Why doesn't iFi make an audiophile phone?
As much as we see value in smartphones (everyone has one!) and we believe they are the future of streaming, iFi is still solely focused on audio products. Hence, we have no plans to make a smartphone. Crumbs, we won’t do a better phone than Apple, audiophile or not! We’re sticking to what we know. In addition, smartphones are moving towards wireless. As a manufacturer, we’re concentrating on keeping our products ahead of the game.
Come on, somebody ask why hasn't iFi created their own R2R portable DAC amp?
As much as we like R2R technology, (it is, in fact, embedded in digital products released in the past under the AMR brand), it doesn’t work equally well for everything. We design our products to be as future-proofed as possible, (MQA, DSD, DXD and so on), which is why we don’t use R2R tech in our gear.
Discrete R2R, especially without laser trimming, or other similar solutions do not perform all that well. The technology itself is trivial, without any challenges beyond the resistor matrix precision (0.0005% precision resistors are required to produce < ½ LSB error at 16-bit) and switches (ideally multiple BJTs on a single IC). Early DACs in CD players were made like that.
(photo courtesy: Texas Instruments)
Fully laser-trimmed integrated R2R DAC chips perform better. We still consider the Philips TDA1541 as unbeaten for a multibit (16-bit chip), precisely because it is not typical R2R tech. It runs on active current steering. This circuitry is too complex for discrete options and it needs many transistors kept at the same exact temperature. This is not really practical in discrete designs.
R2R DACs also have problems with low signal levels, which is what Delta Sigma DACs avoid. Conversely Delta Sigma (including DSD) technology performs relatively poorly at high signal levels in comparison to multibit solutions.
That’s why we prefer hybrids; multibit architecture for high signal levels, (the so-called upper bits of the MSBs), and high speed (DSD256 or higher) Delta Sigma topology for lower signal levels. The Burr-Brown DSD1793 we’ve been using so much is one such hybrid and one of the best options for us.
Are there any plans to improve the volume control in the micro iDSD BL? A balanced version using a 4.4mm output + decent volume control + Bluetooth would be amazing.
Are there any plans for portable devices using 4.4mm output?
Will you continue to use the same Burr-Brown DAC in the foreseeable future?
1. Although there are no plans to tweak the micro iDSD Black Label, its successor (if one where ever to be created!?!?) will be designed with all the feedback from you guys taken into account. We’re lucky to have you and your wealth of knowledge and ideas to draw from.
2. To better the analogue volume control currently inside our micro iDSD BL, would mean a fundamental circuit re-design.
3. Your comments have been noted and passed onto R&D! We introduce them as soon as we can, so stay tuned!
4. We like it a lot, but we don't know exactly which DAC chips we'll use in the future.
(photo courtesy: Texas Instruments)
Why the different design language among the different iFi products? From nano to micro to Pro to ZEN to xDSD to Aurora, it all looks different from each other compared to say Apple products where the various designs are more cohesive.
Different products require different approaches and often also different ‘looks’. Broadly-speaking, we strive to design each product to be as appealing as it can be and we like styling diversity. Audio is funky and fun. Plus, we're no Apple. We're iFi
When is the successor for the micro iDSD Black Label coming out?
If and when it's ready
Jesting aside, any new products will take a different tack. They will be more dedicated to portable or desktop as can be seen with the hip-dac and ZEN series respectively. But watch out, for if and when a successor does come out, it would need to be one beast of a devil.
I have question regarding proper Roon support with iFi iDSD Pro and possibly other devices. Current bridge solution is simply not for everyone (Windows only) and just feels like shortcut. Do you plan to make iFi devices Roon compatible?
As we've explained in the past, it's not possible to have our Pro iDSD fully Roon Ready as we've already maxed out its internal CPU! This product wasn't designed to have Roon endpoint functionality as this would require hardware alterations. We've found a different way to ‘skin this cat’ in the form of the iFi Bridge, please see here:
Realistically, that's all we could do for our Pro iDSD without making changes inside it.
Nonetheless, we're aware of how important Roon is for consumers, which is why we take it into account in our developments.
Wasn't the xDSD supposed to be the successor to the micro iDSD Black Label, or in order words, iFi's flagship portable DAC/amp?
Our xDSD was designed to be something else, our first portable product with wireless functionality. As such, it doesn't compete with the micro iDSD Black Label.
