[bomxtr]

Thanks for your help and yes you are right, this is Hifiman's "quality", sadly I tried the Media Monkey app to connect, but it will never find the ef499 on my network, I tried with two cables and made no change

One chip is responsible for the streamer and usb.If there was a problem with it, absolutely nothing would work.Try logging into Windows \hardware and sound\devices and printers\hifiman ef499\properties, there should be no problem in the properties.If something is wrong, then you need to look at the router settings.They may not be suitable for the streamer, or the antivirus may block the network, but this is unlikely.Try connecting again via another PC.

Measurements of the headphone output at 12 o'clock, no load.The low power level of the amplifier is selected in both cases.OS is a resampling.In OS mode, the dynamic range is 2 dB wider in high frequencies.For the rest, there is almost no change.It looks more like a filter than what it would be if using a high-quality installed asrc.But it costs money, so it's not here) It looks similar to tda1543.Why it was necessary to wipe the chip with sandpaper is not entirely clear.About the power.When the potentiometer is at 9 o'clock, this is about 70 dB, at 12 o'clock it is more than 100 dB at connected headphones fostex T50 rp mk3, it feels like.The amplifier here is more than good.There are questions about the DAC.It feels like it was deliberately made much simpler than it could have been, so that there would be no competition with other dacs of the company.No, it's not bad, but knowing what tda1543 is capable of, the result raises questions.

 

[gooberbm]

One chip is responsible for the streamer and usb.If there was a problem with it, absolutely nothing would work.Try logging into Windows \hardware and sound\devices and printers\hifiman ef499\properties, there should be no problem in the properties.If something is wrong, then you need to look at the router settings.They may not be suitable for the streamer, or the antivirus may block the network, but this is unlikely.Try connecting again via another PC.

Measurements of the headphone output at 12 o'clock, no load.The low power level of the amplifier is selected in both cases.OS is a resampling.In OS mode, the dynamic range is 2 dB wider in high frequencies.For the rest, there is almost no change.It looks more like a filter than what it would be if using a high-quality installed asrc.But it costs money, so it's not here) It looks similar to tda1543.Why it was necessary to wipe the chip with sandpaper is not entirely clear.About the power.When the potentiometer is at 9 o'clock, this is about 70 dB, at 12 o'clock it is more than 100 dB at connected headphones fostex T50 rp mk3, it feels like.The amplifier here is more than good.There are questions about the DAC.It feels like it was deliberately made much simpler than it could have been, so that there would be no competition with other dacs of the company.No, it's not bad, but knowing what tda1543 is capable of, the result raises questions.

Anecdotally, when I demoed the 499/500 at CanJam, the moment I A/B’d them at the same time it was clear as day Hifiman was pushing you up to the 500. Just as a thought experiment, why would they want the 499 with the Phillips R2R dac to be on level with their in-house Himalaya mid-tier dac implementation?

Now, the network/USB not working is grounds to send back for a replacement, but the moment I heard both the 499/500, the 499 was a step behind and is for beginners/people that can’t budget for the 500 only.

 

[bomxtr]

Anecdotally, when I demoed the 499/500 at CanJam, the moment I A/B’d them at the same time it was clear as day Hifiman was pushing you up to the 500. Just as a thought experiment, why would they want the 499 with the Phillips R2R dac to be on level with their in-house Himalaya mid-tier dac implementation?

Now, the network/USB not working is grounds to send back for a replacement, but the moment I heard both the 499/500, the 499 was a step behind and is for beginners/people that can’t budget for the 500 only.

You know, I'm not particularly interested in modern r2r DACs, so I wasn't interested in the ef500, although where I bought the ef499 the price difference was about thirty dollars. I bought the ef499 for $ 200.Why am I not interested in them?Well, it's not a multibit sound, to be honest, and it doesn't look much like old chips and vintage CD players.By nature, it is more of a delta sigma, with an upbeat bass and a dip at high frequencies.The Ef500 is a simplified and cheaper ef400 model.I listened to the ef400 and was not particularly impressed, but compared. with my metrum musette, it was an outright beating of babies.For the sake of interest, I have now compared the ef499 with the hifiman hm602 from the same company.And you know, this old portable sounds better than the new home dac.The middle sounds tastier and more musical, the bass is softer and more pleasant, the treble is smoother, the volume is better in depth, but slightly worse in width.

 

[gooberbm]

You know, I'm not particularly interested in modern r2r DACs, so I wasn't interested in the ef500, although where I bought the ef499 the price difference was about thirty dollars. I bought the ef499 for $ 200.Why am I not interested in them?Well, it's not a multibit sound, to be honest, and it doesn't look much like old chips and vintage CD players.By nature, it is more of a delta sigma, with an upbeat bass and a dip at high frequencies.The Ef500 is a simplified and cheaper ef400 model.I listened to the ef400 and was not particularly impressed, but compared. with my metrum musette, it was an outright beating of babies.For the sake of interest, I have now compared the ef499 with the hifiman hm602 from the same company.And you know, this old portable sounds better than the new home dac.The middle sounds tastier and more musical, the bass is softer and more pleasant, the treble is smoother, the volume is better in depth, but slightly worse in width.

It’s awesome you know your tastes, what works for you, and can cross something unnecessary off your list of gear that interests you. It’s helpful to not feel like you’ve gotta chase everything.

So far, I feel that way after getting the 500. It’s gonna be a fun honeymoon period.

 

[chris0815]

I have both ef500 and 400 and I like both with different strength but I don't use the amp section of the ef500. And the amp section of the ef400 is better. At least with my hear and ears.

 

[taliyev]

I wonder if Himalaya LE in EF500 is the same (but renamed), improved or degraded version of the original chip in EF400. I hope the "Pro" version in EF600/Serenade is better... Although even if it is better theoretically / on-paper, considering HIFIMAN's manufacturing standards, one can never know what is inside of the given box...

