[docholliday]

   
I just listened and compared these 3 tracks (not FLAC, but 320kbps mp3) between N3 and X1ii, using UERR and MDR7506, went back'n'forth multiple times, and don't hear any issues with drums/percussions as you have described above.  I assume you're referring to some ADSR envelope anomaly you hear, perhaps release time?  What I would recommend, in Music Settings take a look at Digital Filter (AKM4490 has different filters) and play around with it.  I'm using Sharp filter.  Also, my N3 already has over 35hrs of burn in.
 

Just a quick follow up, the issue was related to the EQ bug when associated with High gain. Once the EQ would stop working, it would make all the cymbal rings cut off waay early and the drum resonance dry. A reset of the player (and subsequent reconfiguration of settings BEFORE playing a track) resolved it. Also, in high gain, the cymbal resonance was much less, when working correctly, then in low or medium. The player was originally set to high gain to keep the volume 35-45 for the UERR (which is what the X1-II was set at for the same output level). In Low gain, it requires 62-65 on the N3 for the same sound output level.
 
Once I figured out how to keep it from going wonky, I did look at the design documentation of the AK4490EN chip and the 32-bit, 8x sampling SCDF (Sound Color Digital Filter) cutoff filter. To begin with, I had a session drummer lay down a nice track for me (since I was in the studio anyways) to use for testing, with full cymbal solo. I monitored and recorded it via the board with the UERR as well as the Genelec near fields. I also listened from the other side of the glass to get the recording as accurate as possible.
 
I played it back first on the Fiio X1-II to see how it sounded and it was decently close to the studio recording. Then, on to the N3, set to L gain with no EQ...SHARP was the worst filter of all, with the clean brassy resonance of the ride cymbal losing all harmonic resonance and became a vibrating sheet of aluminum foil. The full pre and post ringing of the harmonic cutoff made the mid drums sound solid with little harmonic variation.
 
The most accurate was the SUPER SLOW, which actually drops the SCDF's sampling to half, and resulted in the closest sounding cymbals as well as drum "thumps" that had harmonic resonance. The next closest was the Short Delay SLOW.
 
I also had a go with the keyboard and noticed that the recorded track did work best with SHARP, but wasn't much worse with any other filters. I also tried both tests with a light EQ set at 63/+1db, 125/+1db, and 16K/+1db. Same results, with a bit cleaner ring to the cymbals and drums were a touch more "accurate" - the UERR is known to be very flat, so I gave it a push for the final test.
 
As long as I don't touch the EQ and/or set the EQ with nothing playing, power down and restart, the issue hasn't returned and all test tracks sound very close to how they play on other devices.

 

[Barndoor]

Thanks for a great post.
So Super slow is your preferred; is that right?

 

[hpnut]

Yeah, great folow up indeed..very interesting! Can't wait to get my N3 and see if I can spot these differences.

 

[docholliday]

Thanks for a great post.
So Super slow is your preferred; is that right?

Yes, Super Slow was best for classical, bluegrass, rock, acoustic - anything with defined "physical" instruments. Short delay slow was close behind, a bit less harmonic resonance from symbols and drumheads sounded a hair tighter.
 
It seems that pop, electronica, dance stuff (stuff with more digital instruments than "physical" instruments) may have better results with sharp or short delay sharp. 
 
Slow was pretty much worthless, as it muddied everything up and sounded flat and dead.
 
I listen to (and mix) a lot of female vocals. With Super Slow, you can hear more of the natural reverb in some voices (think the vibration and resonance of a violin string as the bow is drawn across it). The same voices in Sharp sounded more "pop" (not as bad as autotune, but definitely more linear). With Short Delay Slow, the same voice would have some resonance, but less vibration.
 
Oh, and most people won't even notice this stuff, especially with Mp3/320 or even 24/44 FLAC. Even with some 24/96 files, I couldn't tell the difference. But, my capture was done off the mixing console at 24/192 and the file was directly copied over to my card for the player. You'd have to really listen to hear the tiny differences, but sound engineers jobs are to find little nuances and solve problems so the difference stuck out like a sore thumb to me.

 

[twister6]

@docholliday : if you are putting $150 budget dap through these paces, i hate to see what you would do to other $3k-$3.5k flagship DAPs

 
Thanks for the filter pointer, I didn't get to it yet, but looking forward to check it out!

 

[docholliday]

  @docholliday : if you are putting $150 budget dap through these paces, i hate to see what you would do to other $3k-$3.5k flagship DAPs

 
Thanks for the filter pointer, I didn't get to it yet, but looking forward to check it out!

Ha! That's funny...
 
Seriously, as a scientist, my brain forces me to find solutions to problems. As a sound engineer, the little things stick out and I can't ignore them! Bad combo for sanity!
 
I actually don't care for "flagship" DAPs. I'll use my DAW consoles for the purpose of high-quality "reference" audio. I just wanted something that I could take out and about (I wear a dozen other hats too) when I'm doing stuff that I don't have to worry about getting damaged or destroyed. The little nuances got to me, dammit.
 
