[corsario]

Hi,
 
this statement about HM-602 in warp08 review : "Overall SQ is nearly identical using 16/44 music to the HM-801" (using JH customs and R10) makes me very confident that the HM-602 is as good as the HM-801.
 
if you are already experiencing hisses with your Sony DAP, then go for the HM-602.
If you plan to go to JH customs in the near future, then definitely go for the HM-602, especially at this pre-order price.
 
If the HM-602 is as good as the HM-801, as an owner of HM-801 and customs IEM, all I can tell you is : you won't regret it.
 
As a matter of fact, I also pre-ordered the HM-602 (in summer you really feel that the HM-801 is big and heavy and it's kind of difficult to find a place on yourself to carry it. This is where you feel the need for a little brother to the HM-801)

 

[gatz]

 
 
I would be happy to read more listening comparison between both DAP.
 
If 16/44 music quality if nearly identical, and if your statement below is true, the HM-801 will have more less interest...
 
 
Quote:

As far as I am concerned I tried the empirical way : I have quite a lot of tracks in 24/96 and 24/192, and for 2 years now I am looking for one track where I could A/B the difference between 24/192 and 16/44 when downsampled in the right way. So far, I could not hear or ABX a difference between 16/44 and 24/96* (with Stax Omega2 + lynx 2B sound card). This is why I am always very curious when some people claim to hear a difference between 16/44 and 24/192 (or 24/96). If somebody can, please indicate on what tracks and where are the differences (and in the other post, may be not in this one)
 
Basically, as said in the quoted post, 24/96 IS usefull to sound engineer when you have to apply treatments to the sound. When it is finished, 16/44 is juste as fine (unless someone can find the track where a difference may be heard).

 
Sorry being of topic, but I find quite noticable differences between some commercial 16/44 and 24/96 tracks.
Anyway your statement may be true and the difference may come from 24/96 mastering.
(You can try Rebecca Pidgeon "Spanish Harlem" on Chesky for instance)

 

[corsario]

Quote:

Sorry being of topic, but I find quite noticable differences between some commercial 16/44 and 24/96 tracks. Anyway your statement may be true and the difference may come from 24/96 mastering. (You can try Rebecca Pidgeon "Spanish Harlem" on Chesky for instance)

 
It sure must come from the mastering. Did you ABX this "noticable" difference by the way ?
 
The right way to go is to downsample the 24/96 track using R8brain (use the free version which appears to be better than the PRO one for this purpose. It is complicated to explain but let's say that the default dithering performed byt the free version of R8brain is the good one, just set the quality setting to "Very high"). This way you will have the 16/44 version of the 24/96 track : no mastering difference, etc...
 
And there, go to foobar, use the ABX module and make the test*
 
If you can ABX it, then it will be time to consider if R8brain did not deteriorate the 24/96 track or did not performed an inappropriate dithering. But, so far, no ABX was sucessful, so the question is not on the table yet

 
 
*If your soundcard can not switch automatically between 16/44 and 24/96 (this is the case for EMU1212m for instance) then you will need to use R8brain again and upsample your 16/44 sample (no problem it is juste zeros added to obtain 24/96 res, nothing is changed to the file - you can not recreate what was lost in the downsampling process). If your sound card can deal indifferently with any input format (e.g. Lynx2B) then do not bother to upsample and just make the 24/96 vs. 16/44 comparison. If you can ever ABX on one sample, please be kind to indicate the 24/96 sample you used, and I am sure a lot of people, including myself, will be happy to try to ABX it as well.
 
 
PS : to avoid off topic discussion I also replied in the appropriate topic. Please let's continue the discussion there.
 
PS2 : If I am not wrong we are both using EM3pro. Together with the HM801 this is a delightful pleasure ! PM me if you want about 24/96 vs.16/44 (I think we are both french, it will be easier to chat in french, at least for me

)

 

[rainxin163]

i have ordered it three weeks ago ,and will receive it next week,very happy,and i will comaprate it to my sony PCM-D50.

