[gLer]

AFAIK the whole point of upsampling is to move ringing effects produced by the digital filter into higher/inaudible frequencies.

Yes, and to make it easier for the dac chip to accurately convert the waveform.

@Mathieulh have a read here: https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...-conversion-rate/?tab=comments#comment-589253

It’s not about getting more information than what’s in the original file, but in feeding the dac optimal digital information for analogue conversion. That’s why All-To-DSD works well for dacs that are optimised to process DSD, like most delta sigma dacs (including those found in the M11).

 

[pnzr]

damn, now that I have the money ready, they are sould out at AliExpress Anyone knows when they'll be back in stock?

 

[hldn]

Anyone with the leather case in their hands already? I know there's a video posted, and the fitting is just awful. Otherwise I like how it looks. I just don't know if I should be getting it or not, wether if its 22€ or 2€. Fitting is just wrong. I'm not the kind of person who drops gadgets, so I'm not asking for a "will it drop or not" kind of answer. A little help here please

 

[MariusAB]

damn, now that I have the money ready, they are sould out at AliExpress Anyone knows when they'll be back in stock?

Strangely, yesterday there was still three sellers in alie selling m11. But i think it will show up soon as this is happening not the first time.

 

[Isloo]

It's not a huge gap, but enough to be noticeable, the sound just has slightly more presence on the R6 Pro and soundstage is slightly more recessed on the M11, you probably wouldn't notice without doing a direct comparison though.

Thanks. That’s good know. I find even between my M0 and ZX2, the difference is actually smaller than you would think and requires some concentration. It sounds like this would be even more so with the M11. The practicality of having 2.5,3.5 and 4.4 outputs and two sd slots on a good sounding source is very tempting.

 

[Mathieulh]

Yes, and to make it easier for the dac chip to accurately convert the waveform.

@Mathieulh have a read here: https://audiophilestyle.com/forums/...-conversion-rate/?tab=comments#comment-589253

It’s not about getting more information than what’s in the original file, but in feeding the dac optimal digital information for analogue conversion. That’s why All-To-DSD works well for dacs that are optimised to process DSD, like most delta sigma dacs (including those found in the M11).

Upsampling (as will as any audio post processing), will ALWAYS introduce artefacts due to discontinuities with the low pass filter, it will also never introduce new information to the original mastering, anyone claiming otherwise is taking you for a fool.
(for further details, some resources such as https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/interpolation-filter are available)

Upsampling is usually a gimmick meant to sell more devices or "Hi-Res" audio upsampled from 16bit@44.1Hz tracks to those who don't know any better.
All to DSD exists because Fiio does not/cannot (for whatever reason) spend the engineering resource to design an entire Android audio stack replacement (such as what Hiby did on the R6/R6 Pro with their DTA system), the Android stack resamples everything to 16bits@44.1kHz for two reasons:

1. This is a standard frequency so it ensures that whatever DAC they feed the stream to will just work without compatibility issues whatsoever (that's really they main reason they started doing this in the first place)
2. The higher the frequency and bitrate you send to your DAC, the more processing power it requires, so as an energy saving feature, on a portable device such as a cell phone, it makes perfect sense to downsample your audio before sending it to the DAC in order to increase battery life, this is also why All to DSD or upsampling to 24bits@512kHz, with no adding of information whatsoever, makes this even worse as the higher the bit and sample rate you send your DAC, the more power it will draw, and the DAC is (on a DAP) the most power hungry IC there is (and the most power hungry resource, unless you listen at high volume on devices with powerful amps), so you'd arguibly not want it to draw more power than it requires, this is even more true for DSD as processing DSD requires even more power than Hi-Res PCM! (that is true even on Delta Sigma DACs) But a good marketing gimmick always does wonders now doesn't it?

Poweramp is even worse as it (for some unfathomable reason) resamples everything not in its per device "Hi-Res" whitelist (which the M11 is most likely not a part of, at this time) to 16Bit@44.1Hz BEFORE sending it to the android audio stack, which does the exact same thing when the sample rate does not match), it probably does this because the author simply uses the code supplied by Google in its SDK, as-is, which does exactly that, this is why other applications also do this (such as the official Youtube app for instance), as such even a full stack replacement (such as DTA) would have no effect whatsoever on those applications. Meanwhile poweramp upsamples everything in its per device "Hi-Res" list to 512kHz because the author didn't want to bother testing all those devices at various bitrates/sample rates to make sure their DAC was bit perfect compatible, it saves on development time. Neutron and USBAPP authors instead chose another, more audiophile friendly, approach to Hi-Res, chosing to respect the sources' bitrate and sample rate and going the bitperfect route whenever possible, as well as giving the user the choice by allowing it to tweak what gets sent to the DAC to his/her liking.

