SLOW) and another the short/standard delay (SD). A completely different bit ("SSLOW") engages the half sampling frequency bit. When it is engaged (set to 1), the 4490 ignores the first two bits. The AKM "consumer" graph/chart is pretty much marketing and useless. Look at the response graphs from the AKM design sheet for more accurate cutoff frequencies and response times.

Thanks. So am I right in thinking that if I can't hear much over 14kHz, the Sharp filter would be the equivalent of no filter as far as my ears were concerned? On that note, why isn't there an option to have no filter at all? Never mind that last question - I guess that's the default filter - short delay sharp.

EDIT: Sorry, just to continue....I get the idea of sharp roll off but what is the delay meant to achieve?

 

[Oliverw]

@Oliverw Hi, I am quite new to Cayin and honestly didn't have good first impression too, but I think I managed to set it to my liking. My headphone is 32 ohm too, so chances are the settings will be good for you too. So, I set:

1) Medium gain. Sounds more crisp, clear and punchy to me than low gain. And, as far as I tested, high gain gives noticable noise/distortion.

2) "Slow" digital filter. I think it stands in the middle of echo, detail and naturality, which makes it the universal filter for me. Slower filters gives more echo to everything and more naturality to real instruments and vocals, but sacrifies details. Sharp filters give more details to make electronica sound more accurate, but sacrifies echo, and real instruments and vocals sound too artificially detailed. For eample, I can be tempted to change to "short delay slow" or "super slow" for piano and to "short delay sharp" or "sharp" for complex electronica. But I am lazy enough to leave "slow", because nothing sounds bad with it. And so far I've found one piece (White Stripes - Ball and Bisquit), where no other filter manages to turn me on so much. Many people could have a different opinion, so it's always the best to try yourself. Finally, you may find useful http://fiio.me/data/attachment/forum/201703/07/105248t0undeybtzovlezo.png

Didn't touch other settings, EQ is off, replay gain is off.

Not experienced with USB DAP.

Thank You for the answer.
I did find one peeson who tried it with usb audio player and had the same problem as me. The sound was cutting off every few seconds. Andykong said they dont think it works.
Is there anyone who was able to use the n3 as a dac with his/her phone?