[Wishmasterx]

  I have been looking at each FW version and see what the differences are which also may contribute to different sound. From what I can see 2.1.0 and 2.0.5 use sound effects pre-processing (libaudiopreprocessing.so) as per /system/etc/audio_effects.conf  and 2.0.0 do not. I am looking to mod the FW and disable all sound effects. I'm curious to hear DX90 without added spice.

Nice work, thank You

Experimental mod of FW 2.0.5 without libraries exist from Doc2008, but he write, that there is absolutely no difference in sound. You can read about, download and check here:
http://player.ru/showthread.php?t=132569&page=78
PS: Please, can You check in FW, what make EQ ON? I am very interesant about this. Why EQ ON (with all 0) make sound quieter and little different as with EQ OFF (also if I turn volume up to same level)?

 

[goodvibes]

In which post did I mention conspiriacy? Are you trying to accuse me of something you want the others think of me nurturing conspirary?

I 100% listen to the DX90 LO through external amp at max 255 volume. I believe it is the same setup some 3rd party reviews came up with the ruler flat FR with the older 2.0 or 2.0.5 firmware.

If the 2.1 firmware is so different as everyone has said. Wouldn't it be natural to think it will deviate from the previous ruler flat FR? And very likely this less than ruler flat FR just happen to do the right EQ for the popular BA IEMs owned by the 2.1 firmware supporters?

This is your post.
 
"iBasso is a Chinese DAP manufacturer in Shenzhen. Base on my recent observation on the Chinese audio forums, it is very likely iBasso tunes the FW2.1 to the preference of the local Chinese mass: enclosed, in your face kind of mid presentation who uses multi drivers IEM. (BTW, multi BA drivers IEMs is the current hot trend in China)
 
I guess all the other "ordinary" people using dynamic driver headphones like us will have to stick with FW2.0.5."
 
One of the definitions of conspiracy is 'any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.' which I felt fit your description. It's not always an evil action.
 
No offense intended and pointed to your post as a contrast to the one responded to as reinforcement of my opinion that it's not about the type of driver and all about individual sigs.
 
Just an explanation. Apologies if I got it wrong and it upset you.

 

[borrego]

That is a partial definition, not "another" definition.

And there is nothing wrong for iBasso to tune the DX90 to the preference of the largest potential buyer group.

 

[urtv]

I guess I must be an illegal immigrant since I don't live in China but I use a multi BA in NY

 

[goodvibes]

That is a partial definition, not "another" definition.

And there is nothing wrong for iBasso to tune the DX90 to the preference of the largest potential buyer group.

Never said "another" and that's actually the second time you've used quotes with words not in my post. Perhaps it's unintentional and you're unaware that paraphrasing with quotes is improper usage. Just a note for the future. Quotes are strictly verbatim. Wont argue definitions and let this thread return to topic.
 
 I personally don't think they are voicing for anyone in particular. Just doing the best they can.

 

 

[jamato8]

I have email

  This is your post.
 
"iBasso is a Chinese DAP manufacturer in Shenzhen. Base on my recent observation on the Chinese audio forums, it is very likely iBasso tunes the FW2.1 to the preference of the local Chinese mass: enclosed, in your face kind of mid presentation who uses multi drivers IEM. (BTW, multi BA drivers IEMs is the current hot trend in China)
 
I guess all the other "ordinary" people using dynamic driver headphones like us will have to stick with FW2.0.5."
 
One of the definitions of conspiracy is 'any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.' which I felt fit your description. It's not always an evil action.
 
No offense intended and pointed to your post as a contrast to the one responded to as reinforcement of my opinion that it's not about the type of driver and all about individual sigs.
 
Just an explanation. Apologies if I got it wrong and it upset you.

 
 

That is a partial definition, not "another" definition.

And there is nothing wrong for iBasso to tune the DX90 to the preference of the largest potential buyer group.

I have emailed iBasso in the past asking about voicing, since I know there are preferences in China and in Japan for certain types of sound. Having lived there (China) I can understand this. They stated to me that they do not voice it to a preference but try and get the player to be musical and at the same time neutral. With my own preferences, which IMO, and of course subjective, I find that they do sound fairly neutral but true neutrality is impossible, IMO, because of the variances in our ears, culture, musical culture and a host of other reasons. I have dynamic IEM's as well as BA  and for me, have no issue with the DX90 and what it does with them. That is me and doesn't have to be anyone else's interpretation of what they hear and obviously there are some that would disagree what sounds good with the DX90. 
 
