[alnasique]

Look for Rockbox at DX90 thread. I think it's pretty close to off-topic in this thread.

why rockbox doesn't sound this wide and 3d as the mango version does? if I turn on those features of RB as stereo width , etc. the sound gets weird, losses the center, voise, etc.RB sounds great and very smooth BUt NOT wide and 3d. thanks

 

[ballog]

Guys i've had the DX50 since 2013 (1st batch). I really love it but i would appreciate something with more punch in sq and maybe move in higher tier DAPwise. I bought the Hidizs AP80 since but i'm still drawn to the DX50. Maybe its the form factor, Rockbox and sound signature. I have recently been given the chance to score a DX90 for $150. Do you think its a great bargain? Being cash strapped since a while i have been slowly saving to get a better dap than the DX50. In my local market i can get the Fiio M11 for $350 and i'm holding off for maybe next year. Given the foregoing should i go for the DX90?

 

[lian00]

Guys i've had the DX50 since 2013 (1st batch). I really love it but i would appreciate something with more punch in sq and maybe move in higher tier DAPwise. I bought the Hidizs AP80 since but i'm still drawn to the DX50. Maybe its the form factor, Rockbox and sound signature. I have recently been given the chance to score a DX90 for $150. Do you think its a great bargain? Being cash strapped since a while i have been slowly saving to get a better dap than the DX50. In my local market i can get the Fiio M11 for $350 and i'm holding off for maybe next year. Given the foregoing should i go for the DX90?

The DX90 will be a huge sound quality improvement. The cons: you won’t have the fancy new features the recent DAPs offer.

 

[CobraMan]

Guys i've had the DX50 since 2013 (1st batch). I really love it but i would appreciate something with more punch in sq and maybe move in higher tier DAPwise. I bought the Hidizs AP80 since but i'm still drawn to the DX50. Maybe its the form factor, Rockbox and sound signature. I have recently been given the chance to score a DX90 for $150. Do you think its a great bargain? Being cash strapped since a while i have been slowly saving to get a better dap than the DX50. In my local market i can get the Fiio M11 for $350 and i'm holding off for maybe next year. Given the foregoing should i go for the DX90?

Prior to buying a DX220 in April I was using my DX90 that I bought back in July 2014 when they first came out. The DX90 was an upgrade for me from the DX50 and I still believe the DX90 is a great sounding DAP with its dual ES9018K2M DAC chips and high output capability. For me it was better sounding than the Cowon Plenue P1 I picked up in Jan 2016 - and that was about twice the price of the DX90.

If the DX90 you have the chance to buy is in great condition then the $150 is a decent price. Of course, there are altenatives out there in that price range with bigger screens, network connectivity, etc but I don't believe you will compete with the sound quality of the DX90.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Tim

 

[Gordhifi]

My DX 90 was a rock solid player. As with others, I had it since they came out. Only to replace it with the DX 200. Sold mine recently for 100.00 . Lots to like about it. The replaceable battery is one among others.

 

[gazzington]

What the difference between the standard version and the Japanese version?

 

[chaotic_angel]

What the difference between the standard version and the Japanese version?

hope it helps, J series, have different internal components, which some will say higher parts. I had DX90 thick mids blackbackground. Now have DX90j same quality of mids but refined/smoother, highs are smoother, same on the blackbackground. It's like; same favorite coffee one made with a french press while the other is using V60 filter

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/dx9...ge-new-fw-2-3-0.697035/page-924#post-13288998

 

[alnasique]

I don't want to do it. Below is a long explanation.

I don't like any kind of software processing. In hardware, I don't like equalizers and other "beautifizers". I prefer bit perfect playback of digital content, when the quality of the sound mostly depend on the hardware. This way, an ultimate recording sounds ultimate, a good recording sounds good, a bad recording sounds bad.

I never tried the original 2.0.0 firmware. I've flashed 2.0.5 as the frist step after unboxing. Then I ran a test to check if DX90 is bit perfect, which succeeded. Same with 2.1.0.

The test is quite simple, I use it over past 10 years with sound cards, and I wonder why other people don't use it. I connected DX90 S/PDIF to my pre-pro (Onkyo PR SC-5509), and played back a flac track from a DTS Audio CD rip. The processor has detected DTS stream and has decoded it into 5.1 sound. But only if EQ is turned off. Because DX90 software treats DTS-encoded stream as a usual PCM sound data, it would alter it the same way as any other music records, if it alters sound bit stream either way. But the fact that the processor decodes DTS stream flawlessly, exactly means that DX90 player outputs sound stream unaltered, if EQ is turned off. This is called bit perfect playback

Now you might wonder what if the player has two different, parallel, paths for output to DAC and to S/PDIF... I'm sure it hasn't. To confirm that, I even looked into MangoPlayer in a disassembler (IDA).

