[Andykong]

Thanks Andykong for all the details. I always thought that N3 line-out is true line-out and not psuedo line-out (like you mentioned).

Well, I take that as a compliment meaning the line out from N3 is up to par for designated purpose. Thank you very much, that's a relief.

 

[VIPUL PATEL]

Well, I take that as a compliment meaning the line out from N3 is up to par for designated purpose. Thank you very much, that's a relief.

I enjoyed line-out sound when used with my external Amps. Now when I know the exact implementation, I can only appreciate more on how clean the output (even at 1V RMS is).

 

[chinmie]

@chinmie is doing the right thing if he is not using the phone out of N3 at all. This actually is a good idea for those who want to use N3 with desktop or portable amplifier, it is not identical to the line out but close enough.

The line out of N3 is a fixed 1.0 Vrms output from headphone out, it does not bypass the headphone amplification Op-Amp, you can argue that the line out is not complete clean and will undergoes double amplification, but this the best we can do given the space limitation inside the N3, PCB is so crowded that we simply can't squeeze a dedicated line out signal path into it, and to do it right, we cannot use the DAC output as line out directly, we need to add a dedicated Op-Amp after the DAC output, this is what we are doing in the next DAP.

1.0 Vrms is a relatively low output for line out, the standard line out should be 2.0 Vrms. We have to keep this low value because we want to make sure the line out is clean enough even after double amplification. A lot of users are happy with the quality of "pseudo" line out from N3 and consider them very "useable". In fact, there are a lot of more expensive DAP adopted this fixed headphone output approach with their line out feature, so I suggest we always check the feature with your own ears instead of assuming the result based on a generic approach.

chinmie, sorry for unable to facilitate your change request, we cannot customize our firmware for individual, once we do that, we'll need to expand our software team dramatically. All firmware change must be generically apply to all users, that's why we can't take your word as-is and change the firmware, we must consider the great majority which, according to our study, only a small percentage of N3 users will use Line out of N3 exclusively. Your patient and consideration is sincerely appreciated.

That's okay @Andykong , i love the N3 high enough to let this one little problem slide

by the way, does the digital filters affect the line out mode also or is it only affect the headphone out mode? because even at the same volume with the workaround i did, i think there's a slight coloration difference on their sound.

 

[DBaldock9]

I believe we have discussed the digital filters since the early days, and I do remember someone has shared this photo previously. In addition, @DBaldock9 has written quite a lot of sharing regarding digital filters in N3, I still remember he prefers the Super Slow filter for acoustic instruments. Maybe DBaldock9 can chime in again.

It's actually @docholliday who has done the filter comparisons in the studio where he works - using digital audio reference signals straight from the source.

 

[Andykong]

It's actually @docholliday who has done the filter comparisons in the studio where he works - using digital audio reference signals straight from the source.

Oop, my sincere apology, I stand corrected.

 

[docholliday]

It's actually @docholliday who has done the filter comparisons in the studio where he works - using digital audio reference signals straight from the source.

Yes, that was me! That chart I had posted before, but it is truly an ambiguous device posted by Asashi Kasei - very marketing based. Trying to decode what the difference between "traditional sound" and "traditional tone" was enough...(aren't they both "traditional"?)

The result is that Super Slow is best for anything with "real instruments" if you want the most accurate tonal reproductions; Short Delay Sharp for most electronic based, to keep the digital harmonics sharp and clean; and, Short Delay Slow for general use (a compromise of both ends so that you can listen without having to change filters song to song).

 

[ridwan.a.wijaya]

Yes, that was me! The result is that Super Slow is best for anything with "real instruments" if you want the most accurate tonal reproductions; Short Delay Sharp for most electronic based, to keep the digital harmonics sharp and clean; and, Short Delay Slow for general use (a compromise of both ends so that you can listen without having to change filters song to song).

Thank you.. for your helpful explanation, should be sticky on the first page, i'm sure many user didnt follow this thread when buying it. Including me, buy it base on review and then start to follow this thread when there is something I didnt understand.

 

[Andykong]

I enjoyed line-out sound when used with my external Amps. Now when I know the exact implementation, I can only appreciate more on how clean the output (even at 1V RMS is).

Cayin is an expert in analogue audio. We feel comfortable to claim that the analogue circuit of N3 is well above par when compare to other DAPs at similar price range.

 

[Andykong]

That's okay @Andykong , i love the N3 high enough to let this one little problem slide

by the way, does the digital filters affect the line out mode also or is it only affect the headphone out mode? because even at the same volume with the workaround i did, i think there's a slight coloration difference on their sound.

The digital filter will affect both.

N3 is not really a neutral DAP, we don't take neutral as the utmost important reference when we fine tune the N3, listening impression takes priority as N3 aims at the general public rather then the more dedicated audiophile group.

