[svyr]

They've got some truly amazing battery technology and great sound, but poor UI and hiss seems to always plague them. Now if only all these "hifi" dap manufacturers could work together or something, since each one have some serious strengths, but also some serious weaknesses.

>They've got some truly amazing battery technology

eeeem...Wouldn't they just use some off-the-shelf li-poly or li-ion battery ? (plus battery life being a function of the chips inside - generally the simpler the circuit - e.g. everything in one main chip, the less power is drawn)

PS quantitatively, what's amazing? In my experience the only portable player I could describe like that for battery life is cowon d2. That had 30h of flac playback (rated 50 mp3 )

 

[saykong]

New Studio battery is about 50~60h for flac playback, if using MicroSD card is about 40h with flac and volume set to 20/31.

 

[svyr]

New Studio battery is about 50~60h for flac playback, if using MicroSD card is about 40h with flac and volume set to 20/31.

that is good. I guess if you compare the physical size of D2 and Studio-V, not that amazing. (the 30h for D2 I quoted above is 1/2 from SDHC card, 1/2 from memory)

I'd also be fairly suspicious about "what's in the box". Does anyone know the max HP out rating for this device and whether they have any plans to add SDXC compatibility in the future (Studio-V-II or something )?

 

[fatman]

 
great review.
 
As to the hiss, with most of my dynamic earphones, I almost hear no hiss with STUDIO-V. And with SE 530, only very slight hiss can be detectived at the quiet night, which can be ignored when the music is playing.

 

[fatman]

 
With my SE 530, and MP3 320 files, I listen to the STUDIO-V with the volume of 11, the battery playing time is about 75 hours.

 
Quote:

New Studio battery is about 50~60h for flac playback, if using MicroSD card is about 40h with flac and volume set to 20/31.

 

 

[RASeymour]

I've been using the original Studio with q-Jays for the last year or so. 
 
While I was lukewarm about the player at first, mainly due to difficulties with the UI and card, I've come to really enjoy the player.  It is my favorite walkaround player.  I tried the new Studio firmware and while I noticed a difference it wasn't that great to my ears.  I went back to the other firmware.  Jack told me that the new firmware has some sort of line out function, but since I used it as a standalone that didn't make much difference to me.
 
I continue to have a couple of difficulties with the player, although they are minor.  The battery life has never been great for me.  It seems to drain whether I play it or not.  Also, I had some problems with playback if a card was inserted.  Since using it without the card, no problems.
 
Again, this is a great player in my experience.
 
p.s. It may have hiss, but hiss, like gapless playback, has never been that important to me, so I don't pay much attention to it one way or the other.
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

[rymd]

idk man, but it's part of their marketing schtick: "we had to employ the class A amp, which consumes about 3 times the power than the standard integrated class D amp. We overcame this with our proprietary EMA technology. (Energy Management Assignment technology)."
If it's just jargon for a very minimalistic circuit or just a giant lithium ion battery (which is probably why it's so heavy), well then I wish mainstream daps could use simpler circuits and heavier batteries. I would pay for a bulkier fuze that lasted more 50 hours.. and yes, amazing would be like cowon. but hisoundaudio stuff still lasts longer.
 
anyways, I'm still wary of buying anything new from hisoundaudio because of their widespread defects in their amp3...
Quote:

Quote:

They've got some truly amazing battery technology and great sound, but poor UI and hiss seems to always plague them. Now if only all these "hifi" dap manufacturers could work together or something, since each one have some serious strengths, but also some serious weaknesses.

>They've got some truly amazing battery technology

eeeem...Wouldn't they just use some off-the-shelf li-poly or li-ion battery

? (plus battery life being a function of the chips inside - generally the simpler the circuit - e.g. everything in one main chip, the less power is drawn)

PS quantitatively, what's amazing? In my experience the only portable player I could describe like that for battery life is cowon d2. That had 30h of flac playback (rated 50 mp3

)

 

 

[a_tumiwa]

so Studio-V is a newer version of Studio and Studio-I ??
cannot find Studio-V at http://www.hisoundaudio.com/products.php

 

[saykong]

At china they still call it Studio, just the new Studio come with dual firmware. Price is a bit higher than old Studio.

 

[fdhfdy]

There is no hiss on the new model. Btw, the earphone that comes with the machine sounds pretty good. It would be perfect if the machine could be a liitle bit thinner.
 
I saw audiphilechina has the old model. they may start selling new ones soon.

 

[fatman]

Quote:

Is this available anywhere else..?

I got mine directly bought from Hisoundaudio. the shipping fee cost me only USD20 by DHL.
 