But...I'd be tempted to tear those flagship DAPs apart (both physically and scientifically, I am also an electronics engineer and software developer). Yeah, I'm not going there...

 

[peskypesky]

  Ha! That's funny...
 
Seriously, as a scientist, my brain forces me to find solutions to problems. As a sound engineer, the little things stick out and I can't ignore them! Bad combo for sanity!
 
I actually don't care for "flagship" DAPs. I'll use my DAW consoles for the purpose of high-quality "reference" audio. I just wanted something that I could take out and about (I wear a dozen other hats too) when I'm doing stuff that I don't have to worry about getting damaged or destroyed. The little nuances got to me, dammit.
 
But...I'd be tempted to tear those flagship DAPs apart (both physically and scientifically, I am also an electronics engineer and software developer). Yeah, I'm not going there...

You is smart!

 

[docholliday]

 
You is smart!

Nah, just was bored as a kid.

 

[groucho69]

  Ha! That's funny...
 
Seriously, as a scientist, my brain forces me to find solutions to problems. As a sound engineer, the little things stick out and I can't ignore them! Bad combo for sanity!
 
I actually don't care for "flagship" DAPs. I'll use my DAW consoles for the purpose of high-quality "reference" audio. I just wanted something that I could take out and about (I wear a dozen other hats too) when I'm doing stuff that I don't have to worry about getting damaged or destroyed. The little nuances got to me, dammit.
 
But...I'd be tempted to tear those flagship DAPs apart (both physically and scientifically, I am also an electronics engineer and software developer). Yeah, I'm not going there...

You do what we wish we could do

 

[riffrafff]

   
Indeed, I think it's a safety feature to protect your ears!

Oh, I'm sure that's the reasoning behind it...nonetheless, it is très annoying when I'm using it as a line-out source.  My "work-around" was to set the time-out to at least an hour. 

 

[DBaldock9]

There was a notice in my mailbox today, saying that I can pick up my package from MusicTeck tomorrow at the Post Office (it was sent with signature required).
 
I've already got a 200GB MicroSD card for it, and I'm looking forward to using my new N3 tomorrow evening.

 

[riffrafff]

Not really a "case," but since I hate silicone, this ear-bud pouch will have to do. 

 
 

 

[nmatheis]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't understand why people prefer to use higher gain settings to keep the volume at low settings. That increases the volume jump per click of the volume buttons, limiting the ability to fine tune the overall volume setting. It also has the distinct possibility of introducing noise from boosting gain. A couple audio engineers who've designed DAPs also told me that increasing volume to close to maximum levels gets maximum performance out of the DAC. So many reasons to choose the gain setting that allows you to really bump up the volume. To each their own, though.

And I'm not trying to single you out docholliday. I've seen many people complain about gain settings that are too low because they have to crank up the volume levels - even when they can achieve reasonable volume levels when cranking it up. Perhaps I'm missing something...

 

[docholliday]

I'm probably in the minority here, but I don't understand why people prefer to use higher gain settings to keep the volume at low settings. That increases the volume jump per click of the volume buttons, limiting the ability to fine tune the overall volume setting. It also has the distinct possibility of introducing noise from boosting gain. A couple audio engineers who've designed DAPs also told me that increasing volume to close to maximum levels gets maximum performance out of the DAC. So many reasons to choose the gain setting that allows you to really bump up the volume. To each their own, though.

And I'm not trying to single you out @docholliday. I've seen many people complain about gain settings that are too low because they have to crank up the volume levels - even when they can achieve reasonable volume levels when cranking it up. Perhaps I'm missing something...

I wasn't deliberately using high gain to keep the volume level low. I was using high gain to drive the UERR as they are hard to drive. On L gain, you can crank to point of clipping the amp and still not be "too loud". Ideally, you would drive the amp with the highest "natural" level from the pre's. Well, ideally, it would be unity gain across the board until final amplification and let the amp be the one that has the final signal cut.
 
Even then, the whole -6db/-3db/0db unity thing that like "medium gray" in photography, and has been subjective (some call it 13%, other 18% depending on if you believe Ansel Adams or Kodak). Look at DSD/SACD - the standard specs that the level should be reduced by 6db on input to give extra headroom and the decoder should add back 6db. But, some people didn't follow the standard and you'll end up with clipping if you blindly do 6db gain back into the signal without looking at a spectrogram or VU and getting the actual peak of the signal.
 
The gain shouldn't be based on volume level, it should be based on what goes through a sound path as clean as possible (linear) with as little amplification or attenuation of the signal as possible. The UERR is known to want higher levels to keep the response linear. My studio gear like -25 to -20db output level to drive it to equivalent sound levels. Without knowing what the L/M/H gain actually does mathematically on the N3 (I haven't seen any actual level data), it's a guess to which is the "cleanest".

 

[nmatheis]

docholliday: I was just going by this...

"The player was originally set to high gain to keep the volume 35-45 for the UERR (which is what the X1-II was set at for the same output level). In Low gain, it requires 62-65 on the N3 for the same sound output level."