Oh, and what do you guys think about DAPs?
We like DAPs, but we like amps, DACs and their combinations even more
To tack on a question for the spirit of the thread, there’s a massive gap in the product lineup desktop DAC/amp with balanced output and MQA support with the Zen at $129 and Pro iDSD starting at $2,500. Can we expect something in the middle for those who want a higher quality DAC/amp than the ZEN and don’t need the bells and whistles of the Pro (like streaming, DSD1024, etc)?
To fully address this question we'd have to reveal some of our plans, which is something we can't do until we're ready. However, we're aware of the importance of MQA and the need for some middle ground.
Why do you continue to flirt with the idea of discontinuing the micro iUSB 3.0? There is clearly still a demand for it and you guys haven't announced a replacement and have indicated you probably have nothing in the pipeline to replace it with.
It’s true, we had thought about discontinuing it but customers keep asking for it, so we have made restarted production!
Why does the Pro iCAN have so many different outputs? Surely a single balanced and a single trs output would've been enough?
Why does the Pro iCAN not turn off preamp outs when headphones are connected?
Why do remotes for Pro iCAN and Pro iDSD control only volume and not any other function (such as inputs) ?
Why did the company make a switch to Sabre DAC chips with the ZEN line?
1. As a manufacturer, we've always been into providing our customers with as much choice as we can. Our top of the line headphone amp, the Pro iCAN was designed to be as versatile a platform as we could possibly make. That's the reason why it has so many things going on its front, rear and inside too! Also, many possible connections allow users to get by without adapters. Adapters are never a good thing.
2. Headphones that are connected to the Pro iCAN via a XLR plug can’t be detected. This is why the line outputs can’t be automatically turned off.
3. The Pro iCAN is a desktop product. A remote volume control was what was most in demand at the time. Adjusting the volume is probably the most common thing we do with our gear from the comfort of an armchair. Plus, adding all the other switches to the remote was pretty much a no-go really.
4. We've always used DAC chips that are most suitable for the job we need them to do. That's why the Sabre DAC was a better choice for our ZEN series.
ESS Sabre chips aren’t new to us, we used these in the original iDAC. There are some applications where the Burr-Brown DSD1793 (which we like so much!) does not function as well as it could. Where that’s the case, then we use the next best (subjectively) sounding chip available. The ZEN DAC uses the Burr-Brown DSD1793, yes. But the ESS Sabre chip inside the ZEN Blue has the advantage of eliminating jitter at the source. This is why in this application the ESS chip sounds better than a DSD1793. We needed a chip that could counteract the extremely high jitter (~10,000ps) clocks of the Bluetooth chipset.
So you receive remuneration in gourmet food and beverages? I find that my best cognac complements my iFi gear very well, what booze are they bribing you with?
I’m partial to German beer and Stoli. Oh and Moët et Chandon.
I really wanna know when you guys are going to make your own DAP?
That's very unlikely, but who knows, perhaps one day we will. Never say never
But at this juncture, we don’t see DAPs as growing in popularity which is why we are hesitant in investing resources in this direction.
@iFi audio from this Q&A with Thorsten Loesch about PCM vs DSD
https://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-thorsten-loesch-amrifi-audiostream-addendum-pcm-vs-dsd
He says:
"If we convert from 24-Bit at 352.8KHz (DXD-PCM) to 1-Bit at 2.822MHz (DSD) – we need to throw away around 99.96% of the amplitude information the PCM format is capable off, while we are only having 12.5% of the time domain information that the DSD system is capable of. If we convert to DSD to DXD, that is 1-Bit at 2.822MHz to 24-Bit at 352.8kHz – we need to throw away 87.5% of the time domain information of DSD, though we can theoretically remap all of this into the amplitude domain. So in effect we get the worst of both formats, rather than the best of one."
1. Where does this throwing away 87.5% of time domain info come from? I know that 352.8/2822 = 0.125 but how does this actually result in time domain info being thrown away?
2. The quote above is obviously referring to conversion from PCM352.8 kHz to DSD64... So, following on from Q1 above, do things improve with conversion (upsampling) of 352.8kHz to 11.2896 MHz (DSD256)? In terms of time domain info? Or do things get worse in terms of throwing away time domain info?