The HM901 has a huge market in China. I don't think it has been voiced to a preference either but having spoken to Fang at his plant when I was there, he also tries to go for musical and neutral. Obviously different monitors will react differently though with the 901 you have a number of amp boards to choose from. I mention the 901 because I do not think you have to voice something to a preference in order for it to sell well, if it sounds good to begin with. 

 

[headwhacker]

 
Nice work, thank You

Experimental mod of FW 2.0.5 without libraries exist from Doc2008, but he write, that there is absolutely no difference in sound. You can read about, download and check here:
http://player.ru/showthread.php?t=132569&page=78
PS: Please, can You check in FW, what make EQ ON? I am very interesant about this. Why EQ ON (with all 0) make sound quieter and little different as with EQ OFF (also if I turn volume up to same level)?

 
Thanks for the link. I may have missed that. I thought he only modded a DX90 2.0.5 and ported to DX50.

 

[Lad27]

Speaking of EQ, I don't particularly like the way iBasso implemented this feature. It seems like if one of the frequencies is bumped up lets say +3dB, the reference level of 0dB then moves to that setting resulting in overall sound level (volume) droppping by 3dB.
Also the volume with EQ reset (all at 0dB) should in theory be the same as EQ off. For some obscure reason this is not done that way and volume with EQ OFF is always higher.
 
I know that attenuating rather than amplifying is another way of equalizing, I'm using this technique exclusively, but please let me make that decision. If I want to create V-shape by , attenuating mids so be it. The way it is now is a bit counter intuitive.
 
Also the sliders are hard to see in daylight, they should be more contrasty compared to background, the action is not particularly smooth either, I have trouble moving the edge sliders. Adding the orange 0 reference line would help, so would +/- 3dB levels so the user can get better visual clue about the EQ setting. Ability to save several customs presets tailored to different cans would probably stay in the dream book until Rockbox arrives.  
 
Cheers.

 

[nc8000]

Nice work, thank You
Experimental mod of FW 2.0.5 without libraries exist from Doc2008, but he write, that there is absolutely no difference in sound. You can read about, download and check here:
http://player.ru/showthread.php?t=132569&page=78
PS: Please, can You check in FW, what make EQ ON? I am very interesant about this. Why EQ ON (with all 0) make sound quieter and little different as with EQ OFF (also if I turn volume up to same level)?

EQ is not on by default but off. The EQ On is a button that you press to turn eq on not a state indicator

 

[andkoppel]

  Thanks, I need to know why these DAPs sound so different because they measure good.  DX90 measures well, and I've seen post for Chinese sight that show it measures well.  I'd like to see measurements with headphone load though.  All these talks of headphone sound like this, and firmware that...  I know SM2 has been done by Shigzeo, but like to see others, but at the same time, I'd like to see another DAP such as AK240 with the same load as a comparison.  I think this would be informative.

 
In Spanish, but quite informative. Hope it helps. 
 
https://headphoniaks.com/blog/ibasso-dx90-dap-analisis-tecnico-y-review/

 

[goodvibes]

   
In Spanish, but quite informative. Hope it helps. 
 
https://headphoniaks.com/blog/ibasso-dx90-dap-analisis-tecnico-y-review/

 

[IainG]

Sorry if this has already been addressed but I haven't seen my exact situation discussed in this thread:
 
I am currently using firmware 2.05 and I do have gapless turned on in the settings. Most of my files are in FLAC:
 
I am not getting gapless playback on my albums, however:
 
Typically, there is a very clear gap of 0.5 - 1 second between the first and second track of ANY album I play that should be gapless.
Then, between each subsequent tracks on the album there is a lesser gap, but still a very clear glitch/click/pause that can be heard as one track changes to the next. 
 
It is obviously not a problem with my files as every album has this same pattern of a stronger gap between tracks 1 and 2 and then lesser but still noticeable gap between the remaining tracks of the album. The same files play gapless seamlessly on FOOBAR 2000 or other gapless players.
 
As many of my albums require seamless gapless playback, this is disturbing to me.
 
Anyone encountered this or have any ideas of how to fix it?

 

[nc8000]

I often do get the gap between track 1 and 2 but no gap between the remaining tracks

 

[M-13]

It's seems like Fiio is not making it any secret they're developng the X7. Which will be their ultimate player. Is Ibasso working on a rival? An update to the DX100 perhaps?

 

[taran]

I've clearly not used the dx90 enough In terms of audio so far...blows the socks off anything I have heard thus far in terms of portability!