 

[bomxtr]

I think it's just a different fpga setup.You can get completely different results.Or just various components, which is much simpler and cheaper-you don't need highly paid programmers, but only engineers.

 

[Brain Damage]

I wonder if Himalaya LE in EF500 is the same (but renamed), improved or degraded version of the original chip in EF400. I hope the "Pro" version in EF600/Serenade is better... Although even if it is better theoretically / on-paper, considering HIFIMAN's manufacturing standards, one can never know what is inside of the given box...

Interesting you mention this as I was just googling this the other day, but to no avail.

 

[skfalco]

One chip is responsible for the streamer and usb.If there was a problem with it, absolutely nothing would work.Try logging into Windows \hardware and sound\devices and printers\hifiman ef499\properties, there should be no problem in the properties.If something is wrong, then you need to look at the router settings.They may not be suitable for the streamer, or the antivirus may block the network, but this is unlikely.Try connecting again via another PC.

Measurements of the headphone output at 12 o'clock, no load.The low power level of the amplifier is selected in both cases.OS is a resampling.In OS mode, the dynamic range is 2 dB wider in high frequencies.For the rest, there is almost no change.It looks more like a filter than what it would be if using a high-quality installed asrc.But it costs money, so it's not here) It looks similar to tda1543.Why it was necessary to wipe the chip with sandpaper is not entirely clear.About the power.When the potentiometer is at 9 o'clock, this is about 70 dB, at 12 o'clock it is more than 100 dB at connected headphones fostex T50 rp mk3, it feels like.The amplifier here is more than good.There are questions about the DAC.It feels like it was deliberately made much simpler than it could have been, so that there would be no competition with other dacs of the company.No, it's not bad, but knowing what tda1543 is capable of, the result raises questions.

Really sorry for my previous post, my unit was set to 220V, México uses 110V, I corrected this and everything works great, USB type C still has some cracks and pops , but network works now with UPNP, same problem with gains, almost no difference and no pre amp function, I'm trying to find a way to control volume, thanks a lot for your help

 

[bomxtr]

It's good that everything ended well) In general, it is better to buy immediately under your voltage, so as not to make a mistake with the voltage switch on the DAC itself.Theoretically, of course, nothing should have failed, but there is such a possibility, since your DAC has been connected for a long time. wrong.There is essentially a built-in minicomputer on allwinner h3, something like orange pi with Linux, and how this could affect it is unclear.This is a good thing for sound, because when using an Internet cable, rather than usb, you are completely isolated from the noise of the main home PC and all its disadvantages and cues.In terms of sound quality, the best program is roon and probably amarra lux, but the second one is buggy and not particularly convenient.It is better to replace the DAC, of course, if there are problems with it.The difference in gain is clearly visible and distinct for me.

I can say that the dac started playing normally only after a few days of continuous operation.Maybe you shouldn't turn it off at all to make it sound good.In the early days, there was one dominant bass and midbass and there was practically no space in the sound.The high and the middle were dirty.Now everything has become much better.But still, the midrange frequencies are not as beautiful as I used to hear from the tda1543, even in budget implementations, not to mention expensive solutions.They are rather in the neutral direction.The tall ones were cold, sharp and thin.Now it's almost gone, but the smoothness inherent in this dac is still not I notice.In general, it seemed to me that it doesn't look much like a multibit dac, unless of course you take into account the deep bass midbass.I also didn't find any drivers for windows 7, but the driver from hifiman ef600 came up using the poke method.They are the same.Everything works.In general, the streamer board is the same from the manufacturer and the same from serenade and serenade jr, but they already have an xmos usb chip.Maybe it sounds better.In the early days of the DAC, the sound with headphones, and my main ones are the sennheiser hd 800 and the sennheiser hd800s, was no better than the sennheiser hd 600, probably one of the most disliked headphones, like the hd650.Clamped down,completely uninteresting and boring.Now the difference is obvious.I would suggest that hifiman listen to old multibit DACs from sony,philips before making new players in the future.The concept of what to strive for in future products will be clear.For example, my portable sony discman d20. The sound is musical and interesting, and even it replays the ef499 with ease and the hifiman hm60x series easily) That this is a multibit can be heard from the first notes.I also made measurements of the ef499 line output and what I measured on to understand its capabilities and limitations (Realtek ALC887).The dac itself is externally made very well and everything is conveniently located.The disadvantages are volume controls and an input selector.There is a backlash of a millimeter or so.

 

[TeamHiFiMAN]

 

[Danx3k]

My ef499 turned up today. Very happy with it.

It streams via WiFi fine in my Qobuz app (and any other app on my phone for that matter).

However using Qobuz windows app, it just won’t display it in the outputs? It does with tidal on my pc but nothing with Qobuz?

Is this an issue with the Qobuz windows app itself?

 

[chaotic_angel]

My ef499 turned up today. Very happy with it.

It streams via WiFi fine in my Qobuz app (and any other app on my phone for that matter).

However using Qobuz windows app, it just won’t display it in the outputs? It does with tidal on my pc but nothing with Qobuz?

Is this an issue with the Qobuz windows app itself?

Helo, how to use with the Qobuz please?

 

[chris0815]

Watch the video above.

 

[Danx3k]

Helo, how to use with the Qobuz please?

I just can’t get Qobuz windows app to work with it. I’ve tested it with Tidal
windows app and it works just like the video above, but the EF499 doesn’t appear in the output list on Qobuz windows app.

I suspect it’s because Tidal has a tidal connect and Qobuz still don’t have an equivalent

If someone knows a workaround for the Qobuz windows app, I’d love to know.

On my iPhone it’s straight forward and comes up right away on the Qobuz app: