[iFi audio]

  iFi Audio Team,
 
If there is not already a list of known of approved devices that the micro iDSD works with, maybe there could be one? Perhaps posted on your webite?
I am in the same boat as rebeljeff, I own a OnePlue One device and it looks like the micro iDSD work work properly with it.
 
I am will to be there are other forum members who havewondered the same thing.
 
Thanks in advance and thanks for a great product!
 
Regards,
 
Eric

 
Hi,
 
Background
Android is not a "monolithic" Operating system like Windows, OSX and iOS. It is more like a Meccano-Erector set of parts.
 
What is included in the final unit depends on hardware and what the company decided to included of the software.
 
There are waaaay too many devices to test.
 
UAPP maintains a list of devices known to work with their software, but likely non of the devices in this list work for System Audio, only via UAPP.
 
As far as we know (as we cannot test every existing and new product out there), currently the Sony XPERIA Z2 and Z3 range (Phones of all sizes and tablets) are the only Android devices that support sending the System Audio (including app's like Spotify and Tidal) to a USB Audio Class 2.0 DAC and for Z2 only since a few months back when a new version system software became available. The original XPERIA Z series does not support this (yet?).
 
So, going back to the OP, the Sony is the one for his needs (at this moment in time).
 
 
More in-depth
On the support ticket system, we send out an Android Setup Guide which reads likes this:
 

1. Android device that can run Android 4.1 or above
2. USB Host mode has been enabled by the Android manufacturer
3. Android device running Android Open Accessory (AOA) protocol version 2.0

These two resources are very useful and are being constantly updated.
 
For a list of Android devices supported:
1. http://www.extreamsd.com/USBAudioRecorderPRO/
This is updated on almost a daily basis. Davy Wentzler is the main guy behind eXtream software development.
 
2. http://www.head-fi.org/t/595071/android-phones-and-usb-dacs/1140

If it conforms to the above specifications, then it will work with the nano iDSD or any other USB Audio Class 2.0 compatible DAC for that matter.

We prefer USB Audio Player Pro (UAPP) or Hi-Res Walkman app (Sony only of course).

Our test platform for Androids consists of:
-Sony Xperia Z Ultra / Z2 phone / Z2 tablet (Z3 has slightly proessor so is virtually identical to the Z2)
-USB Audio Player Pro Software/Hi-Res Walkman app (which converts DSD/PCM176)
-Generic OTG adapter
-several Kingston Class 10 64G micro SDHC Card's filled with DSD, DSD128, DSD256 and Hi-Rez PCM
-iDSD nano or iDSD micro (with necessary adapters)
-Noise Cancelling travel headphones (mobile)
-Fostex T(L)-50RP magnetic planar Headphones

The Z-series have powerful CPUs to keep and enough internal storage that the SD Card can be used strictly as Music (or Video) storage.
 
The latest version (1.4.7) plays DSD (up to DSD256 on iDSD micro/nano) stable and of course any PCM file we have been throwing at it, as long as they are stored on Class 10 SDHC cards.

The latest version of UAPP also supports playing music from Network drives, however on wireless networks going for Hi-Rez quickly chokes on a lack of network bandwidth.
 
The main headache is that there are far too many Android models out there to keep track of and the situation is changing almost on a daily basis.

 

[ImperialBlade]

Hello iFi Team,
 
Thanks for the reply! Looks like my OnePlus One will work when I use the OTG cable, sweet!
 
Thanks again!
 
Regards,
 
Eric

 

[ultraman]

HibyMusic and UAPP is working on my OnePlus One but Spotify is not.
 
Oneplus--OTG--IDSD

 

[thisisvv]

Hi all,
 
getting this device on saturday, wanted to ask has anyone used this with LCD-3...., currently i am using a adcom dac with ray samuels Raptor amplifier with lcd-3...was wondering hows the ifi idsd as an amp is...i know it is a great dac what i have heard...
 
on sme note has anyone used hqplayer with this device...
 
