[figgie]

Quote:

figgie do you speak Chinese? That may make it much easier for them to understand if the language barrier is in the way . Then translate to English for us . lol
 
I think the directions are thorough though .

I do not speak either Cantonese or Mandarin.
 
with that said, as long as I do not get to crazy technical, they should understand the idea which if they do. You guys are one less issue away from DAP greatness.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

*Raises hand*
I do scripting for a living, logic and pseudo code is what I look at for 8 hours a day whil listening to my DX100

So does that mean it has your approval? .
 
Not sure if it's just me but I have gapless set to 5 seconds and for some reason it sounds even better on that setting.

 

[surfer1000]

For my 2 cents, I don't rate the Shure E535's, sounded no different to my Klipsch X5's that were half the price.

If you want the best IEM's in my opinion then get the AKG 3003's, expensive but man do they sound good!...blew my X5's out the window

 

[Sorensiim]

So does that mean it has your approval? .

Not sure if it's just me but I have gapless set to 5 seconds and for some reason it sounds even better on that setting.

I would check for bit depth and sample rate instead of album name. That way it still works for guys like me who carry both the 16/44.1 and 24/192 versions of some albums

 

[surfer1000]

I love the gapless setting at 5 secs, brilliant

 

[lee730]

Quote:

For my 2 cents, I don't rate the Shure E535's, sounded no different to my Klipsch X5's that were half the price.
If you want the best IEM's in my opinion then get the AKG 3003's, expensive but man do they sound good!...blew my X5's out the window

For the money I think the To Go 334s would sound better IMO. At least I felt that way on the short audition I had with them. I still prefer the Tralucents to both though. It really comes down to personal preference at this point in the game .

 

[ericfarrell85]

Quote:

No comparison at all. EQ works perfectly on 1.2.7. I prefer to use EQ off as it sounds best that way without artificial boosting of the frequencies. 1.10 is not comparable to 1.2.7 at all in sound quality or functionality. 1.2.7 is the best followed by 1.1.7.
 
1.2.7 has made this player comparable to my DACport LX which is a huge feat IMO. Before on 1.1.7 it was a really good DAP but still not comparable to my desktop rig. Now it is very much comparable.

Great info! Thanks Lee. I'll update the firmware and see how it goes. At this stage I like the CLAS and iBasso equally, with the former providing greater warmth and musicality (possibly at the expense of treble extension) and the iBasso a step up in clarity, soundstage and overall transparency.
 
As I no longer have the same opportunities to listen to my portable setups like I once did, I'm becoming more and more disenchanted with their value. An DX100 > MK3 > 1K+ custom adds up to > $2500 (and quite a bit more in my case!). Unfortunately it cannot hold a candle to a good desktop setup imo. I used to be of the opposite school, believing iem's can scale to full-size-open-headphone heights with the proper investment, but I was terribly wrong in that idea and paid substantially for it. Even so, the convenience of wonderful SQ anyplace is quite a feat and can be downright transporting. I'm glad you found your desktop equivalent (or near) and if the iBasso scales up as you say I'll be doubly pleased. 

 

[lee730]

Quote:

Great info! Thanks Lee. I'll update the firmware and see how it goes. At this stage I like the CLAS and iBasso equally, with the former providing greater warmth and musicality (possibly at the expense of treble extension) and the iBasso a step up in clarity, soundstage and overall transparency.
 
As I no longer have the same opportunities to listen to my portable setups like I once did, I'm becoming more and more disenchanted with their value. An DX100 > MK3 > 1K+ custom adds up to > $2500 (and quite a bit more in my case!). Unfortunately it cannot hold a candle to a good desktop setup imo. I used to be of the opposite school, believing iem's can scale to full-size-open-headphone heights with the proper investment, but I was terribly wrong in that idea and paid substantially for it. Even so, the convenience of wonderful SQ anyplace is quite a feat and can be downright transporting. I'm glad you found your desktop equivalent (or near) and if the iBasso scales up as you say I'll be doubly pleased. 

lol ericfarrel I won't be surprised at all if the DX100 brings that wanted warmth to your sound while being even more detailed and musical than ever before (after updating to 1.2.7). I also won't be surprised if I see your CLAS on the for sale forum shortly . It's really that good....

 

[jamato8]

IMO, the DX100 with the current firmware in every way holds up just fine against desktops, to the point it just is smaller is size but not in sound.

 

[figgie]

Quote:

I would check for bit depth and sample rate instead of album name. That way it still works for guys like me who carry both the 16/44.1 and 24/192 versions of some albums

 
 
that is fine...
 
do you have the albums mixed that one song is 16/44 and then next one is 24/192?
 
If they set there array correctly, They should have two albums of the same name.
 
For instace
 
Eagles - Hell Freezes Over (16/44)
Eagles - Hell Freezes Over (24/96)
 
More than likely there is a clear delination in which the 16/44 album is ALL 16/44 and 24/192 is ALL 24/192. THAT is why I chose the Album name as the grouping for the DAC reactivation which also does Artist and Album sorting. That goes out the windows under song sort or playlist which will require each track be sampled to set the DAC up.

 

[figgie]

Lee
 
The gapless setting, what does it do?
 
Do you think it would benifit longer or shorter? Seems like it is a buffer for when the music plays continous but I can not be sure of that.
 
Currently it is set at 5 seconds and 10 seconds.
 
10 seconds to much?

 

[Sorensiim]

Quote:

 
 
that is fine...
 
do you have the albums mixed that one song is 16/44 and then next one is 24/192?
 
