[Maxpain]

So if I understand this correct,asio buffer size and playback latency will not have an impact on sound quality but usb streaming mode may have an impact? Can I ask what excactly is happening when we select streaming modes? I dont really undesntand what this option does..

 

[john57]

  So if I understand this correct,asio buffer size and playback latency will not have an impact on sound quality but usb streaming mode may have an impact? Can I ask what exactly is happening when we select streaming modes? I don't really understand what this option does..

The USB Streaming Mode can be set to one of the following values:
• Minimum Latency = 1 millisecond
• Low Latency = 2 milliseconds
• Standard = 4 milliseconds
• Relaxed = 8 milliseconds
• Reliable = 12 milliseconds
• Safe = 16 milliseconds
• Extra Safe = 32 milliseconds
A buffer depth of 1 millisecond is the smallest value supported by the underlying Microsoft bus drivers.
 
That is about as much I can currently find. You just have to experiment and recheck with the highest sampling rate or DSD to find the stable values. If I am using my DAW I would want the lowest latency I can get away with. 

 

[Maxpain]

Thank you for the detailed and informative answer! I am going to experiment and try to find the optimal solution!
 

 

[lucidreamer]

  The drawback of large buffers is that stopping, pausing and changes can take longer. Streaming mode does make some difference in sound quality on my I7 4790 with 16 gigs. Some streaming modes like relaxed will not work on my system.  It is really system dependence on what works best. Option like memory playback can make a difference in some cases. My OPPO HA-1 has the same options and a few others makes as well.

 
I do not hear any sound quality difference when changing the Streaming Mode in iFi application. It may introduce some clicks and gaps when choosing a wrong setting with upsampling from MP3 to DSD sometimes, but the sound quality does not become different. Why would it affect the sound quality?

 

[john57]

   
I do not hear any sound quality difference when changing the Streaming Mode in iFi application. It may introduce some clicks and gaps when choosing a wrong setting with up-sampling from MP3 to DSD sometimes, but the sound quality does not become different. Why would it affect the sound quality?

The streaming mode effects buffer depth in ms. For me there is a bit of an impact on dynamics and clarity of sound when I change streaming mode. Like I said earlier, you might not hear the the difference. If I was working on my DAW applications I want the lowest Latency I can get away with. For music playback I want the best audio quality settings. There is another setting on the iDSD micro the absolute polarity switch which for the life of me I can not hear any differences at all.

 

[USAudio]

Hi,
As per the post by iFi here:  http://www.head-fi.org/t/711217/idsd-micro-crowd-designed-and-the-new-firmware-flavours-are-here-page-138/660#post_10611007

 ... we are only 3dB (0.5 Bit) off a 20 Bit equivalent SNR

 
So if I read that correctly, that says the iFi Micro iDSD has 19.5 effective bits of resolution?
If so, that's very good for a sub-$500 amp/DAC, eh?!

 

[DomieMic65]

I have a micro on loan for audition which has the 5.0 fw.
When I turn the unit off and put my Mac mini to sleep mode, after I wake up the mini and turn on the Micro it can't connect to the computer even if it shows connected in the sound options menu.
I have to unplug and replug the Micro in order to connect.
My iDSD nano does not have this issue (5.0A). It didn't have it even with the older fw.
Will the 5.0B solve the problem? I don't want to install it on the unit because it isn't mine.
I am considering of upgrading but this is a little frustrating inconvenience...
Thnx

 

[iFi audio]

  Hi,
As per the post by iFi here:  http://www.head-fi.org/t/711217/idsd-micro-crowd-designed-and-the-new-firmware-flavours-are-here-page-138/660#post_10611007
 
So if I read that correctly, that says the iFi Micro iDSD has 19.5 effective bits of resolution?
If so, that's very good for a sub-$500 amp/DAC, eh?!

 
Hi,
 
Yes. But if one wanted to nit pick, then there are small sample variations (as with all chipsets regardless) so say > 19 Bit ENOB on dynamic range.
 
We would not know. We just try to make the best product we can - since the micro iDSD was launched last year, nothing has been launched that does DSD512/PCM768 natively. Nevertheless, we still try to keep pushing the boundaries. While we like 'measures good' as much as the next guy, we like it even better if it sounds good.

 
Cheers.

 

[394216]

Has anyone compared the micro idsd to the new chord mojo? They are in the same price range and Im looking to upgrade to any of the two.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[bloodydoorknob]

I don't have the mojo, but I own both the hugo and iDSD micro.  From what I've read here, the mojo is very similar to the hugo.  The dac section of the micro and hugo are similar to my ears with the hugo sounding slightly more transparent. The amp section of the micro is great, but I find that it can sound a bit harsh and dry in the highs compared to the hugo's headphone out.   For this reason, I run the micro into a ifi ican and it smooths out the highs very nicely without any loss in detail.  I actually prefer this combo over the hugo, but as an all-in-one solution, the hugo wins in my book.     

 

[394216]

I don't have the mojo, but I own both the hugo and iDSD micro.  From what I've read here, the mojo is very similar to the hugo.  The dac section of the micro and hugo are similar to my ears with the hugo sounding slightly more transparent. The amp section of the micro is great, but I find that it can sound a bit harsh and dry in the highs compared to the hugo's headphone out.   For this reason, I run the micro into a ifi ican and it smooths out the highs very nicely without any loss in detail.  I actually prefer this combo over the hugo, but as an all-in-one solution, the hugo wins in my book.     

thanks! What concerns me about the idsd micro is the said channel imbalance. I have pretty sensitive headphones (um3x,a83,he400s and k701).

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

[Hubert481]

You have to use it above 12 o'clock
Otherwise the channel imbalance wont't make you happy

 

[technobear]

I don't have the mojo, but I own both the hugo and iDSD micro.  From what I've read here, the mojo is very similar to the hugo.  The dac section of the micro and hugo are similar to my ears with the hugo sounding slightly more transparent. The amp section of the micro is great, but I find that it can sound a bit harsh and dry in the highs compared to the hugo's headphone out.   For this reason, I run the micro into a ifi ican and it smooths out the highs very nicely without any loss in detail.  I actually prefer this combo over the hugo, but as an all-in-one solution, the hugo wins in my book.     

thanks! What concerns me about the idsd micro is the said channel imbalance. I have pretty sensitive headphones (um3x,a83,he400s and k701).

Why would you be concerned when micro iDSD has IEMatch to ensure that it is the perfect match for sensitive IEMs and others?

 

[technobear]

You have to use it above 12 o'clock
Otherwise the channel imbalance wont't make you happy

The micro iDSD has some channel imbalance below about 9 o'clock.

 

[Dixter]

The imbalance is nothing to be concerned about....   you match the amp output to your headphone with the volume knob at around 12 oclock...   works well that way...