Baten
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2012
- Posts
- 1,911
- Likes
- 1,002
In iFi's BitPerfect philosophy there is No OverSampling (NOS)
iFi audio iDSD Signature - The saga continues!
- Thread starter iFi audio
- Start date
I don't understand how that is possible, given that the Signature, as far as I'm aware, is not balanced internally, and the outputs of both ports are the same.
While I don't know if it isn't one you could find on Ali Express or similar, it's not any common battery unfortunately, though it does seem to be fairly easy to replace.
I've noticed a bit of FR change using Andromedas on the different settings, more so than the 2.5 Ohms would suggest.
If I might burst your bubble, there isn't a "triple unfold" with MQA: It unfolds once to 17/88.2 or 17/96k, then the rest is up-sampling with a select digital filter. Much of this likely has to do with the ADCs used to digitise most music only outputting large amounts of noise above ~50khz, not something you'd want to try and encapsulate. Not to mention, you'd need a huge, 32 bit file to do so. You'll see now DAP makers now advertising "MQA 8x" and "MQA 16x" because MQA was caught out lying about their tech. The differences you hear with MQA files on TIDAL, if any, are due to the tracks being put through some kind of DSP that compresses them and boosts the loudness and bass very often.
i think you are right. I prefer not having MQA capabilities, I pointed it out to show that the firmware clearly was not successfully updated to 5.2 unlike what ifi support has told me, because MQA files (only available in firmware version 5.3) was still being processed instead of DSD 512. I couldn’t careless about mqa files.
No worries. Some people get very hung up on MQA, like it's the second coming, or they aren't up-to-date on what's actually going on.
Dixter
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Posts
- 1,985
- Likes
- 942
Hey Currawong... could you tell us what is the difference between MQA renderer and MQA decoder... I got tricked once when that question was on the setup with Roon...
Can you explain where and when mqa was caught lying about their tech and that’s why they were forced to change?I don't understand how that is possible, given that the Signature, as far as I'm aware, is not balanced internally, and the outputs of both ports are the same.
While I don't know if it isn't one you could find on Ali Express or similar, it's not any common battery unfortunately, though it does seem to be fairly easy to replace.
I've noticed a bit of FR change using Andromedas on the different settings, more so than the 2.5 Ohms would suggest.
If I might burst your bubble, there isn't a "triple unfold" with MQA: It unfolds once to 17/88.2 or 17/96k, then the rest is up-sampling with a select digital filter. Much of this likely has to do with the ADCs used to digitise most music only outputting large amounts of noise above ~50khz, not something you'd want to try and encapsulate. Not to mention, you'd need a huge, 32 bit file to do so. You'll see now DAP makers now advertising "MQA 8x" and "MQA 16x" because MQA was caught out lying about their tech. The differences you hear with MQA files on TIDAL, if any, are due to the tracks being put through some kind of DSP that compresses them and boosts the loudness and bass very often.
Obviously I’m not Currawong, but a decoder is needed to do the first “core” unfold. This can be done in software (Tidal app, Roon, etc.) or in hardware if the DAC has a built in decoder (iFi Pro iDSD, Topping D90 MQA, etc.). The subsequent unfolds can be done by renderers on the DAC hardware side. Renderer only examples are like AudioQuest DragonFlys and iFi’s portable/transportable line (hip dac, iDSD Micro/Nano, etc.). Can read more detailed explanation directly on MQAs site.
EDIT: I also use Roon, so when you’re setting up your DAC you have the option of decoder or renderer, so gotta select what’s right there. Then you also have the option if you want Roon to do the core unfold. If you have a DAC that has a decoder, set it to decoder then you can mess around with if you like the software or the hardware first unfold better. If your DAC is a renderer only you don’t have a choice, you need the software to do the core unfold.
Last edited:
Software can decode and do the first unfold. A render merely renders that first unfold on the device. A hardware decoder then unfolds or other times to the highest mqa resolution of the original file and then plays it back at the designated resolution. Like I believe currawong says, the hardware applies some form of mqa filter back in the final unfold or render that supposedly maintains the original time domain of the file as it was originally intended.
Last edited:
This is all about my ears and my headphones. It does not mean that you should hear the difference). I hear better channel / instrument separation on the 4.4 output.
I have to say that the cables are also different. In addition for 6.3 it also goes through an adapter XLR to 6.3 while for 4.4 this is a single direct cable from plussound audio.
Last edited:
Oh MQA hahaha That's all I'll say
Condocondor
500+ Head-Fier
I have the BL. I used the iSilencer (the new one) and it doesn't hold a candle to the iPurifer3 and/or the iGalvanic. I mean "Whoa".I finally received my IFI idsd signature. It is very similar to blacke label but with subtle but clearly defining enhancements: I notice more detailed highs, it sounds more spacious and definitely, the sound is incredible. I love it, the difference with black label is noticeable, I suppose it will depend on the ear, the cans ... I don't know, if there are people who say they sound the same ... for me, no, not at all, it is not the day and the night, but I hear something that sounds clearly better to me. The IFI idsd signature combination in high gain + isilencer (another gadget that further improves separation and texture) + tidal on ipad pro + Hifiman Arya is simply MAGESTUOUS. I can't stop listening, I love Arya and her three-dimensional effect, her subwoofer, her details ... did I say her three-dimensional soundstage? : P and signature makes them sound great. In case anyone is interested: isilencer is much better than DQ jitterbug (isilencer makes everything sound airier and improves the punch and texture of the bass, DQ just makes it sound sweeter) and IFI idsd signature is much better than Mojo, for my signature sounds more natural, much more airy and much better bass (maybe mojo reveals more micro-details but I notice that signature has come closer to black label in this sense), but in general terms, although there are times when we cannot walk in counter clockwise, if I went back, I would always buy IFI idsd signature, isilencier and Arya again. I am not saying that my impressions are an absolute truth, but if it is what I feel, what I hear and perhaps my thoughts will help someone
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2013
- Posts
- 16,673
- Likes
- 12,487
As far as MQA goes, yes!
Has anyone succeeded in playing DSD 512 on their ifi micro iDSD signature?
I just got my review unit in. It has that nice “warm and detailed” iFi sound I like so much. Looking forward to testing the Sig with a bunch of headphones.
Quick question. Considering the Hifiman Arya. Will the Signature be able to drive them?
Users who are viewing this thread
