[icefalkon]

   
 
Yes, but the difference you're hearing might be just a difference in the EQ levels used on the mixing desk during another mastering of the album.
 
I'm not anti-MQA, I'm just saying it appears you are attributing the difference to MQA because you've heard a few MQA files and read some exciting MQA articles, when, it may be because of differences in mastering rather than having anything at all to do with MQA.
 
Until you can be absolutely 100% certain, then publicly urging iBasso to complicate their products further, with a proprietary approach like Meridian's, hardly seems fair to iBasso.

 
 
Amen.
 
 
Steve from NYC

 

[Mython]

LOL - and Currawong posted this, just a few seconds ago, in a different thread:
 

 

Spoiler: Off-topic reply about MQA.

 

  what i was reading about mqa (and someone clarify if i'm wrong) just because it's MQA doesn't necessarily mean it'll be a better sounding production than
is one done later one (remastered) down the line, esp if the original master was so-so anyway..can't put lipstick on a pig so to speak.....i'll try to find the article.
if i'm wrong don't blast me...be polite, thanks.

 
On the contrary. I've read Various articles saying that MQA is basically as good as DSD in a much much smaller file size due to compression so it can be streamed. 
 
http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/06/an-inconvenient-truth-mqa-sounds-better/
 
http://www.crutchfield.com/S-YITtscFKiGC/learn/high-resolution-audio-guide.html

 
MQA is EQ'ed, more or less. That is why in demos it sounds different. But that is because....
 

  What's the benefit of MQA? Most of us(99%) cannot even hear the difference between 320 kbps vs CD in an abx type test.

 
...the idea is that the behaviour of the original ADC that was used during recording or encoding (if from tape) can be included in the MQA file and the DAC can compensate for it during playback, which is supposedly what was being heard in the demos.
 
Of course, this could be done without MQA entirely, and it is very arguably only worth considering for at least moderately high-end gear and listening to well-recorded music where all the details and acoustic considerations matter.

 

[Paul - iBasso]

From my understanding most times it's unintentional. Maybe due to changes in the cpu processing? I don't think companies really have an explanation for it, at least nothing that I've read.

That is correct. It is unintentional. We have spoken to manufactures of chips and no one has a solid answer. The FW affects the CPU and from that the sound can change a little. We design the digital section and amp section to sound the best it can in our opinion. We do not try to alter the sound with FW but as seen with most any daps the sound does change a little or a lot with updates. Sometimes it is better and sometimes it is not. When it is not good sounding we reload the same FW again and the sound changes. So we work to get a neutral sounding FW and this may take a few tries. I wish to stress that we do not try to mold the sound but we want the FW to be neutral to allow our dac and amp section to work as intended.
 
We supply a burn in cable with the DX200 and feel the burn in is beneficial. The sound will smooth out as time passes and the bass tightens more compared to a new DX200. Other refinements to the sound also occur. The burn in time is around 100 hours and continues to refine to around 200 hours.

 

[geagle]

 

 
Paul, BTW, when will the DX200 be available to buy also on your website, if I may ask?

 

[T.R.A.N.C.E.]

That is correct. It is unintentional. We have spoken to manufactures of chips and no one has a solid answer. The FW affects the CPU and from that the sound can change a little. We design the digital section and amp section to sound the best it can in our opinion. We do not try to alter the sound with FW but as seen with most any daps the sound does change a little or a lot with updates. Sometimes it is better and sometimes it is not. When it is not good sounding we reload the same FW again and the sound changes. So we work to get a neutral sounding FW and this may take a few tries. I wish to stress that we do not try to mold the sound but we want the FW to be neutral to allow our dac and amp section to work as intended.

And that's why I've come to prefer daps with bare bones firmware, no OS, just music player with some normal function. The sound is more transparent and engaging.

The more features and more complex the firmware is the less transparent the sound becomes, vocals are worst affected imo.

The best firmwares are simple and custom written code, the firmware size measured in Kb's not Mb's, and not based on an underlying code base like most daps are. Props to Qls, Aune, Soundaware and others with the mind set of tackling sound quality from both software and hardware perspectives.

It's nice that ibasso is open about the firmware issue. I hope ibasso make a DX200 level dap with bare bones firmware, or even no screen, no OS, just pure sound and engineering, with minimal software to muck it up. But thats just me, the majority of the market just wants MOAR features.

 

[artpiggo]

And that's why I've come to prefer daps with bare bones firmware, no OS, just music player with some normal function. The sound is more transparent and engaging.

The more features and more complex the firmware is the less transparent the sound becomes, vocals are worst affected imo.

The best firmwares are simple and custom written code, the firmware size measured in Kb's not Mb's, and not based on an underlying code base like mostbdaps are. Props to Qls, Aune, Soundaware and others with the mind set of tackling sound quality from both software and hardware perspectives.

It's nice that ibasso is open about the firmware issue. I hope ibasso make a DX200 level dap with bare bones firmware, or wait for it *no screen, no OS, just pure sound and engineering, with minimal software to muck it up. But thats just me, the majority of the market just wants MOAR features.

Then mojo+ poly is what you need totally.

 

[HiFiChris]

 
Then mojo+ poly is what you need totally.

 
You will still need a smartphone/Bluetooth audio player to control the MojoPoly though. I personally don't really get the benefit of adding the Poly to the Mojo instead of a spare smartphone dedicated just for being a digital transport source.

Just my $0.02.

 

[jmills8]

You will still need a smartphone/Bluetooth audio player to control the MojoPoly though. I personally don't really get the benefit of adding the Poly to the Mojo instead of a spare smartphone dedicated just for being a digital transport source.


Just my $0.02.

$0.01

 

[jmills8]

DX200 + Music App + EQ + Mojo = BUY

 

[artpiggo]

You will still need a smartphone/Bluetooth audio player to control the MojoPoly though. I personally don't really get the benefit of adding the Poly to the Mojo instead of a spare smartphone dedicated just for being a digital transport source.


Just my $0.02.

You're right. I forget this point

 

[T.R.A.N.C.E.]

I'm a firm believer that the digital audio source is very important, I hear big differences between my sources when hooked up to my NAD M51 dac, so I dislike portable dac/amp products, and prefer not to use my phone as a source.

 

[Rockcoon]

Mimouille, so what about mids? Any changes during burn in?
i like when singer voices sounds a bit forwarded, rather than distant. That's the only thing that bothers me about dx200

 

[Whitigir]

And that's why I've come to prefer daps with bare bones firmware, no OS, just music player with some normal function. The sound is more transparent and engaging.

The more features and more complex the firmware is the less transparent the sound becomes, vocals are worst affected imo.

The best firmwares are simple and custom written code, the firmware size measured in Kb's not Mb's, and not based on an underlying code base like most daps are. Props to Qls, Aune, Soundaware and others with the mind set of tackling sound quality from both software and hardware perspectives.

It's nice that ibasso is open about the firmware issue. I hope ibasso make a DX200 level dap with bare bones firmware, or even no screen, no OS, just pure sound and engineering, with minimal software to muck it up. But thats just me, the majority of the market just wants MOAR features.

This is why you would want Sony new Dap, the WM1A/Z series

 

[Mimouille]

Mimouille, so what about mids? Any changes during burn in?
i like when singer voices sounds a bit forwarded, rather than distant. That's the only thing that bothers me about dx200

Let me get back to you after a couple of days of burn in at least.

 

[Mimouille]

Burning in with the provided cable. It allowed me to test the battery, decent performance.

Om high gain, balanced, volume at 60/150, I get roughly 8 to 8:30 hours. I accessed the screen rarely though.