[Raketen]

  Hmmmmm.... looks like the phone company employing them has decided to use two rather than one despite its;

 ''new internal dual-DAC architecture''
 
http://www.esstech.com/index.php/en/news/newsroom/ess-brings-music-life-new-vivo-flagship-smartphone/

IDK the wording on that reeks of marketing obfuscation & doesn't make it totally clear it will use two dual-dac chips rather than just one dual-dac chip- it uses the phrase "twin-dac" when referring to the phone and "dual-dac" when referring to the chip which is a little confusing.

Could be awesome though... I just wish one of these "hi-fi phones" would add three playback control buttons, guess they figure everyone has remotes on their headphone cables these days.

 

 

[twister6]

How about iBasso IT03 3way hybrid?  Update on availability?
 

 

 
Model No.: IT03
Type: Dynamic driver (9.2mm) x 1
Balanced Armature x 2...
Freq. Response: 10Hz-30kHz
Sensitivity: 105+/-2dB
Impedance: 8 ohm
Noise Attenuation: -30dB
Rated Power: 5mW
T.H.D: <1% (at 1kHz /1mW)
Plug Size: 3.5mm gold-plated
Cord Length: 1.2m
Weight: 9g without cable

 

[Goldlion973]

 
IDK the wording on that reeks of marketing obfuscation & doesn't make it totally clear it will use two dual-dac chips rather than just one dual-dac chip- it uses the phrase "twin-dac" when referring to the phone and "dual-dac" when referring to the chip which is a little confusing.

Could be awesome though... I just wish one of these "hi-fi phones" would add three playback control buttons, guess they figure everyone has remotes on their headphone cables these days.

 

 
It seems to be the other way round to me.... that the description of the DAC chip allows for confusion, that it does not offer the same as a twin chip setup would and that this is evidenced in the phone still requiring two of them in order to classify as an actual dual DAC device.
 
It need clarifying and comparing to literal dual DAC chip offerings as the industry standard. 

 

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

I actually make a point to go for dap's with single dac myself, it is an indicator that the company isn't concerned with marketing and more concerned with actual performance (not in DX200's case, I'd wager ibasso just couldn't fit two dacs in... ...).
 
I haven't seen any evidence that a dual dac setup (in the constraints of a dap) performs better than a single dac, I have seen the opposite though. When your running on 3.7v battery power, the limiting factor in performance of all daps is the power supply and it's regulation, the more chips and power draw, the more strain is on the power supply, the worse the regulation gets, the higher the internal resistance becomes, and the sound quality is affected.
 
In DX90, using a better quality battery increased sound quality, it underlined the fact that the power supply resistance was a limiting factor in it's design, it may have had better sound quality with a single dac rather than it's dual mobile ess dacs.
 
There are certain companies out there that make a point to use a single dac in their dap as they choose engineering over marketing. I would choose QA360LE, Aune M2S, Esther M1 Pro, Pono Player, HA-P90SD, etc, over any AK and over DX80, N6, etc. 
 
You have to remember most dac chips only cost $5, add in another couple dollars for it's opamp lpf, point being it's not difficult to implement dual dacs for these dap companies, they do it for marketing, with no thought on performance. AK cripple the amp section in ak100ii/ak300 so that the ak120ii/ak320 sound better and people think it's the dual dacs their hearing... To top it off they don't even implement a line out on their daps so people can't directly compare dual dac vs single dac... What does this tell you about dual dacs in general? It tells me No thanks, I will stick to daps engineered to perform, not look pretty on paper. So I have come to not support any company that uses dual dacs in any of their daps, as I believe it to be based on marketing rather than based on performance and engineering.
 
Dual dac shenanigans aside, AK's business model is still obnoxious, stripping away the quality of the lower models, where is the native DSD? Only ak240/ak380 have it, Why? There are $200 daps that do native dsd, yet people still don't understand how obnoxious AK's business model is. The stripping of features would be ok if it was just that, but it isn't, the PCM playback is also affected by this, in ak240/ak380 the xmos chip that handles the native dsd is also acting as a decoupler from the cpu for sending i2s to the dac, which increases sound quality of even PCM playback, which is why people say ak240 sounds better "more analog" than ak120ii, despite them both sharing the exact same dac and amp sections.  Thus none of AK's products are worth owning in my opinion, they are just a mix of mostly crippled and otherwise overpriced offerings... If you want the best sound quality look for a dap with native dsd, as it also affects PCM playback, and imo single dac is the way to go as well. People really need to be more aware of the digital section of daps, (eg the native dsd issue) as well as things like custom fpga decoding (esther m1), or custom cpld decoding (qa360), which can increase sound quality over plug and play solutions like xmos.
 
That's me. As individuals we all have different priorities. /end rant

 

[Goldlion973]

   
That phone is using dual mobile 2 channel dacs (2x ES9028C2M), the DX200 is using a single desktop dac (ES9028PRO), which has 8 dac channels. If theoretical performance spec sheets are your thing then the single desktop dac still outperforms the dual mobile dacs...
 
I actually make a point to go for dap's with single dac myself, it is an indicator that the company isn't concerned with marketing and more concerned with actual performance (not in DX200's case, I'd wager they just couldn't fit two dacs in...).
 