 

[warp08]

So, a couple of quick points:
 

• every review or impression is subjective (that means I can't tell what you heard and you can't tell what I heard even if we were using identical equipment down to the last interconnect)
• I have heard badly recorded material in 24/96 resolution and well-recorded reference material in 16/44.  
• You need a reference system to really appreciate what the SACD/hi-res format really has to offer.  I do think that the HifiMAN devices' capability to offer playback of this material sets them apart from the rest of the DAPs currently out there, but I agree that is not the whole picture, merely a differentiator.
• Impressions are just that, impressions.  No scientific basis or methods were intended, nor was there a possibility.  It was just "to my ears only."  But for some members it represented one more little data point, for better or worse.  
• When the HM-602 will ship, hopefully soon, we will see a lot more comparisons and in-depth reviews so we can all benefit from actual listening experiences instead of quoting contrasting and interesting empirical studies.  Whether the HM-602 or any other source succeeds or not will be determined how it performs for you, with your headphones, music and by your ears.  That's all that matters.

 
 
Quote:

 

Hi,
 
the link given to you by Dedero is the thing. And everything is further explained in one of the last posts of the linked discussion : http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/415361/24bit-vs-16bit-the-myth-exploded/510#post_6869095
 
As far as I am concerned I tried the empirical way : I have quite a lot of tracks in 24/96 and 24/192, and for 2 years now I am looking for one track where I could A/B the difference between 24/192 and 16/44 when downsampled in the right way. So far, I could not hear or ABX a difference between 16/44 and 24/96* (with Stax Omega2 + lynx 2B sound card). This is why I am always very curious when some people claim to hear a difference between 16/44 and 24/192 (or 24/96). If somebody can, please indicate on what tracks and where are the differences (and in the other post, may be not in this one)
 
Basically, as said in the quoted post, 24/96 IS usefull to sound engineer when you have to apply treatments to the sound. When it is finished, 16/44 is juste as fine (unless someone can find the track where a difference may be heard).
 

 

[Anaxilus]

I'm not sure why you would downsample 24/192 or 24/96 to 16/44 so you could AB 16/44 to 16/44.    My logic class skipped over HD audio but ok.  Regardless, I would love to hear from you 801 owners that get the 602 as well.  Based on my limited research of the DAC I would be surprised the 602 has the same level of line noise as the 801.  I think it will be more about a unique sonic signature rather than emulating the 801 signature at a bargain price.  Just a guess at this point. 

 

[corsario]

Quote:

I'm not sure why you would downsample 24/192 or 24/96 to 16/44 so you could AB 16/44 to 16/44.    My logic class skipped over HD audio but ok.  Regardless, I would love to hear from you 801 owners that get the 602 as well.  Based on my limited research of the DAC I would be surprised the 602 has the same level of line noise as the 801.  I think it will be more about a unique sonic signature rather than emulating the 801 signature at a bargain price.  Just a guess at this point. 

 
I'm not sure if you understood well : the point is ABing 24/96 to downsampled 24/96.
Gatz, much praise to him, actually made the test. Read the results here.
 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

I'm not sure if you understood well : the point is ABing 24/96 to downsampled 24/96.
Gatz, much praise to him, actually made the test. Read the results here.
 

Well I was going by what you said here:
 
Quote:

 
It sure must come from the mastering. Did you ABX this "noticable" difference by the way ?
 
This way you will have the 16/44 version of the 24/96 track : no mastering difference, etc...
 

I understand you're argument in the other link about mastering.  However, the fact is 24/96 allows for much more data to be potentially included and resolved within the same sine wave.  Whether you have the equipment or ears for it to be worthwhile is another matter.  I would rather someone show me a 24/96 or 24/192 includes the same amount of data or checksum value as a 16/44 to convince me its a gimmick.  If a 16/44 has the same amount of data as a 24/192 then something is wrong or suspect.  Whether someone can hear the difference between 16 bit or 24 bit, MP3 of WAV makes no difference to me if there is in fact a physical difference in the amount of data stored.
 