 

[Art of sound]

I don't see a point to open it and find what chip they are using. I doubt that it is all in a single chip. There are number of components that can influence sound quality. I have spent number of years in a record industry as a producer and I see that you are all missing the major issue. Only the sound created in a recording studio is the original. That's the sound producer and engineer wanted to have in specific studio listening room atmosphere. Everything else, out of that room is just a reproduction, more or less great. How guys can discuss about missing frequencies or SOUND COLORATION when they do NOT have a source to compare with. How they know how original sound was created, they have no chance to compare it. The very only way is to compare with their old earphones and players, the sound they have used to it. Simply, they do not have a reference sound to compare with. So, as a bottom line, we have all reviewers just guessing how the original sound should sound! Or worst, we just read about their personal taste! Boring.
So, what is the key? Simple way indeed. During a recording in studio EVERY producer and engineer try to record each instrument precisely so when mixed to a song listeners can distinguish it among other instruments and vocals. Hence, while listening various types of music genres, if we can distinguish instruments one by one, place them at their position in stereo image, we probably have the sound close to original. That's how creators of that sound (producers and engineers) wanted to have it.
For me , the key word when describing Studio V is musicality. That player has necessary musicality of the sound. While listening it with different earphones and headphones (including Grado, Sony, Sennheiser), as well as a part of my home system: British valve amp Audio Innovation, Tannoy speakers, RSC Tarra Labs speakers cable, I found Studio V sounding amazing and almost identical to a CD player while reproducing the same tunes . I tried hooking to my home system iPod, Sansa, Sony...and all of them sounded awful. Nice work Hisoundaudio. You are on the right track!

 

[svyr]

I don't see a point to open it and find what chip they are using. I doubt that it is all in a single chip. There are number of components that can influence sound quality. I have spent number of years in a record industry as a producer and I see that you are all missing the major issue. Only the sound created in a recording studio is the original. That's the sound producer and engineer wanted to have in specific studio listening room atmosphere. Everything else, out of that room is just a reproduction, more or less great. How guys can discuss about missing frequencies or SOUND COLORATION when they do NOT have a source to compare with. How they know how original sound was created, they have no chance to compare it. The very only way is to compare with their old earphones and players, the sound they have used to it. Simply, they do not have a reference sound to compare with. So, as a bottom line, we have all reviewers just guessing how the original sound should sound! Or worst, we just read about their personal taste! Boring.
So, what is the key? Simple way indeed. During a recording in studio EVERY producer and engineer try to record each instrument precisely so when mixed to a song listeners can distinguish it among other instruments and vocals. Hence, while listening various types of music genres, if we can distinguish instruments one by one, place them at their position in stereo image, we probably have the sound close to original. That's how creators of that sound (producers and engineers) wanted to have it.
For me , the key word when describing Studio V is musicality. That player has necessary musicality of the sound. While listening it with different earphones and headphones (including Grado, Sony, Sennheiser), as well as a part of my home system: British valve amp Audio Innovation, Tannoy speakers, RSC Tarra Labs speakers cable, I found Studio V sounding amazing and almost identical to a CD player while reproducing the same tunes . I tried hooking to my home system iPod, Sansa, Sony...and all of them sounded awful. Nice work Hisoundaudio. You are on the right track!

I disagree. People who have the unit can and should compare it to other sources/amps they have and point out any characteristic coloration that's specific to the Studio-V. True, they can't compare to what A recording was mastered on, but it's not relevant 'on average'. What's more, knowing the specific sound helps people not buying something that will most likely not much match their current tastes or gear.

That said, great that you enjoy your new player

 

[Art of sound]

Well, I must highlight that I am not confronting myself with reviewers, however majority of them are missing the point. Do we want from our high fidelity unit a large color screen and pretty design OR a great sound? That is the key deference between iPod and Studio. All branded portable hifi manufacturers gave up on the sound quality because it requires a lot of research and experimenting and push on design and larch touch screens. So, what almost all hifi players are missing is clarity and musicality of sound they reproduce.
Recently one great friend of mine, a music star, told me that while listening his music on one of branded players he could not hear three of eight instruments! Simply players cannot reproduce it or the sound of those instruments was too weak. 
I just want to emphasize that I expect from my portable player to reproduce sound as close as possible to original, which means clean, detail and without any distortion, which Studio obviously does. I am curious to hear new Hisoundaudio earphones paired with Studio V. Can anybody test them?

 

[svyr]

Well, I must highlight that I am not confronting myself with reviewers, however majority of them are missing the point. Do we want from our high fidelity unit a large color screen and pretty design OR a great sound? That is the key deference between iPod and Studio. All branded portable hifi manufacturers gave up on the sound quality because it requires a lot of research and experimenting and push on design and larch touch screens. So, what almost all hifi players are missing is clarity and musicality of sound they reproduce.
Recently one great friend of mine, a music star, told me that while listening his music on one of branded players he could not hear three of eight instruments! Simply players cannot reproduce it or the sound of those instruments was too weak. 
I just want to emphasize that I expect from my portable player to reproduce sound as close as possible to original, which means clean, detail and without any distortion, which Studio obviously does. I am curious to hear new Hisoundaudio earphones paired with Studio V. Can anybody test them?

I'm not following your argument above (about reviewers missing the point) and it seems to me like you're missing the point. What sounds 'great' to you might sound like utter horse manure to someone else...and there are hundreds of cases like that on head-fi already...

References to 'it sounds amazing' or imaginary friends who are 'great music stars' and 'think it's amazing' are hardly useful information and are borderline trolling and forum bait marketing. (and what I'm doing is n00b-bashing, but hey)


>sound as close as possible to original, which means clean, detail and without any distortion

Yea... ok. A post ago you were saying they key to you was musicality, not some sort of reference sound. Changing your mind a bit quickly?


>All branded portable hifi manufacturers gave up on the sound quality because it requires a lot of research and experimenting and push on design and larch touch screens. So, what almost all hifi players are missing is clarity and musicality of sound they reproduce.

That I don't disagree with. Still, a touch screen doesn't necessarily mean bad sound. Cheap DACs/opamps and a poor implementation inside do. But that's not the case for all modern players...