V

 

[Triodemode]

  Hi all,
 
getting this device on saturday, wanted to ask has anyone used this with LCD-3...., currently i am using a adcom dac with ray samuels Raptor amplifier with lcd-3...was wondering hows the ifi idsd as an amp is...i know it is a great dac what i have heard...
 
on sme note has anyone used hqplayer with this device...
 
V

Just read reviews and product literature regarding your Ray Samuels Raptor.  The headphone amp in the iDSD is not bad for utilizing 10 year old conventional chip based circuitry however, the Raptor (at least from a design standpoint) is in a completely different league.  That being said, I would bet the fantastic DAC section in the iDSD micro will sound better than that older Adcom piece.

 

[thisisvv]

 
Just read reviews and product literature regarding your Ray Samuels Raptor.  The headphone amp in the iDSD is not bad for utilizing 10 year old conventional chip based circuitry however, the Raptor (at least from a design standpoint) is in a completely different league.  That being said, I would bet the fantastic DAC section in the iDSD micro will sound better than that older Adcom piece.

No doubt about DAC, was trying to know the AMP side of it....
 
V

 

[BillsonChang007]

As a STANDALONE amp with the Micro iDSD, the amp is very powerful and shouldnt be a problem driving your Audeze. I am not sure how does Audeze sound but the Micro iDSD's amp section is more on the lean side. Other than that, it is transparent, and clean sounding amp.

 

[fleemur12]

thisisvv, my guess would be that you will notice a difference using the micro iDSD vis–à–vis it's DAC compared to using an older Adcom DAC unit, but that isn't your question. 
 
As a headphone amp, the iDSD micro is an amazing unit and it blows the doors off of some more expensive units out there.  The real strength of the iDSDs amp is it's incredible versatility.  It can basically drive any set of cans out there, from the most power-hungry to the most frugal.  This is because it has the ability to provide up to 1560 mW of continuous power (4,000 mW peak) plus it is incredibly adjustable and can be tailor-fit.  I agree with BillsonChang007 that the iDSD micro will have no problems driving your LCD-3s.  While it may run a little lean sonically, it may not be noticeable to you, as my understanding is the Raptor is on the lean side as well, at least compared to other tube amps. 
 
I have never had the pleasure of listening to the Emmeline II Raptor or anything made by Ray Samuels Audio, so I'm going to base my opinion on what I've read about the Raptor and on my personal experience with the iDSD.  I would therefore take it with a grain of salt.  You have been forewarned! 
 
The two units seem to have the ability to provide enough power to drive power-hungry cans AND both units apparently have very low noise floors.  Based on this, I think that the iDSD micro will be quite similar to the Raptor as an amp in terms of their ability to drive the LCD-3s.  (On a side note, I can attest to the IDSD having a low noise floor, at least to my ears and compared to one other DAC/amp.  The first thing I noticed about the iDSD (compared to my Teac UD-501) is that it had no detectable floor noise.  It still blows me away weeks later.  Since I've never heard the Raptor, however, I cannot make any statement on how it compares to the iDSD.) 
 
All this being said, you are going to notice a difference when you add the iDSD because you will be able to make more adjustments to the characteristics of the amp.  Plus, the DAC components of the iDSD are going to be technically more advanced than those found in the Adcom.  Incidentally, which Adcom DAC do you have?  Generally, the older the unit, the greater the advance in technology between the units will exist, so if you're using a GDA-600, prepare to hear a difference.  I'm very interested in hearing your feedback after you've listened to the iDSD. 
 
Incidentally, I still have an Adcom GTP-350 preamp/tuner and GFA-535II amp driving a pair of Paradigm 5se MKIIs I bought about 21 years ago.  It's not a bad-sounding set-up for the money. 

 

[fleemur12]

A quick update.  I've been listening to my iCan micro in my iFi stack for a couple of days now, and the increase in soundstage and sonic detail is remarkable.  I eventually need to get some audio analysis software to support my observations.  I'm done writing tonight between work, eBay and this board, so I'm keeping this short and I'll see if I have permission to post pics yet. 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 
A pic of my previous DAC -
 

 

[BillsonChang007]

That is one tidy desktop set up!

 

[Triodemode]

  thisisvv, my guess would be that you will notice a difference using the micro iDSD vis–à–vis it's DAC compared to using an older Adcom DAC unit, but that isn't your question. 
 