I haven't seen any evidence that a dual dac setup (in the constraints of a dap) performs better than a single dac, I have seen the opposite though. When your running on 3.7v battery power, the limiting factor in performance of all daps is the power supply and it's regulation, the more chips and power you draw, the more strain is on the power supply, the worse the regulation gets, the higher the internal resistance becomes, and the sound quality is affected.
 
In DX90, using a better quality battery increased sound quality, it underlined the fact that the power supply resistance was a limiting factor in it's design, it may have had better sound quality with a single dac rather than it's dual mobile ess dacs.
 
There are certain companies out there that make a point to use a single dac in their dap as they choose pure engineering above marketing. I would choose QA360LE, Aune M2S, HA-P90SD, Pono, Esther M1, QP1R, etc, over any AK and over DX80, N6 etc.
 
You have to remember most dac chips only costs $5, add in another couple dollars for it's opamp lpf, point being it's not difficult to implement dual dacs for these dap companies, they do it for marketing, with no thought on performance. AK cripple the amp section in ak100ii/ak300 so that the ak120ii/ak320 sounds better and people think it's the dual dacs their hearing... To top it off they don't even implement a line out on their daps so people can't directly compare dual dac vs single dac... No thanks, I will stick to daps engineered to perform, not look pretty on paper.
 
AK's business model is obnoxious, stripping away quality of the lower models, where is the native DSD? Only ak240/ak380 have it, Why? There are $200 daps that do native dsd, yet people still don't understand how obnoxious AK's business model is. The stripping of features would be ok if it was just that, but it isn't, the PCM playback is also affected by this, in ak240/ak380 the xmos chip that handles the native dsd is also acting as a decoupler from the cpu for sending i2s to the dac, which increases sound quality of even PCM playback, which is why people say ak240 sounds better "more analog" than ak120ii, despite them both sharing the same dac and amp section. Thus none of AK's products are worth owning in my opinion, they are just a mix of mostly crippled and otherwise overpriced offerings... If you want the best sound quality look for a dap with native dsd, as it also affects PCM playback.
 
That's me. As individuals we all have different priorities.

 

Rather than talk dual DAC saying 'Dual mono' might put more emphasis on things. Is a shame its not a feature, its pros outweigh the cons. Its manufacture seems to be the problem, battery life etc. Wondering if the cost reflect this, ibasso is a hifiman competitor over all else. It needs to be feature rich. 

 

 

[oldmate]

   
That is a thought worth pursuing. Now how to go about it. Anyone on a first name basis with the "Dude"?

 
 
 
iBasso DX200 Quincy Jones signature edition!!

 

[Mython]

 

[hAbIrAbI]

Since foobar2000 has now been released for Android I'm actually interested in how far one can use 3rd party apps on the DX200.

 

[Raketen]

  Since foobar2000 has now been released for Android I'm actually interested in how far one can use 3rd party apps on the DX200.

Oh wow, is that project finally finished? I remember they have been working on it for a very long time since doing some crowdfunding many years ago. Very cool if so, though I think may not replace Neutron for me.

At any rate iBasso rep said it will be full unrestricted android 6 based DAP so apps should work --> http://www.head-fi.org/t/791531/dx200-the-style-has-been-chosen-by-your-votes-details-of-design-and-features-on-1st-page/570#post_12556310

 

[Sound Eq]

i hope the amp modules will not pick transmitted signals like what happens on my fiio x7 and am3 even when wifi and bluetooth are off

 

[mpawluk91]

If ibasso wants more of my money the dx200 better not be a glitchy piece of crap! I'll happily stay with my dx90 until things get sorted out with firmware issues.

If worst comes to worst I'll just get a mojo

 

[Paul - iBasso]

If ibasso wants more of my money the dx200 better not be a glitchy piece of crap! I'll happily stay with my dx90 until things get sorted out with firmware issues.

If worst comes to worst I'll just get a mojo

I agree with you. No one likes glitchy or crap. Even worse is glitchy crap.
 
To that end we will work hard to have neither or either.

 

[warrior1975]

Personally I'd much rather have swappable amps than dual dacs. I've come to really enjoy the amp modules on my X7. No more stacking for me when OTG.

 

[mpawluk91]

I agree with you. No one likes glitchy or crap. Even worse is glitchy crap.

To that end we will work hard to have neither or either.

I believe in you guys! You always make great hardware "I tend to listen to my ibasso stuff more than my fiio stuff" if you get the software right on this release then your untouchable

 

[kawaivpc1]

 
I agree with you. No one likes glitchy or crap. Even worse is glitchy crap.
 
To that end we will work hard to have neither or either.

Please implement proper firmware, OS, quality touchscreen this time.
 
Completely forget about DX100. That doesn't exist any longer!!!
 
I hope to use Foobar2000 on DX200. Foobar2000 is still the best for playing high-res files on desktop. 
 
Please let Foobar2000 android use internal DAC and amp of DX200.
 
DX100 could install Rockbox but Rockbox player couldn't use DX100's internal DAC and amp despite of it having much better folder browser (error-free) than DX100's stock browser.