 

[MajesticSquirrel]

Yes, that was me! That chart I had posted before, but it is truly an ambiguous device posted by Asashi Kasei - very marketing based. Trying to decode what the difference between "traditional sound" and "traditional tone" was enough...(aren't they both "traditional"?)

The result is that Super Slow is best for anything with "real instruments" if you want the most accurate tonal reproductions; Short Delay Sharp for most electronic based, to keep the digital harmonics sharp and clean; and, Short Delay Slow for general use (a compromise of both ends so that you can listen without having to change filters song to song).

Thank you.. for your helpful explanation, should be sticky on the first page, i'm sure many user didnt follow this thread when buying it. Including me, buy it base on review and then start to follow this thread when there is something I didnt understand.

What you will like the most may differ. I suggest you take at least 3 songs. One with only real instruments and/or vocals, one electronic and one mixed. Then try all the filters with each song and you should be able to choose favorite filter(s). If you couldn't decide or want some criteria, then pay attention to:
1. How natural is the sound.
2. How detailed is the sound.
3. Isn't the sound too harsh?
4. Do you get enough energy/sparkle out of sound, doesn't it feel dull/muddy/veiled?
5. Does the sound feel close or distant, is it wide and deep, how good is instrument separation?

The digital filter will affect both.

N3 is not really a neutral DAP, we don't take neutral as the utmost important reference when we fine tune the N3, listening impression takes priority as N3 aims at the general public rather then the more dedicated audiophile group.

Hello, maybe you could make a neutral tune and let user switch between neutral/default in the upcoming firmware? If adding user interface functionality takes too much time, then maybe you could make an alternative firmware for it? For example, if/when you have 2.2 firmware, you could make a copy of it and fine-tune the copy to sound neutral. So there would be two files for 2.2 firmware - one called something like "2.2 default", another - something like "2.2 neutral tune". If you think adding two files for one firmware might confuse users, you could upload only default firmware to your website, but include neutral tune in this forum. It would be really interesting to hear neutrally tuned Cayin.

 

[Indrajit]

Regarding the digital filters, it becomes very difficult to be at peace with any one filter in a long listening session, it brings unrest. All the filters impose an advantage but on the expense of other tonal aspects. It will be convenient and wonderful if future Firmware includes a neutrally tuned sound signature thus putting the need to change filters at peace.
There are listeners who prefer sound quality to other features so if it is possible, an alternate firmware concerning only sound quality change will hold its own value

 

[Andykong]

Hello, maybe you could make a neutral tune and let user switch between neutral/default in the upcoming firmware? If adding user interface functionality takes too much time, then maybe you could make an alternative firmware for it? For example, if/when you have 2.2 firmware, you could make a copy of it and fine-tune the copy to sound neutral. So there would be two files for 2.2 firmware - one called something like "2.2 default", another - something like "2.2 neutral tune". If you think adding two files for one firmware might confuse users, you could upload only default firmware to your website, but include neutral tune in this forum. It would be really interesting to hear neutrally tuned Cayin.

Cayin will stick with our choice of sound signature, and we do not use firmware for sound tuning, all our firmware sound exactly the same unless we have to change the algorithm during a bug fix or optimization, or we have to adjust the power management function which occasionally will change the sound.

 

[Andykong]

Regarding the digital filters, it becomes very difficult to be at peace with any one filter in a long listening session, it brings unrest. All the filters impose an advantage but on the expense of other tonal aspects. It will be convenient and wonderful if future Firmware includes a neutrally tuned sound signature thus putting the need to change filters at peace.
There are listeners who prefer sound quality to other features so if it is possible, an alternate firmware concerning only sound quality change will hold its own value

I think there is a major misunderstanding about the digital filters in AK4490.

The digital filters are provided by the AKM DAC chipset, and AKM will almost employ ONE filter in its DAC process, so its a matter of Cayin pick one digital filters as default, or allow you the user to select according to their preference. we can't develop a digital filter to replace the AKM filters in N3 implementation.

 

[georgelai57]

Latecomer to this thread. There is one feature I’m extremely interested in and that is to use the OTG to a 256 GB full sized SD card. Any users here with real world experience?

 

[gLer]

Regarding the digital filters, it becomes very difficult to be at peace with any one filter in a long listening session, it brings unrest. All the filters impose an advantage but on the expense of other tonal aspects. It will be convenient and wonderful if future Firmware includes a neutrally tuned sound signature thus putting the need to change filters at peace.
There are listeners who prefer sound quality to other features so if it is possible, an alternate firmware concerning only sound quality change will hold its own value

Try as I may I can’t hear much of a difference regardless of which filter I choose, so I just keep it on the default filter and enjoy. I’m using only lossless, often HD files with good, detailed headphones and they sound just like they should regardless of filter choice. YMMV.