Now, bearing in mind that both 2.0.5 and 2.1.0 are bit perfect, what is the difference between them? There are two:

• Changes in MangoPlayer to fix playback order of files and tracks in CUE sheet (that's what I asked them for
  
  ).
• Removed 5 libraries from system/lib/soundfx.

The #2 is the most questionable change. Well, probably I have to tell you that I'm professional programmer for past almost 30 years, involved into mobile and embedded platforms since 1995, and for past 4 years Android is one of the platforms I work with. That's to avoid speculations about my experience.

The soundfx filters are not used by MangoPlayer. They can be used only by Android sound path, but MangoPlayer does not use Android sound path. I've read Android programmer's documentation on those filters, and I'm pretty sure they are not used. Moreover, with 2.0.5, I tried to delete the core Android sound files, and it changed nothing: MangoPlayer continued working.

So why iBasso decided to delete them? In my opinion, to stop speculations floating around.

Why somebody hear different "sound signatures" of different firmware versions? It is up to them. I do understand that there are different "sound signatures" depending on temperature, humidity, time of the day, day of the week, mood, tiredness, how good/bad IEMs inserted etc. etc.etc. That's why I said in comments to "my" firmware that it may change the "sound signature".

But hey, all in all, even it is truly confirmed that soundfx files being present, even not used, affect the sound signature, for me it's exactly mean they must be deleted and never put back! Because I like bit perfect sound!

If you like to listen not to music but to distortions, wait for RockBox to appear, and you'll have them all

Frankly, when I was waiting for my DX90, I've read a lot of forums, built RockBox for Android myself to try, had read its sources and decided that this is not the way to go with players like DX90. At least - not for me.

By the way: apart for specific test tracks, I didn't listen lossy files of even CD rips on DX90 so far, only hi-res records. That's what I purchased it for.

Dear Lurker, I appreciate all your work regarding the firmware, you have done a lot. But could you also find some time to fix/customize the initial firmware 2.0 that was to me the best sounding FW ever? I think many DX90 owners will agree on that. It has though some bugs, such as skipping the very beginning of some tracks, and very annoying lag when pressing physical buttons. PLEASE consider fixing this firmware without changing much the sound, thank you !

 

[Lurker0]

PLEASE consider fixing this firmware

What do you ask to fix, requires access to the source code, which, obviously, I have no. Most of the software problems were fixed in the more recent versions, so please consider using them.

 

[alnasique]

I would burn in first with 2.0 for 100 hours or more and then just listen to the music on the 2.0 before FW updating. For me 2.0 is a class better than 2.1 in terms of musicality, resolution, sound is fuller, richer. I've just downgraded to 2.0 because of dull sound of 2.1 (here is my post). But it may depend on the headphones or your personal preferences.

Hello, are you still there? I just returned to 2.0, because it's the best sounding firmware, and I can live with a small lag, or missing filter features, BUT it's skipping the scanning process and some CUE(FLAC) files, dx90 restarts when trying some cue-flac images, have you had this problem? I can't see using a different firmware. thanks

 

[alnasique]

What do you ask to fix, requires access to the source code, which, obviously, I have no. Most of the software problems were fixed in the more recent versions, so please consider using them.

Hello , thanks for finding time to answer! The most powerful SQ of this FW keeps me from using the recent ones. this is not a placebo as many say. the other versions sound flat give or take. Besides, with a programmer ,acquaintance of mine, we are trying to change balance, as the balance seems to be shifted to the left, needs an accurate measuring tool though to confirm. Anyways, the experiment was to use these lines
#dBscale-min=-46.50dB,step=1.50dB,min=0,max=31
{name 'Headphone Playback Volume' value [0 31]}

and change the values [31 31] to [whatever 31 or vice versa ] it seems it changes the sound but not much,and there is no logic in it because we would assume 0-31 being only right channel heard, in fact both channels still work almost identical, so probably it's not the sought line. Please could you give me a hand on this? what line is responsible for SQ, balance, compression, etc. thanks

 

[Lurker0]

what line is responsible for SQ, balance, compression, etc.

I don't understand you where are the "lines" you are referring to/looking for.

 

[alnasique]

I don't understand you where are the "lines" you are referring to/looking for.

these are the lines from asound.conf file.

 

[Lurker0]

these are the lines from asound.conf file.

AFAIK this file has no use in DX90. I've never touched it.

 

[KT66]

Currently using a DX90 in my main home system.
Into Mojo, into Prima Luna Prologue 2 into Rogers LS5/9
Sonically, as a source I can't fault it. It cuts out for second every now and then, randomly,
Very annoying. I swear my DX90 didn't always do this.