 

[Mathieulh]

Thanks. That’s good know. I find even between my M0 and ZX2, the difference is actually smaller than you would think and requires some concentration. It sounds like this would be even more so with the M11. The practicality of having 2.5,3.5 and 4.4 outputs and two sd slots on a good sounding source is very tempting.

I forgot to mention that the R6 Pro also has slightly more details, but in, my opinion, that makes it slightly oversharpened at times (but shines when string instruments come into play), nothing that can't be EQd out, but I don't like using EQs unless I am forced to. It's not that noticeable, mind you.

 

[Isloo]

I forgot to mention that the R6 Pro also has slightly more details, but in, my opinion, that makes it slightly oversharpened at times (but shines when string instruments come into play), nothing that can't be EQd out, but I don't like using EQs unless I am forced to. It's not that noticeable, mind you.

Do you happen to know how the M11 compares to the ZX300 or ZX2? Although, I don’t have the zx300, I have listened to several times and know how it compares to the ZX2. Thanks.

 

[Mathieulh]

Do you happen to know how the M11 compares to the ZX300 or ZX2? Although, I don’t have the zx300, I have listened to several times and know how it compares to the ZX2. Thanks.

That depends on what you are listening with and what output, if it's low powered IEM over SE, the ZX300 definitely sounds cleaner overall, anything else, the sound will be fuller, have more presence and a whole lot more details, you should also note that on both the ZX2 and ZX300, the SE is seriously underpowered, meanwhile, power wise, SE on the M11 almost (but not fully) compares to the Balanced output on the ZX300 (which the Hiby's SE would fully compare to in sheer power, sound quality wise, the ZX300 Balanced output remains slightly cleaner, but it is overshadowed by the balanced output on the R6 Pro (and sounds somewhat similar to the one on the M11, although the M11's balanced output sounds slightly duller in my opinion)

I would say that the M11 is a better overall package than the ZX300; especially as they share a similar price point, that said if you don't care about connectivity, the huge battery life on the ZX300 might be a more appealing factor to you, it's also worth saying, although not as powerful, the Balanced output sounds slightly better on the ZX300 (but not to the case of it being a deciding factor), I also like the design of the M11 better (I like it better than the R6 Pro's as well, it's also more practical as the R6 Pro is noticeably heavier than the M11, the ZX300 is lighter than the M11 though), but that's really a subjective point of view.

 

[Isloo]

That depends on what you are listening with and what output, if it's low powered IEM over SE, the ZX300 definitely sounds cleaner overall, anything else, the sound will be fuller, have more presence and a whole lot more details, you should also note that on both the ZX2 and ZX300, the SE is seriously underpowered, meanwhile, power wise, SE on the M11 almost (but not fully) compares to the Balanced output on the ZX300 (which the Hiby's SE would fully compare to in sheer power, sound quality wise, the ZX300 Balanced output remains slightly cleaner, but it is overshadowed by the balanced output on the R6 Pro (and sounds somewhat similar to the one on the M11, although the M11's balanced output sounds slightly duller in my opinion)

I would say that the M11 is a better overall package than the ZX300; especially as they share a similar price point, that said if you don't care about connectivity, the huge battery life on the ZX300 might be a more appealing factor to you, it's also worth saying, although not as powerful, the Balanced output sounds slightly better on the ZX300 (but not to the case of it being a deciding factor), I also like the design of the M11 better (I like it better than the R6 Pro's as well, it's also more practical as the R6 Pro is noticeably heavier than the M11, the ZX300 is lighter than the M11 though), but that's really a subjective point of view.

Thanks. It sounds like the Zx300 and M11 are broadly similar sound quality wise for iems, with the zx300 having a slightly cleaner output through its balanced connection and the M11 having the advantage with more difficult to drive headphones.

 

[digititus]

Upsampling just introduces unnecessary artefact to the audio and makes it arguably sound worse, it cannot improve on the original sound quality, just ask ANY sound engineer.

I just asked a sound engineer. She said you are talking nonsense.

 

[gLer]

Upsampling (as will as any audio post processing), will ALWAYS introduce artefacts due to discontinuities with the low pass filter, it will also never introduce new information to the original mastering, anyone claiming otherwise is taking you for a fool.
(for further details, some resources such as https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/interpolation-filter are available)

Upsampling is usually a gimmick meant to sell more devices or "Hi-Res" audio upsampled from 16bit@44.1Hz tracks to those who don't know any better.
All to DSD exists because Fiio does not/cannot (for whatever reason) spend the engineering resource to design an entire Android audio stack replacement (such as what Hiby did on the R6/R6 Pro with their DTA system), the Android stack resamples everything to 16bits@44.1kHz for two reasons:

1. This is a standard frequency so it ensures that whatever DAC they feed the stream to will just work without compatibility issues whatsoever (that's really they main reason they started doing this in the first place)
2. The higher the frequency and bitrate you send to your DAC, the more processing power it requires, so as an energy saving feature, on a portable device such as a cell phone, it makes perfect sense to downsample your audio before sending it to the DAC in order to increase battery life, this is also why All to DSD or upsampling to 24bits@512kHz, with no adding of information whatsoever, makes this even worse as the higher the bit and sample rate you send your DAC, the more power it will draw, and the DAC is (on a DAP) the most power hungry IC there is (and the most power hungry resource, unless you listen at high volume on devices with powerful amps), so you'd arguibly not want it to draw more power than it requires, this is even more true for DSD as processing DSD requires even more power than Hi-Res PCM! (that is true even on Delta Sigma DACs) But a good marketing gimmick always does wonders now doesn't it?

Poweramp is even worse as it (for some unfathomable reason) resamples everything not in its per device "Hi-Res" whitelist (which the M11 is most likely not a part of, at this time) to 16Bit@44.1Hz BEFORE sending it to the android audio stack, which does the exact same thing when the sample rate does not match), it probably does this because the author simply uses the code supplied by Google in its SDK, as-is, which does exactly that, this is why other applications also do this (such as the official Youtube app for instance), as such even a full stack replacement (such as DTA) would have no effect whatsoever on those applications. Meanwhile poweramp upsamples everything in its per device "Hi-Res" list to 512kHz because the author didn't want to bother testing all those devices at various bitrates/sample rates to make sure their DAC was bit perfect compatible, it saves on development time. Neutron and USBAPP authors instead chose another, more audiophile friendly, approach to Hi-Res, chosing to respect the sources' bitrate and sample rate and going the bitperfect route whenever possible, as well as giving the user the choice by allowing it to tweak what gets sent to the DAC to his/her liking.

Wait are you suggesting FiiO have t bypassed the Android audio stack with FiiO Music and that playback of any high-res music is artificially upsampled, even in the FiiO app? I seriously doubt they would have earned High-Res certification if that was the case.

 

[Mathieulh]

I just asked a sound engineer. She said you are talking nonsense.

They she should resign her job and get another vocation (seriously, we are in the realms of audio engineering 101 here), as well as explain herself in detail as to how upsampling would provide any benefits to the sound signature whatsoever while keeping the original sound intact (something that's not possible according to the laws of physics, but I digress). Unlilke your so called "sound engineer" I could actually provide a very detailed explanation as to why this happens, but wasting my time to enlighten you is not part of how I plan on spending my day.

 

[gLer]

They she should resign her job and get another vocation (seriously, we are in the realms of audio engineering 101 here), as well as explain herself in detail as to how upsampling would provide any benefits to the sound signature whatsoever while keeping the original sound intact (something that's not possible according to the laws of physics, but I digress). Unlilke your so called "sound engineer" I could actually provide a very detailed explanation as to why this happens, but wasting my time enlighten you is not part of how I plan on spending my day.

Do you feel there’s any real advantage to high-res music using daps like the M11 then? The reason I ask is that I have many Redbook rips that sound better in many ways to their high-res equivalents. In fact I contend that the mastering of the original recording - not the file format or upsampling or downsampling - makes by far the biggest difference when it comes to perceived quality. Heck most people still get by with lossy files (shock horror!).

 

[Mathieulh]

Wait are you suggesting FiiO have t bypassed the Android audio stack with FiiO Music and that playback of any high-res music is artificially upsampled, even in the FiiO app? I seriously doubt they would have earned High-Res certification if that was the case.

They don't need to do so with their own Fiio music app as it can (and does) use the DAP's low level APIs to set the bitrate and frequencies accordingly as well as to achieve (if required) a bit perfect output. It would however have to do this to bypass the android stack limitations on third party apps (short of replacing the stack entirely, which is much more work).

Their own app achieving higher than CD quality audio, would normally be enough to pass the Hi-Res certification (as far as I know of)