[Brooko]

ApparentlyTidals high res vs lossy had one from a different master - just what I read. HD Tracks previously had some 24/96 tracks which had originated as redbook - although it seems that practise has stopped now. Only way to be sure - if testing - is to use the method I suggested.

 

[x RELIC x]

The method Brooko linked to is the best way to check the difference between high res and CD quality, but be aware that many high res masters are also terrible. High res does not automatically mean it will be better.

 

[chowmein83]

  It is worthwhile stating that amongst audio engineers, it is widely accepted that Red Book CD (44/16) is indistinguishable from any of the higher resolution formats in blind testing.
What often results in better sound with these releases is that the higher resolution versions have been remastered, which does indeed often make a difference (sometimes quite substantial). But the difference comes from the remastering, not from the extra bits.
You can test it yourself, try downloading the high-res and 44/16 versions of a track or tracks from hdtracks. Then use Foobar to do blind testing. if you can't tell the difference, then you are saving yourself some money and storage space.

I actually agree with you (@sbradley02) and with @x RELIC x here - personally, I really cannot distinguish between 16/44 and higher-resolution versions of the same song if they are from the same master. (Have done testing with the Foobar ABX comparator)
 
And @Brooko is right as well - I have found that the reason the higher-resolution file sounds better (if it even does) is usually because it is from a different, better master.

 

[BeatsWork]

Honestly I find CD 16/44.1 lossless very good sounding so if I can't find the high res version it's not going to stop me from enjoying the music I love. What I seek out is the best mastered version of a track/album as the X5ii will clearly show you any flaws like clipping or dynamic range compression from the masters. Modern music is plagued by the 'loudness wars' and many producers of popular music find that compressing the dynamic range in the track (not file compression like mp3) is perceived as sounding better, but really it's just louder and actually less detailed. While it's true that humans perceive louder music as better initially what ends up happening is the nuances are lost and the music can come across as flat in comparison to a well mastered track.

I use this site as a quick check before I purchase an album to see what the dynamic range is:

http://dr.loudness-war.info/

Completely agree. I would love to find a site that compares different mastering of older albums and general critique of mastering on new material. DR comparisons is a good start but not the complete picture. Unfortunately there is not enough consumer demand/attention for larger artists* to properly master and plenty of incentive to appeal to the "Beats" crowd by cranking everything to 11. It's sad listening to a brilliantly mastered track from the 70's which blows away any modern recording for instrument separation, vocal dynamics etc.
 
 
* I have zero interest in audiophile masters of Kentucky Folk Masters ... 

 

[originalsnuffy]

Steve Hoffman forums are a great place for critical reviews of new and remastered recordings.

 

[JohnBal]

Steve Hoffman forums are a great place for critical reviews of new and remastered recordings.

+1  That is my "Go to" as well.

 

[JimmyTryhard]

Hi all, 

I posted this on the se846 thread but thought i might get a bit more feedback here. 

I recently purchased a fiiO x5ii to pair with my se846. Reading through the various threads it seemed like a good upgrade from my iPod touch 5th gen. I spent a few hours listening to the same music files on both devices and am having a hard time trying to find a huge difference between the 2. Should I spend more time listening to the x5 then go back to the ipod to see if there really is a difference or will i only notice a difference if i play hi-res files? The files i have tested on both devices are ALAC 44/16 and some 320kbps mp3 files. I feel that i am hearing a slight difference in the fact that i don't need to have the volume turned up as loud on the x5 to hear slightly more detail where as on the ipod more detail is revealed only once the volume is turned up. I was just curious on others views on the 2 devices with the se846 and whether or not its worth keeping the x5.

thanks. Dave

Ultimately, just narrow down your decision to what you personally need. Everyone has a different purpose for wanting to use the device; for example, I personally need more storage space than my iPhone 5S can provide, and I really enjoy the general design of the X5ii. Sound quality is of course important to me, but I am not looking for a night and day upgrade from my 5S, which provides a slightly more congested sound but isn't extremely far from the same quality. Being able to play any type of lossless file is also one of the main deal factors for me.

Do you really need any of the features that the X5 offers and the iPod can't deliver on? If no, then you may not need to keep it. In the end, only you really know your own circumstances, so it's not going to be helpful to ask others for advice in this situation.

 

[330779]

Thanks,

I was really only looking for improved sound quality and the slight convenience of not having to convert flac to alac otherwise the ipod does pretty much what I need.

 

[HiFiDJ]

Quick question.....
 
How is the x5ii display compared to the x3ii? Can the x5ii and x3ii be seen outdoors?

 

[BudC]

Quick question.....

How is the x5ii display compared to the x3ii? Can the x5ii and x3ii be seen outdoors?

Can't speak for the X5-II but the X3-II is not good in daylight.

 

[x RELIC x]

Quick question.....

How is the x5ii display compared to the x3ii? Can the x5ii and x3ii be seen outdoors?

The X5ii uses an IPS LCD screen and the X3ii uses a TFT LCD screen. I haven't used the X3ii but many users report the X5ii screen is 'much better'. Clarity and viewing angles when going from TFT to IPS would be worth it IMO. I have no real difficulty reading the screen in daylight vs my iPhone.

 

[HiFiDJ]

I see, thanks! Display is a big factor to me, so it's good to know X5ii is good.

 

[Dobrescu George]

  I see, thanks! Display is a big factor to me, so it's good to know X5ii is good.

X5II screen can be read in direct sunlight, and can be used outside. 
 
I did not own an x3K, but I had hold one in hand, and X5II's screen is brighter and color reproduction is very good. 

 

[397324]

Hi
 
Bought a X3ii to use primarily on the beach, as I live in Jersey. Totally and I mean totally unreadable. Tried to shield the screen with my hands, but with no success. My iPod Classic 160GB it replaced was fine. A portable player that you can't use outdoors in the sun. Really! Not fit for purpose I'd say.
 
Have subsequently bought a X5ii on the advice of various forum members, but haven't had a chance to test it.
 
What I do know is I can't get it to work in DAC mode on Windows 10. Wish I'd gone for an Ibasso or something similar! Anyone want to buy a two month old X5ii for £220? Seriously, I want shot of it. Astell and Kern JR here I come.
 
Regards
 
Darren

 

[yoyorast10]

nvm