If they set there array correctly, They should have two albums of the same name.
 
For instace
 
Eagles - Hell Freezes Over (16/44)
Eagles - Hell Freezes Over (24/96)
 
More than likely there is a clear delination in which the 16/44 album is ALL 16/44 and 24/192 is ALL 24/192. THAT is why I chose the Album name as the grouping for the DAC reactivation which also does Artist and Album sorting. That goes out the windows under song sort or playlist which will require each track be sampled to set the DAC up.

Well, your method should work, mine will work 

 
It's just as easy to check for bit depth and sample rate as it is to check the album tag, so why not got for the definitive property instead of the probable one? This also takes playlists into account. 
 
Given their track record for not being able to differentiate two different albums called "Greatest Hits" is just another argument for doing it based on bit depth and sample rate. We have the info, let's use it.
 
Pseudo-code-logic-thingy:
 
'variable for storing the last bit depth and sample rate played:
strLastBitSample = ""
 
(You press play, metadata is read from the file)
strCurrentBitDepth = "24"
strCurrentSampleRate = "192"
strBitSample = strCurrentBitDepth & strCurrentSampleRate
IF strBitSample = strLastBitSample OR strLastbitSample = "" Then
      Play without leading silence/fade-in
Else
      Play with leading silence/fade-in
End if
 
Yeah, I'm tired, but let me explain: If it's the first track being played, just play it. No change in bit depth or sample rate, so just go. If the track being played is the same as the last track played, there's no change either, so just go. However, if there is a change - add the leading silence or fade-in.

 

[figgie]

Quote:

Well, your method should work, mine will work 

 
It's just as easy to check for bit depth and sample rate as it is to check the album tag, so why not got for the definitive property instead of the probable one? This also takes playlists into account. 
 
Given their track record for not being able to differentiate two different albums called "Greatest Hits" is just another argument for doing it based on bit depth and sample rate. We have the info, let's use it.
 
Pseudo-code-logic-thingy:
 
'variable for storing the last bit depth and sample rate played:
strLastBitSample = ""
 
(You press play, metadata is read from the file)
strCurrentBitDepth = "24"
strCurrentSampleRate = "192"
strBitSample = strCurrentBitDepth & strCurrentSampleRate
IF strBitSample = strLastBitSample OR strLastbitSample = "" Then
      Play without leading silence/fade-in
Else
      Play with leading silence/fade-in
End if
Yeah, I'm tired, but let me explain: If it's the first track being played, just play it. No change in bit depth or sample rate, so just go. If the track being played is the same as the last track played, there's no change either, so just go. However, if there is a change - add the leading silence or fade-in.

 
I agree with you on track record.. I just think they did not think about it. Lots of companies don't because they just see the end goal. A good DAP. They are responsive so that means they hopefully understand what we are conveying. Why stop at good when it can be GREAT.
 
I am thinking that they do the indexing at first, not on read otherwise you won't have the long load up time. If i recall there was a debug file. I will have to look to see if they actually build a db file based on the indexed files.
 
your will work great on playlist or song sort. Under the album sort or artist sort, the bitrate is constant for an album. Though I like your idea. bitrate should be kept in the ID3 tag.... which is like a 4kb read. Let me send that to them. I think your option will be more efficent than there current offering on the playlist/song sort portion. A parallel but independant function. BTW  the OR should be change to AND, strBitSample must equal both SampleRates and BitDepth. If any of those change the DAC has to reinitialze.
 
something like
 
(You press play, metadata is read from the file)
strCurrentBitDepth = "24"
strCurrentSampleRate = "192"
 
strBitSample = strCurrentBitDepth & strCurrentSampleRate
 
IF strBitSample = strLastBitSample & strLastbitDepth = ""
      Play without leading silence/fade-in (Do not reinitialize DAC)
      strLastBitSampleRate = strCurrentSampleRate (store the current rate prior to reading next file)
      strLastBitDepth = strCurrentBitDepth (store current Depth prior to reading next file)
Else
      Play with leading silence/fade-in
End if
 
 
Personally I am thinking the fadein still should be in the 50 ms range. Not to be confused with 500ms. 50ms should be almost unnoticeable. Honestly a quick scope of the signal and the pop ought to tell them how long to mute. Not that hard. :/
 
Any input on the gapless setting?
5 seconds, 10 seconds, Native.

 

[HiFlight]

I have conducted a couple of measured standby discharge tests and with v.1.2.7, I am dropping about slightly less than 1% per hour as shown on the battery meter. This is by just manually turning off the screen with music not playing. I have not killed any running processes or altered any other settings except for turning off WiFi.

(Last test: In 7 hrs, it decreased from full charge to 94%)

 

[lee730]

Quote:

Lee
 
The gapless setting, what does it do?
 
Do you think it would benifit longer or shorter? Seems like it is a buffer for when the music plays continous but I can not be sure of that.
 
Currently it is set at 5 seconds and 10 seconds.
 
10 seconds to much?

Well 5 seconds is kinda like a fade in but it doesn't cut out any music during the next track, just it kinda fades in the next track just as the older track finishes. Not sue why but it just sounds more detailed and dynamic (3D) to my ears for some reason so I'll keep it on that setting for now. But Native seems to be the best keeping gapless in mind without and sort of fade in. This only occurs though when not manually selecting tracks. I'd like to have both options of course without actually losing the beginning of any of my tracks on manual change. (the heart of the problem).