[diamondears]

I think I've sufficiently burned-in my iFi micro iDSD...and wow. Can't imagine something better than this. That iFi house sound is just plain great. I'd say the GREATEST house sound I've heard. Makes very very good sense that iFi insisted on that 1794 DSD1793DAC chip. And there's no sacrifice in details doing that, unbelievable. Details on all frequency ranges are all there, no trade-offs---lower bass, upper bass, lower midrange, upper midrange, lower treble, upper treble...alto, tenor, soprano......they're there. Anybody into headphones SHOULD try this marvel. Aplogies for the outburst...

 
Question for iFi/Mike: Would using Normal Power mode over Eco Mode have benefits, objectively and subjectively? Like more lower midrange and more overall bass body/mass, digs deeper into lower frequencies, etc.? Or does it just really affect the volume/knob/attenuator range?
 

 

 

[BillsonChang007]

I think I've sufficiently burned-in my iFi micro iDSD...and wow. Can't imagine something better than this. That iFi house sound is just plain great. I'd say the GREATEST house sound I've heard. Makes very very good sense that iFi insisted on that 1794 DAC chip. And there's no sacrifice in details doing that, unbelievable. Details on all frequency ranges are all there, no trade-offs---lower bass, upper bass, lower midrange, upper midrange, lower treble, upper treble...alto, tenor, soprano......they're there. Anybody into headphones SHOULD try this marvel. Aplogies for the outburst...:atsmile:

Question for iFi/Mike: Would using Normal Power mode over Eco Mode have benefits, objectively and subjectively? Like more lower midrange and more overall bass body/mass, digs deeper into lower frequencies, etc.? Or does it just really affect the volume/knob/attenuator range?

AFAIK, the power switch difference is only output power difference and small changes to the output impedance.

Hope it helps!
Billson

 

[maricius]

DSD1793** DAC Chip hehe but I agree with your impressions. I've finally heard better though. It took a while. Chord QBD76 HDSD DAC feeding an HDVD800 (amp section) feeding a balanced HD800. Substantially better but that DAC alone cost around $7000 more… Overall, I have yet to come across a headphone or IEM that doesn't pair well or improve substantially with the iDSD, even the cheap Xiaomi Piston 2 or the Soundmagic ES20. It has great synergy as a whole system. I do wish to hear the Hugo. 

 

[diamondears]

  DSD1793** DAC Chip hehe but I agree with your impressions. I've finally heard better though. It took a while. Chord QBD76 HDSD DAC feeding an HDVD800 (amp section) feeding a balanced HD800. Substantially better but that DAC alone cost around $7000 more… Overall, I have yet to come across a headphone or IEM that doesn't pair well or improve substantially with the iDSD, even the cheap Xiaomi Piston 2 or the Soundmagic ES20. It has great synergy as a whole system. I do wish to hear the Hugo. 

Stand corrected...I'm not good on numbers...

 
The Hugo? You compared it with micro iDSD with same amp and same HP and same recording?

 

[jexby]

  I think I've sufficiently burned-in my iFi micro iDSD...and wow. Can't imagine something better than this. That iFi house sound is just plain great. I'd say the GREATEST house sound I've heard. Makes very very good sense that iFi insisted on that 1794 DSD1793DAC chip. And there's no sacrifice in details doing that, unbelievable. Details on all frequency ranges are all there, no trade-offs---lower bass, upper bass, lower midrange, upper midrange, lower treble, upper treble...alto, tenor, soprano......they're there. Anybody into headphones SHOULD try this marvel. 

 
I don't want to retract any hype, as the micro iDSD is my favorite single DAC+Amp combo I've ever owned, but a couple clarifying questions:
 
1.  haven't seen anyone summarize the "House Sound" of iFi.  my interpretation is:  musical, clear, detailed, in sync.
but not overly warm or bass/treble/mid heavy.
so what is the House Sound?
 
2.  HE-560 and micro iDSD could benefit from some additional soundstage width/height IMHO.  otherwise yes, the amp section is pretty sweet and matches up perfectly with other IEMs and of course HP50.

 

[BillsonChang007]

I have not tried any other iFi toys so I cant comment on the "iFi house soun" part but I agree that the Micro iDSD is indeed very musical and detailed.

 

[maricius]

 
Stand corrected...I'm not good on numbers...

 
The Hugo? You compared it with micro iDSD with same amp and same HP and same recording?

Nope. I wish to hear it. 

Originally Posted by jexby /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
2.  HE-560 and micro iDSD could benefit from some additional soundstage width/height IMHO.  otherwise yes, the amp section is pretty sweet and matches up perfectly with other IEMs and of course HP50.

 
I found width to be excellent but then again I'm coming from the Fidelio L2 (just good width with excellent depth). I found the pairing with the HE-560 to be lacking in soundstage depth and it still sounded a little hollow, a little too bright. Maybe a change of cable, Focus A pads, or a nice tube/hybrid tube amp would fix those. 

