[CobraMan]

To be fair this declaration should be based on a blind listening comparison of each device listening to the same music, same IEM's, and music optimized for each device - if you can 100% pick out the DX200 after leveling all other factors as your favorite then you have proven to yourself that it is the best for your ears and you can hear the difference. Someone else might reach the opposite conclusion based on how they hear things.

Stating the obvious but also wanting to keep an open and objective mind to the R6 Pro and whatever the DX220 might be.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Whitigir]

To be fair this declaration should be based on a blind listening comparison of each device listening to the same music, same IEM's, and music optimized for each device - if you can 100% pick out the DX200 after leveling all other factors as your favorite then you have proven to yourself that it is the best for your ears and you can hear the difference. Someone else might reach the opposite conclusion based on how they hear things.

Stating the obvious but also wanting to keep an open and objective mind to the R6 Pro and whatever the DX220 might be.

Cheers,
Tim

Even if sound is subjective, the DX200 technologically is superior to R6Pro. The DX200 is behind only in battery charging technology...no quick charge

Ok, let’s just be open minded and call an iPod as competitive to DX200Titanium because sound is subjective.

I meant no offenses, and I am honest, if you can be satisfied by IPod and or Smartphone, my goodness....you are lucky. I have a friend who can’t appreciate my rig that is even more expensive than his car, but he is satisfied on his Note 9 and stock buds. I wish I could do the same, then my money could be used better else where

 

[CobraMan]

I am sure we have all been witness to absolutely fantastic hardware on paper that was terribly implemented into a system which resulted in a useless pile of expensive junk. My only suggestion was to let one's ears tell them which is best while taking in all the great advice, reviews, and information that the great contributors here and elsewhere on the web provide to all of us.

No offense taken but suggesting IPod or Smartphone is satisfying wasn't necessary and to some might actually be good enough. They most likely are not reading this thread or any of the others pertaining to the higher end DAP's we all follow.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Whitigir]

I agree about the advise to let a person ears judge upon what he/she should choose. But technologies would be always the facts isn’t it ?

Implementations ? Yeah, many people blame it on implementations. But what is implementations we are talking about here ? Sound tuning of implementations ? Or hardware parameters ? I don’t know what parameters you rely on, unless sound is subjective and you blame it on implementations just as a cause, then I have no further debate.

Both ES9028Pro and ES9028Q2M are capable of DSD512, but only DX200 allows DSD512, and R6Pro does not allow DSD512....so who is restricting hardware limitations now ? Even if you don’t dig deep into engineering point of view, a hardware limitations is very easy to spot, because the device can not allow full features, period. Similar to any Pc or desktop build.

 

[CobraMan]

I will use an analogy here in the automobiles - someone picks the biggest, badest, highest horsepower engine and crams it into the smallest, lightest, flimsiest frame they can find. On paper they might think they have all the ingredients for the ultimate performance but in reality it would be just terrible.

Are you suggesting that you have never purchased a piece of audio equipment or computer gear that you later weren't someway or somehow disappointed in? If you no - you never have I am not sure you are being completely honest with yourself and then - why are you still looking to buy something better than the DX200?

Food for thought - not trying to start a battle with you here. Suggest you try to use terms/phrases like "my favorite", "best sounding to my ears", or something along these lines instead of emphatic, declarative assertions about what the ultimate device is.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Whitigir]

Cars is different, there is a mark of what they are trying to achieve. A lapsed time or a 0-60mph, and or 1/4 mile. The engineers and the team design according to that. It is not always highest horse and highest torque....or lightest frames. There are more to it, such as balancing, point of gravity, drag and aero efficiency, tuning in software performances to calibrate load, air, compression ratio vs density...etc...

When you are talking about Automotives. Everything is Relying on facts and nothing is subjective. When a car was designed with the goal to meet something, every technology and engineering will go toward that goal. In the end conclusion, it will expose the Limitations of the engineerings, the sciences, the designs, and or implementations weakness of one team to another

Electronic engineering is the same, when a chip needed a resistor and a supplied voltage to enable a function, then if you don’t implement it, the function is not enabled. If you don’t meet the requirements it may not function right.

