[nmatheis]

Anyone using these with AKG K553? If so, what do you think?

 

[crustaceanzx]

  We tested the dac function on all of our Windows machines here. All the different operating systems from 7 forward were tried and worked. It may be that different computers have small differences and this may account for the reason for the DX not working correctly on many machines. If it had not worked here we would never have released it. We are still working on a fix for this SW and are using more Windows based machines and Mac. We are sorry for any inconvenience.

 
Hi Paul,
 
Sorry for the trouble. I did further trial and error, then I found out that the main cause of the issue was the Group Policy folder that I copied into my sys32 folder. I did it because it was one of the steps for using dx90 as DAC on a PC, as taught by one tutorial I read. After deleting the Group Policy folder, the DAC can work perfectly fine.
 
Thanks for the prompt reply!

 

[jk47]

  Just got mine. To me, it sounds bassier than neutral, and definitely bassier than the Zune HD I was using before. I'm noticing a huge difference with full-sized cans like the HD700. Apparently even with an amp the Zune was doing a pitiful job of powering these, whereas the DX90 fares much better.
 
It looks like I'll want to rerip my CD's in FLAC instead of 320kbps mp3, so what programs do you guys recommend for this? And how can I format it to make sure the DX90 reads the music correctly and sorts it properly by artist, track number, etc? Playing from the SD card in folder mode right now, it plays the songs in the wrong order. Even with the track number in each song file and the name of each track as "(track number) - (song name)", it skips around.

i'm using dbpoweramp to rip to flac.  can't address your other question - i use a folder structure instead of tags.

 

[nmatheis]

Tsujigiri: Just to eliminate the easy stuff first - you don't have the DX90 in shuffle mode, do you?

 

[pholcus1975]

I suggest Exact Audio Copy. Be sure to uncheck id3v2 for tagging flacs.

 

[pholcus1975]

Btw,I fixed stuff unproperly tagged with mp3tag.

 

[V-l-a-d-i-m-i-r]

@Paul: Thank you! May I report one cosmetic bug I observe since 2.1.8 (persists in 2.2.0). Cosmetic, but scary for an audiophile. I never use EQ, but when visiting its menu, I can see random numbers, and sometimes even one of the sliders shifted. All greyed out, as EQ is disabled, and really disabled according to measurements. Still, it's the scary bug. Thought it's better to report, to make the great product even greater.
 
@ALL: Don't want to get off-topic too much, but we should remember, the real musical instruments do not (pre)ring. Killing or at least minimizing preringing is one of the essential parts of achieving high fidelity reproduction... Take a look on the high-end DACs world. High-end DACs as a rule use custom minimum phase upsampler, which kills the preringing. Also good NOS DACs have absolutely no preringing by NOS design itself (e.g. Metrum products). In DX90, the slow rolloff filter is the way to minimize preringing. With bright high-end headphones slow rolloff may sound overall more analog because of the less digital distortion in time domain. I can confirm it both with my ears and measurements. But right, slow rolloff as implemented in DX90 is slighly duller. Just slightly, you have to get really high-end headphones to talk about such things. Only very selected headphones have enough treble extention and speed to even notice those things. Just IMHO

 

 

[nc8000]

When you turn eq off all sliders stay in their last enabled position so when you turn it on you resume where you left of

 

[Papi]

Hi,

I'm planning on eventually replacing my good old cowon s9 with a DX 90, but since the S9 is still working fine, I'm having some doubts here. Could someone help me and answer the following questions ?

1. I think I read somewhere that on the DX90, in shuffle mode you can't go back to the previous track, could someone confirm that ?

2. I would use the DX90 with a Sennheiser Momentum at home and plugged in the auxiliary input of my headunit in my car. Would the headunit benefit from being connected to the LO of the DX90, compared to my S9 which has only a HO ?

3. I didn't find much feedback on this, but I ask anyway : I guess the DX90 would have a different sound compared to the S9, but not necessarily "better" since the S9 is already a valuable source, am I wrong ?

4. I read the last few page of this thread, and it seems there are some problems with playlists ? I don't use playlists currently on my S9, don't even know if it's able to handle playlists, but I could see the benefit of that.

Thanks for any help.

Pierre

 

[bharat2580]

2.2.0

Very different. I ll say it represents the biggest change between two consecutive fw's

#Resolution seems a lot higher and better somehow
#Treble is very well extended, in sharp roll off maybe a bit more then i would like even on the hd650s
#Separation, details seems boosted somehow
#its very musical yet analytical
#Mids are exceptional

Reminded me of the first fw but with a better representation and lot more energy and base

Nailed it

Rank
2.2.0
2.1.0
2.1.8

Cheers

 

[wizard327]

Hi guys, anybody tried dx90 with Shure SRH940? How does it sound? Cheers

 

[H20Fidelity]

Hi guys, anybody tried dx90 with Shure SRH940? How does it sound? Cheers

 
I have this pairing. Its quite detailed, engaging, DX90 has no problems driving them in low - medium gain. 
 
I couldn't call it the most airy presentation and the soundstage width is a little narrow (nothing overly crushing)
 
Going to sound more intimate and a little in your face , closed in, though if you're a fan of SRH940's detail you'll be more than pleased.

 

[Floating Red]

Hi guys, anybody tried dx90 with Shure SRH940? How does it sound? Cheers

I have this pairing too. As H20Fidelity said, the sound is quite detailed and engaging. For my part I use the low gain and it does the job very well. After, all depends on the firmware used. Because of the very detailed treble (or even sibilant) of the SRH940, and the neutrality of the rest of the spectrum, the 2.18 fw sounds more musical to my ears, acute becomes softer, mediums are not highlighted and bass s 'finally expressed. With the 2.20 fw, it's true, it's a little more detailed, but with the SRH940, it's much more tiring.

 

[wizard327]

Thanks H20Fidelity and Floating Red for the inputs. I think I'm going to pass this one. Cheers

 

[proedros]

i really like how 2.1.8 by Lurker sounds , i am still undecided if this one or 2.2.0 or hell even 2.1.5 lurker is the one i like best

feels like having so many great options to choose from - now 2.1.8 makes my K3003 sing

fantastic.