As a headphone amp, the iDSD micro is an amazing unit and it blows the doors off of some more expensive units out there.  The real strength of the iDSDs amp is it's incredible versatility.  It can basically drive any set of cans out there, from the most power-hungry to the most frugal.  This is because it has the ability to provide up to 1560 mW of continuous power (4,000 mW peak) plus it is incredibly adjustable and can be tailor-fit.  I agree with BillsonChang007 that the iDSD micro will have no problems driving your LCD-3s.  While it may run a little lean sonically, it may not be noticeable to you, as my understanding is the Raptor is on the lean side as well, at least compared to other tube amps. 
 
I have never had the pleasure of listening to the Emmeline II Raptor or anything made by Ray Samuels Audio, so I'm going to base my opinion on what I've read about the Raptor and on my personal experience with the iDSD.  I would therefore take it with a grain of salt.  You have been forewarned! 
 
The two units seem to have the ability to provide enough power to drive power-hungry cans AND both units apparently have very low noise floors.  Based on this, I think that the iDSD micro will be quite similar to the Raptor as an amp in terms of their ability to drive the LCD-3s.  (On a side note, I can attest to the IDSD having a low noise floor, at least to my ears and compared to one other DAC/amp.  The first thing I noticed about the iDSD (compared to my Teac UD-501) is that it had no detectable floor noise.  It still blows me away weeks later.  Since I've never heard the Raptor, however, I cannot make any statement on how it compares to the iDSD.) 
 
All this being said, you are going to notice a difference when you add the iDSD because you will be able to make more adjustments to the characteristics of the amp.  Plus, the DAC components of the iDSD are going to be technically more advanced than those found in the Adcom.  Incidentally, which Adcom DAC do you have?  Generally, the older the unit, the greater the advance in technology between the units will exist, so if you're using a GDA-600, prepare to hear a difference.  I'm very interested in hearing your feedback after you've listened to the iDSD. 
 
Incidentally, I still have an Adcom GTP-350 preamp/tuner and GFA-535II amp driving a pair of Paradigm 5se MKIIs I bought about 21 years ago.  It's not a bad-sounding set-up for the money. 

The reason your setup sounds so remarkable is due to you listening through the iCAN and not the iDSD's built in headphone amp...  The iDSD headphone section uses a chip that has been on the market for 10 years.  Trying to make comparisons between this and the Ray Samuels Raptor tube amplifier is IMO ridiculous.
 
It has been well established that to fully exploit the sonic attributes of the iDSD DAC section, an exteranl amplifier needs to be used.  There are several other portable headphone amplifiers that utilize class A topology with excellent results.  My feeling is that instead of having a power level swith (eco-normal-turbo), it would have been more sonically advantageuos to utilize discrete components in the headphone amp, and have this switch change between class A and A/B operation, this would give the option (with more sensitive headphones and IEMs in Class A) to better convey more of the excellent DAC's sound when using the unit as a single box solution.
 
I would happily forgo output power/battery life and exclude a few power hungry headphones, to have a better sonically matched DAC and headphone section when using the iDSD micro as a one box portable. Does anybody even need to utiizle turbo mode?  My power hungry Beyerdynamic 600 ohm DT880's get plenty loud in normal mode. Am I the only one who holds this opinion?
 
Again, even in it's current configuration as a one box solution the iDSD is without peer however, I think the headphone amplifier could could have been better implemented to sonically match the DAC.

 

[semeniub]

  The reason your setup sounds so remarkable is due to you listening through the iCAN and not the iDSD's built in headphone amp...  The iDSD headphone section uses a chip that has been on the market for 10 years.  Trying to make comparisons between this and the Ray Samuels Raptor tube amplifier is IMO ridiculous.
 
It has been well established that to fully exploit the sonic attributes of the iDSD DAC section, an exteranl amplifier needs to be used.  There are several other portable headphone amplifiers that utilize class A topology with excellent results.  My feeling is that instead of having a power level swith (eco-normal-turbo), it would have been more sonically advantageuos to utilize discrete components in the headphone amp, and have this switch change between class A and A/B operation, this would give the option (with more sensitive headphones and IEMs in Class A) to better convey more of the excellent DAC's sound when using the unit as a single box solution.
 