 

[diamondears]

   
I don't want to retract any hype, as the micro iDSD is my favorite single DAC+Amp combo I've ever owned, but a couple clarifying questions:
 
1.  haven't seen anyone summarize the "House Sound" of iFi.  my interpretation is:  musical, clear, detailed, in sync.
but not overly warm or bass/treble/mid heavy.
so what is the House Sound?
 
2.  HE-560 and micro iDSD could benefit from some additional soundstage width/height IMHO.  otherwise yes, the amp section is pretty sweet and matches up perfectly with other IEMs and of course HP50.

Its hard to describe. Its the sort of sound that you gotta hear to know it for sure. As already said in here by iFi audio themselves, that house sound comes primarily from the chip used--the DSD1793 chip. Interestingly, the HRT iStreamer has the PCM1793 DAC chip, which I have and happen to really love the sound of.
 
My best description would be just a little and right/perfect amount of "huskysilky-ness" (for lack of better word) thrown in without being sibilant nor grainy nor being too smooth...and also with the perfect amount of lower deep bass "mass" or "body" inserted. These are the sound characteristics that distinguishes its house sound. The things you mentioned--musical, clear, detailed, in sync---can be true to any other sound, but IMO it won't capture iFi's house sound properly. For me, "husky-ness" and "deep lower bass body mass" would. Its truly an amazing and likeable sound signature. I'm even hesitant to describe them because that might wrongfully capture that house sound as different persons have different interpretations and imaginations. You have to HEAR it. And you have to compare it with other sounds to distinguish it.
 
All the details are there, so its very detailed...but the details were not brought out by cranking up certain frequencies. Its truly unexplainable. Maybe that's why even iFi themselves can't explain why they chose that DAC chip (despite other chips being technically having more) except to say that its because of its SOUND--that house sound.

 

[diamondears]

 
Nope. I wish to hear it. 
 
I found width to be excellent but then again I'm coming from the Fidelio L2 (just good width with excellent depth). I found the pairing with the HE-560 to be lacking in soundstage depth and it still sounded a little hollow, a little too bright. Maybe a change of cable, Focus A pads, or a nice tube/hybrid tube amp would fix those. 

Oops, sorry, meant to ask the ChordQB you mentioned, not Hugo.
 
Yes, agree width is excellent, moreso with the 3D (and XBass on to offset the extra treble from 3D). I've heard the HE-560 with the micro iDSD and I have the same impressions, though IMO its mainly due to the HP, not the micro iDSD. The HE-560 is quite detailed on the upper registers, so that made the vocals and high frequency instruments more forward than normal.
 
But with the LCD-2, the micro iDSD is perfection. Now I'm really waiting for that mini iDSD with balanced HP out jacks!

 

[ClieOS]

... 1.  haven't seen anyone summarize the "House Sound" of iFi.  my interpretation is:  musical, clear, detailed, in sync.
but not overly warm or bass/treble/mid heavy.
so what is the House Sound?
...

 
Having used most of iFi gears for awhile, my impression is that they are not looking for any particular strong flavor of house sound in their gears. If anything, I'll say it is mostly neutral with a very slight touch of warmth, retaining clearness and transparency without being bland or colored. All and all, not too far from your definition.
 
p/s: A strong house sound can be both a good an bad thing, I was posting in a Chinese forum a few days ago, saying that I didn't find the richer / denser sounding Hugo to be that much of an upgrade over iDSD micro and I was instantly branded a shill because apparently they regard a denser / richer sound to be a "more correct" sound than something more neutral, so I must be either a disguised sale agent from iFi or just plain deaf. The attack on personal level is so horrendous that there is no way to talk any sense into them. Make me feel a lot of comfort in that we don't need to resolve to name calling to prove a point in HF.

 

[diamondears]

The right word, I think, is SILKY-SMOOTH, with that SILKY-SMOOTHNESS coming from the upper frequencies, passing into the midrange, and all the way into the deep lower bass...

 

[diamondears]

   
Having used most of iFi gears for awhile, my impression is that they are not looking for any particular strong flavor of house sound in their gears. If anything, I'll say it is mostly neutral with a very slight touch of warmth, retaining clearness and transparency without being bland or colored. All and all, not too far from your definition.
 
p/s: A strong house sound can be both a good an bad thing, I was posting in a Chinese forum a few days ago, saying that I didn't find the richer / denser sounding Hugo to be that much of an upgrade over iDSD micro and I was instantly branded a shill because apparently they regard a denser / richer sound to be a "more correct" sound than something more neutral, so I must be either a disguised sale agent from iFi or just plain deaf. The attack on personal level is so horrendous that there is no way to talk any sense into them. Make me feel a lot of comfort in that we don't need to resolve to name calling to prove a point in HF.

Hard to tell that to people who've spent 4 times as much...

  They're actually reacting to someone telling them they just wasted US$2,000...

 

[diamondears]

 
Hard to tell that to people who've spent 4 times as much...

  They're actually reacting to someone telling them they just wasted US$2,000...

And yet, no DSD 512..

 

[maricius]

  Oops, sorry, meant to ask the ChordQB you mentioned, not Hugo.
 