Sound tuning is another matter, and again, sound is subjective, just as much as art and food, I don’t need to repeat 1000x times that I am not going to debate with you. For this point I agree

But please know that, Hardware implementations is not related to sound performances and personal preferences. Simply put a DAC that can do DSD512 is being restricted....is hardware restriction, and that is hardware implementation as a fact and not subjective. Therefore, specifications and functioning conclusion is that DX200 is superior to R6Pro. Sound performances ? Again is subjective

 

[CobraMan]

You completely missed the point ! Hardware can be implemented poorly.

Goodnight,
Tim

 

[singleended5863]

Guys! I suggest to keep peacefully in this thread please use your own thread or go back to wherever you came from to discuss. I think R6 pro they have their own thread too.
Please don’t just jump in here to compare this and that or start debating.
It is not healthy at all IMO!

 

[Whitigir]

You completely missed the point ! Hardware can be implemented poorly.

Goodnight,
Tim

Really ?

Hardware can be restricted (this is what Hardware implementation limitation is about), and Good Hardware can sound bad (subjectively) due to bad tuning. That is my point.

I guess I missed your, what is Hardware implementations you are trying to tell everyone about ? Is it because it sound bad to your preferences ? Could it be software related ?

 

[Whitigir]

Then what is a hardware tuning ? What is hardware equalization ? Yeahs, just some resistor calibrated toward a specific spectrum. Here is a schematic of an adjustable Equalizer. But then again, not only hardware can be used as Equalizer. Hardware was the only choices when analog was the only way. Nowadays, in digital world, software calibration is also very important.

When a DAP sound is not to your taste, it isn’t all the hardware, but also software. That is why to my view, hardware implementation is about done right (to allow full functional features, or restricted). But I guess we just misunderstood each other

So then, when talking about performances, consumers are at the hand of the designer Mercy. Fortunately, as a consumer, we can opt for different devices that suit our taste, and nothing is wrong with that

 

[jmills8]

Guys! I suggest to keep peacefully in this thread please use your own thread or go back to wherever you came from to discuss. I think R6 pro they have their own thread too.
Please don’t just jump in here to compare this and that or start debating.
It is not healthy at all IMO!

By "this" you meaning a dap that hasnt even been built for production ? Think the kids enjoy the back and forth.

 

[davidmolliere]

We’ve seen that before with upcoming products, as long as everyone remains civil... let’s agree to disagree.

My own take is that the R6 Pro is a very mature product, it might have a lesser spec’ed DAC but it’s smartly tuned, well built with an amazing screen and a great amp section. It will never have the flexibility of the DX150/DX2XX line up, nor does it compete in the same bracket as the DX2XX line up. Right now it’s better finished than the DX200 in terms of build, but I expect DX220 to be up to DX120 standards which is perfect build. Software wise, I expect the DX220 to come with a refreshed Mango. Maybe even latest android? Even 8.1 will be just as good as R6 Pro so... overall between that and AMP9 coming up it’s a no contest in pure perf and versatility. We’ll see...

Now the R6 Pro tuning and MSEB might suit people better and if you don’t roll AMPs then there is room for different products

 

[TheUnknow]

7/ External USB-DAC upto 384 and DSD512. What DAP is out there that can do DSD512 ? None!

What is the point of doing DSD512 ? Which album do you know , has been recorded in native DSD512 ?

Less than 2000 albums have been recorded in native DSD , everything else is PCM to DSD conversion.

 

[Whitigir]

What is the point of doing DSD512 ? Which album do you know , has been recorded in native DSD512 ?

Less than 2000 albums have been recorded in native DSD , everything else is PCM to DSD conversion.

You already answered 1 part of those reasons. Majority of those albums are simply PCM to DSD but done by the studio and deemed worthy by the studio.

Another reason is that the current DAC Sigma-Delta Chips are capable of upto 256x Over Sampling In conversion. DSD512 is Oversampling of 512X which is Twice as much than any desktop DAC-IC can do at the moment. But that is technically speaking. Sound performances, you will have to listen to it yourself.

One of the reason why many companies do not want DSD512 on Portable player is due to how much power it consumes and heat dissipation problems. It also needs very beefy clocking systems too. The DMP-Z1 from Sony will not enable this function either

 

[Whitigir]

Here is another thread for the DSD512

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/dx200-and-dsd512-how-why.888682/