Now for the sake of the 602 doing the R8brain trick to make 24bit files viable on the 602 is another matter.  Leaving the format wars aside if what you say is correct, assuming no flaws or errors in methodology then playing 24bit on the 602 should be more than acceptable.  I'm actually still stuck at the research I have done stating the 602 DAC is really only capable of 8 or 12 bit resolution.  Anywho, I'm preordered, my ears will answer the question at least for me. 

 

[corsario]

 
Quote:

Well I was going by what you said here: This way you will have the 16/44 version of the 24/96 track
 

Yes precisely, so you will compare 16/44 vs. 24/96, using the same original file (in 24/96). Seems hard to understand

 

 
Quote:

 
Now for the sake of the 602 doing the R8brain trick to make 24bit files viable on the 602 is another matter.  Leaving the format wars aside if what you say is correct, assuming no flaws or errors in methodology then playing 24bit on the 602 should be more than acceptable.  I'm actually still stuck at the research I have done stating the 602 DAC is really only capable of 8 or 12 bit resolution.  Anywho, I'm preordered, my ears will answer the question at least for me. 

 
In this discussion I do not care about the 602 capability, I do not care about playing 24/96 tracks with a 16/44 device. I cited R8brain only as a tool allowing a 16/44 vs. 24/96 comparison with a one and only original track (in 24/96) : this is the only way to be sure that there is no mastering difference. That's all. Please try to understand (cf. supra).
 
 
Now you speak about data, etc.., please read the topic I already have cited above for all the theoretical part. And yes you will hear a difference : only in silent part, with the volume at maximum.
 
Did you read the test performed by Gatz in the other topic. This brilliant guy understood the R8brain trick and utility in a second (bright isn't it ?) and, kaboom, he performed the test the same night at home, he used his own ears and equipment and the result is.... big surprise

 
Please, would it be possible to follow this discussion in the other topic ?
 
 


 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

 
Yes precisely, so you will compare 16/44 vs. 24/96, using the same original file (in 24/96). Seems hard to understand

 

 
 
In this discussion I do not care about the 602 capability, I do not care about playing 24/96 tracks with a 16/44 device. I cited R8brain only as a tool allowing a 16/44 vs. 24/96 comparison with a one and only original track (in 24/96) : this is the only way to be sure that there is no mastering difference. That's all. Please try to understand (cf. supra).
 
 
Now you speak about data, etc.., please read the topic I already have cited above for all the theoretical part. And yes you will hear a difference : only in silent part, with the volume at maximum.
 
Did you read the test performed by Gatz in the other topic. This brilliant guy understood the R8brain trick and utility in a second (bright isn't it ?) and, kaboom, he performed the test the same night at home, he used his own ears and equipment and the result is.... big surprise

 
Please, would it be possible to follow this discussion in the other topic ?
 
 


 

Yes I read Gatz's post.  That's why I replied as I did.  I've had my fill of the 16bit/24bit discourse long before I saw your post and have no further comment on it in any thread.  My last statement was a segway to return the topic to the 602 before YOU derailed the topic again with a post that offered nothing new to either discussion.  Yes, YOU who said you do not care about the 602's abilities.  So yes, please let us continue discussing the 602.  Thx. 

 

[Student_Driver]

Well... I have my doubts... but I'm in.. just pre-ordered... 

 

[Woody469]

I only have to preorder the HM-602 Portable Music Player and the free headphones are shipped with it?

 

[Darksyde]

Quote:

I only have to preorder the HM-602 Portable Music Player and the free headphones are shipped with it?

Yes.  However, I strongly advise against ordering the player just for the earbuds. 

 

[Youthanasia]

Out of curiosity and since I am counting the days on my HM-602:
 
What does it mean: Shipping time: Before the first week of Sept, 2010.
To put it literally "Before the first week of Sept, 2010" = "Before September"
 
So it is actually :Before the end of the first week of September? So before 07 September it will be shipped? ? )

 

[.Sup]

Quote:

Out of curiosity and since I am counting the days on my HM-602:
 
What does it mean: Shipping time: Before the first week of Sept, 2010.
To put it literally "Before the first week of Sept, 2010" = "Before September"
 
So it is actually :Before the end of the first week of September? So before 07 September it will be shipped? ? )

I understood that it will be shipped one week before September.