3. What are technical thoughts about upsampling PCM to high DSD rates (DSD256 and above).
1. Yes, sampling at a much lower rate cannot describe a transient waveform as well in the time domain. Please think about 24 frames per second versus 60/120/240Hz refresh rates. The frame number does not matter if a picture is steady, however with rapidly moving images? It does!
2. Upsampling cannot restore time or previously lost amplitude domain information. At best, if upsampling to infinity, no additional losses occur. In reality, any form of upsampling is lossy.
3. In the purely digital domain sense, without considering conversion to analogue, any sample rate conversion (upsampling) is lossy and thus best avoided. In a system comprised of a DAC, analogue stages, amplifiers and speakers, the end result from the
whole system may subjectively favour the upsampled result in spite of objective losses.
It is a highly intriguing subject and one which needs more hard science applied to it before we can make anymore statements here.
Can i use digital input (USB2.0 type A) of the nano iDSD BL, to connect it to Hiby R3's (DAP) digital out (usb type C)?
Will it work following this way of connectivity? Hiby R3 supports connectivity this way, i already use the iBASSO DC01 dongle in this way.
In addition to this, I use with all of my IEMs, balanced 2.5 TRRS out cables, and for use on DAPs with single ended 3.5mm output, I use a 2.5mm to 3.5mm adaptor.
Will this be a problem with the nano iDSD BL? I mean the use of a 2.5 to 3.5 adaptor? Will this way provide balanced connectivity there?
Lastly......is there any real audible difference between iMatch and direct inputs? I have read the specs on output impedance on both of the inputs and all of my DAPs obtain at most 1 Ohm output impedance
1. If you intend to use the HiBy as a transport and the nano iDSD BL as a DAC/amp combo, then yes, that's how you connect the two.
2. The nano iDSD BL's 3.5mm headphone out is S-Balanced, which means that it'll accept regular (TRS) and balanced (TRRS) 3.5mm jacks.
3. The iEMatch output was designed to transparently provide more headroom for very sensitive loads, mainly iEMs. As such, it doesn't sound different.
Any chance of 4.4 mm trrs iEMatch version? Or, even better, iEMatch as 2.4, 3.5 and 4.4 mm connectors for soldering? Thank you.
We got multiple questions about these items and we're looking into this. Watch this space!
I thought he left iFi / Abbingdon (parent company of iFi)? His LinkedIn page shows:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/thorsten-loesch-studio-raumklangg/
I stepped away from my daily duties as director to spend more time with my family and work on recording and sound reinforcement projects (returning to my Pro roots), which are interesting to me but less so for AMR/iFi.
As an active shareholder, I continue oversee the design and tuning at AMR/iFi along with others. And reply to the odd question.
sra1 portable direct drive raal
The Raal Requisite SRA1 is a very unique product. We've heard it and we've enjoyed it thoroughly, however, at this point the item you mentioned is beyond our scope.
What could be done to improve the micro iDSD BL...for $1200....for *$1800? Where would you start? Where would you put the extra money? Matched components? Better USB? Balanced?
In a way it’s not really a question of money, but more about what improvements are desired. Our Pro iDSD shares many fundamentals with the micro iDSD (both the regular & BL versions). The former’s more substantial budget not only allowed for additional features, but also unlocked alternative approaches to analogue circuitry.
Could we make a portable Pro iDSD version at say 1800 USD and without tubes? In principle yes, we could. But would such an item make commercial sense? Now that remains to be seen. If it does…
Is the ZEN DAC a full MQA decoder or a renderer like the AQ Dragonflys?
So in TIDAL Windows application should I set Passtrough MQA?
If this option is used can I see the magenta (MQA) colour behind the volume knob, or with the GTO filter installed I can see only the yellow colour?
I ordered a ZEN DAC Yesterday. Is the GTO filter installed at factory or in any case I have to download it and install it after purchase?
Is there any way back if I like the original sound of the device compared with the GTO filter? If yes how to do it?
1. The ZEN DAC is a MQA renderer.
2. Correct.
3. These are LED colors you should see. Magenta indicates MQA and yellow tells you that the GTO filter is engaged.
4. The ZEN DAC was launched with the GTO firmware already installed. Read more about the GTO filter here:
https://ifi-audio.com/downloads/
...and scroll down to the 'other iFi firmware' tab, thanks!