I would happily forgo output power/battery life and exclude a few power hungry headphones, to have a better sonically matched DAC and headphone section when using the iDSD micro as a one box portable. Does anybody even need to utiizle turbo mode?  My power hungry Beyerdynamic 600 ohm DT880's get plenty loud in normal mode. Am I the only one who holds this opinion?
 
Again, even in it's current configuration as a one box solution the iDSD is without peer however, I think the headphone amplifier could could have been better implemented to sonically match the DAC.

Hmmm - it sounds like you've described a perfect follow up product for iFi to work on...
 
iFi was clearly trying to make the Micro iDSD as accessible to as many types of users as possible. Fortunately, as you say, it does partner extremely nicely as a standalone DAC feeding into better quality amps if that's what you are looking for. I've tried it together with the iCAN+iTube, NOS tube amps and the Clones Audio amps and I can't imagine ever needing to pay more for a better sounding DAC for my purposes.

 

[GradoSound]

 
Over speakers and/or in a phono stage is another thing, when lots of big glowing tubes might be the cats meow. But I believe I'm pretty good with this iTube model, without spending a lot of cash on what I don't even need.

 
One of the best kept secrets in HT setups (to get a decent stereo audio from HT) is to get an AVR with pre-outs and a good 2ch power amp to drive L/R speakers then put iTube between AVR and power amp. I do this with an Onkyo 818 and Rotel 1552 Mk2 and the result is amazing. It sounds like you are listening to a $$$$$ gear.

 

[ClieOS]

  The reason your setup sounds so remarkable is due to you listening through the iCAN and not the iDSD's built in headphone amp...  The iDSD headphone section uses a chip that has been on the market for 10 years....

 
Err, before we go too far, you should know that the same chip is used in both iCAN and iDSD headphone output stage. 10 years is really nothing as new chip is usually slow to be adopted by the industry. Some opamp, like OPA627, easy double the time and yet still well regarded among user and manufacturer. In fact, the DSD1793 in iDSD is well over 10 years too. At the end of the day, it is more about the implementation (and its limitation no less) than everything else.

 

[iFi audio]

  The reason your setup sounds so remarkable is due to you listening through the iCAN and not the iDSD's built in headphone amp...  The iDSD headphone section uses a chip that has been on the market for 10 years.  Trying to make comparisons between this and the Ray Samuels Raptor tube amplifier is IMO ridiculous.
 
It has been well established that to fully exploit the sonic attributes of the iDSD DAC section, an exteranl amplifier needs to be used.  There are several other portable headphone amplifiers that utilize class A topology with excellent results.  My feeling is that instead of having a power level swith (eco-normal-turbo), it would have been more sonically advantageuos to utilize discrete components in the headphone amp, and have this switch change between class A and A/B operation, this would give the option (with more sensitive headphones and IEMs in Class A) to better convey more of the excellent DAC's sound when using the unit as a single box solution.
 
I would happily forgo output power/battery life and exclude a few power hungry headphones, to have a better sonically matched DAC and headphone section when using the iDSD micro as a one box portable. Does anybody even need to utiizle turbo mode?  My power hungry Beyerdynamic 600 ohm DT880's get plenty loud in normal mode. Am I the only one who holds this opinion?
 
Again, even in it's current configuration as a one box solution the iDSD is without peer however, I think the headphone amplifier could could have been better implemented to sonically match the DAC.

 
Hi,
 
We make our design choices strictly on sound quality. We really do.
 
It is our job to sift through the good stuff and not so good stuff.  If it is old or new, we dont mind, so long as it delivers sonically.
 
The Burr-Brown we use in the nano, micro and upcoming Pro series is +12 years old! But we insist on using it even over above the "newer and better" chipsets.
 
This is before we discuss NOS valves used in the iTube and AMR components.
 
 
Last but not least, Class A on USB/battery is just not going to happen.  As much as we would like it (more so than the next guy) it is just not possible.