Yes, agree width is excellent, moreso with the 3D (and XBass on to offset the extra treble from 3D). I've heard the HE-560 with the micro iDSD and I have the same impressions, though IMO its mainly due to the HP, not the micro iDSD. The HE-560 is quite detailed on the upper registers, so that made the vocals and high frequency instruments more forward than normal.
 
But with the LCD-2, the micro iDSD is perfection. Now I'm really waiting for that mini iDSD with balanced HP out jacks!

 
The LCD-2 with the iDSD had amazing bass and vocals. The depth was spectacular. I could actually imagine a band in front or say the vocalist with the band behind. If the LCD-2 was a little more airy, had more width, a smidgeon clearer, it would be perfect… Maybe that's why there are the LCD-3 and LCD-XC (which I wish to hear but are still sadly past my budget of how much I'd ever spend for a single item). Maybe there's an Alpha Prime in my future. With balanced being quite a popular choice, I was surprised it wasn't a feature on the iDSD… but in retrospect… there doesn't seem to be much space left. Ditto the Chord Hugo. 
 
Regarding the ChordQB setup, the comparison was done with an HD800 on single ended with the Micro iDSD as standalone and balanced with the Chord QB feeding the HDVD800 amp section. Very unfair comparison but the iDSD doesn't embarrass itself. It's just that that set-up was meant for the HD800 (arranged by a local retailer for a big meet). 
 
 

   
Having used most of iFi gears for awhile, my impression is that they are not looking for any particular strong flavor of house sound in their gears. If anything, I'll say it is mostly neutral with a very slight touch of warmth, retaining clearness and transparency without being bland or colored. All and all, not too far from your definition.
 
p/s: A strong house sound can be both a good an bad thing, I was posting in a Chinese forum a few days ago, saying that I didn't find the richer / denser sounding Hugo to be that much of an upgrade over iDSD micro and I was instantly branded a shill because apparently they regard a denser / richer sound to be a "more correct" sound than something more neutral, so I must be either a disguised sale agent from iFi or just plain deaf. The attack on personal level is so horrendous that there is no way to talk any sense into them. Make me feel a lot of comfort in that we don't need to resolve to name calling to prove a point in HF.

I've seen something similar or possibly worse… it was like backstabbing and not minding the poster right in front of him. Anyways, comparisons with the Hugo have been… contradictory amongst people. Some say the Hugo is warmer, bassier, and more musical while being more resolute while some say the Hugo is slightly more resolute and with slightly greater technicalities at the expense of musicality and warmth relative to the iDSD. Which would you find to have more bass quantity and extension? The Hugo right or do you mean by richer/denser to be mostly in the midrange? Is the soundstage and imaging obviously better on the Hugo? Thanks in advance!! I'm trying to conclude what I'd be getting and losing in changing the iDSD into a Hugo and also if it would be the worth the additional costs.
 
 
 
To anyone here, has anyone here been able to compare the micro iDSD with the AK240 either as DAC only or as a DAC/amp on something they can equally drive well? 

 

[diamondears]

   
The LCD-2 with the iDSD had amazing bass and vocals. The depth was spectacular. I could actually imagine a band in front or say the vocalist with the band behind. If the LCD-2 was a little more airy, had more width, a smidgeon clearer, it would be perfect… Maybe that's why there are the LCD-3 and LCD-XC (which I wish to hear but are still sadly past my budget of how much I'd ever spend for a single item). Maybe there's an Alpha Prime in my future. With balanced being quite a popular choice, I was surprised it wasn't a feature on the iDSD… but in retrospect… there doesn't seem to be much space left. Ditto the Chord Hugo. 
 
Regarding the ChordQB setup, the comparison was done with an HD800 on single ended with the Micro iDSD as standalone and balanced with the Chord QB feeding the HDVD800 amp section. Very unfair comparison but the iDSD doesn't embarrass itself. It's just that that set-up was meant for the HD800 (arranged by a local retailer for a big meet). 
 
 

I've seen something similar or possibly worse… it was like backstabbing and not minding the poster right in front of him. Anyways, comparisons with the Hugo have been… contradictory amongst people. Some say the Hugo is warmer, bassier, and more musical while being more resolute while some say the Hugo is slightly more resolute and with slightly greater technicalities at the expense of musicality and warmth relative to the iDSD. Which would you find to have more bass quantity and extension? The Hugo right or do you mean by richer/denser to be mostly in the midrange? Is the soundstage and imaging obviously better on the Hugo? Thanks in advance!! I'm trying to conclude what I'd be getting and losing in changing the iDSD into a Hugo and also if it would be the worth the additional costs.
 
 
 
To anyone here, has anyone here been able to compare the micro iDSD with the AK240 either as DAC only or as a DAC/amp on something they can equally drive well? 

Which LCD-2 you tried? Try the LCD-2 with Fazors. It solved the things you're longing for in the LCD-2. But the LCD-2 Rev. 2 has more in the lower registers, sort of a trade-off. The graphs are exactly correct on this as that's what I hear as well. The micro iDSD's XBass boost on deep bass not bleeding into the midrange really solves this. So with the micro iDSD, you can have the LCD-2 Rev. 2's bass and LCD-3's more airy treble/mids all at the same time. Ain't that great?