Introducing Lotoo PAW Gold

[parabellum777]

That hasn't been my experience.  If I listen to an album of .dsf tracks, I get the click between every track.

That's what also happens to me. No problem with flac files, but whatever DSD album I play I get the "click" sound between songs. I tried to change the DSD gain option to 0, but still have it.

 

[cooperpwc]

   
Really? I was listening to The Dark Side of the Moon album in dsf over the past 30 minutes and I didn't hear a click between the tracks

Just changed to Genesis ''Lamb Lies Down on Broadway'' and also no clicks, while gapless works perfect...

 
Ah... another enthusiast of the genre! Also a fan of Gentle Giant and VDGG?

 

[jmills8]

Ah... another enthusiast of the genre! Also a fan of Gentle Giant and VDGG?

you mean another old fart.☺

 

[Kerouac]

you mean another old fart.☺

 
Yeah...right! Coming from the guy in an (pretty cool though) ABBA shirt

 

[Kerouac]

All the above - it truly is a reference dap, and I don't use that word lightly. I have well over 200 hours on mine and it just keeps getting better: tighter bass, more resolving..... Also, something that is not discussed much here is the ability to shape the sound with the parametric equalizer. It really is a great tool. I have a ciem that benefits from a very slight bass boost below 200 hz and the ability to fine tune is an asset. I know most purists denounce any eq, but depending on the ciem, and if used judiciously it can be a benefit.

 
What...does it even get better with burn-in hours?
 
I noticed that my (4 weeks old, but I'm the 2nd owner) LPG had only 7 battery ''cycle counts'' (this information can be found when you scroll down in "Battery info''). So, I guess it had approx 70 hrs playtime so far. I already love the sq => if it even gets better than this(?)

 

 

[Jazzi]

   
What...does it even get better with burn-in hours?
 
I noticed that my (4 weeks old, but I'm the 2nd owner) LPG had only 7 battery ''cycle counts'' (this information can be found when you scroll down in "Battery info''). So, I guess it had approx 70 hrs playtime so far. I already love the sq => if it even gets better than this(?)

 

Wow!  Thanks, Kerouac.  I've owned my LPG over a year and didn't realize that detailed battery information was there.

 

[xtr4]

   
What...does it even get better with burn-in hours?
 
I noticed that my (4 weeks old, but I'm the 2nd owner) LPG had only 7 battery ''cycle counts'' (this information can be found when you scroll down in "Battery info''). So, I guess it had approx 70 hrs playtime so far. I already love the sq => if it even gets better than this(?)

 

 
LOL, I didn't even know this either. Thanks for the info. Just checked mine and I'm on 47 cycles hahahah

 

[DWbirdseye]

What...does it even get better with burn-in hours?

I noticed that my (4 weeks old, but I'm the 2nd owner) LPG had only 7 battery ''cycle counts'' (this information can be found when you scroll down in "Battery info''). So, I guess it had approx 70 hrs playtime so far. I already love the sq => if it even gets better than this(?) :rolleyes:  

Yes it does get better with usage I didn't know about the battery info, thanks.

 

[DWbirdseye]

Ah... another enthusiast of the genre! Also a fan of Gentle Giant and VDGG?

If we are going to reference gentle giant, let's not forget caravan, early soft machine, camel, and a few others.

 

[Level]

All the above - it truly is a reference dap, and I don't use that word lightly. I have well over 200 hours on mine and it just keeps getting better: tighter bass, more resolving..... Also, something that is not discussed much here is the ability to shape the sound with the parametric equalizer. It really is a great tool. I have a ciem that benefits from a very slight bass boost below 200 hz and the ability to fine tune is an asset. I know most purists denounce any eq, but depending on the ciem, and if used judiciously it can be a benefit.

EVERYTHING is EQ'd at source. If personal listening adjustments improve your experience by all means do what works for you. Purists are people who don't really understand how music is made and for them listening 'dry' somehow makes it more meaningful, more power to 'em if that floats the cork.

 

[headwhacker]

EVERYTHING is EQ'd at source. If personal listening adjustments improve your experience by all means do what works for you. Purists are people who don't really understand how music is made and for them listening 'dry' somehow makes it more meaningful, more power to 'em if that floats the cork.

So true, like so many other things in audio, unfortunately.

 

[DWbirdseye]

 
EVERYTHING is EQ'd at source. 

This is true. I suppose the counter argument would be that the listener wants to listen to the music as intended by the artist, so when the master is completed, that is the final presentation. The problem with this is that there are just too many variables in the listening chain: power supply, source, amp, dac, hearing > anatomy of the inner ear etc....I think it's fantastic that paw gold has the ability to effectively compensate for short comings associated with the above; and if used wisely should not step on the other technical aspects of the SQ. 

 

[Level]

  This is true. I suppose the counter argument would be that the listener wants to listen to the music as intended by the artist, so when the master is completed, that is the final presentation. The problem with this is that there are just too many variables in the listening chain: power supply, source, amp, dac, hearing > anatomy of the inner ear etc....I think it's fantastic that paw gold has the ability to effectively compensate for short comings associated with the above; and if used wisely should not step on the other technical aspects of the SQ. 

There really is no counter argument...you need to understand the dilemma faced by mastering producers and engineers who incessantly tussle with the compromise of EQ'ing each work to a subjective listening standard. Do you master for audiophiles, iTunes, smartphone listeners, car stereos or home systems....or some grey zone in between? As you observe there are incalculable variables to consider and so the mastering process is always a guessing game.
 
Mastering (& recording) studios use several monitor sets that represent different listening environments, Aurotone speakers were a standard for a long time.....they weren't very good and that was the point, if it sounded good on the 'tones' it would probably sound good on most stereos, thus mastering to a 'common standard.' Incidentally, playing back the same music on reference monitors could make you shudder, but not too many folks own reference sound systems so out it goes for distribution.
 
So if your dap sounds better with some eq why would you not apply it? It's certainly not unrealistic to state a mastering engineer might listen to a purists system and say it sounds like crap. And the eq'd system might be found to sound really good. Best advice, please yourself.

 

[nmatheis]

FWIW, I rarely use EQ but agree wholeheartedly with Level. There is no perfect master / mix. People shouldn't be looked down upon for using EQ to tailor music to their tastes or to compensate for their audio chain.

 

[DWbirdseye]

 
There really is no counter argument...you need to understand the dilemma faced by mastering producers and engineers who incessantly tussle with the compromise of EQ'ing each work to a subjective listening standard. Do you master for audiophiles, iTunes, smartphone listeners, car stereos or home systems....or some grey zone in between? As you observe there are incalculable variables to consider and so the mastering process is always a guessing game.
 
Mastering (& recording) studios use several monitor sets that represent different listening environments, Aurotone speakers were a standard for a long time.....they weren't very good and that was the point, if it sounded good on the 'tones' it would probably sound good on most stereos, thus mastering to a 'common standard.' Incidentally, playing back the same music on reference monitors could make you shudder, but not too many folks own reference sound systems so out it goes for distribution.
 
So if your dap sounds better with some eq why would you not apply it? It's certainly not unrealistic to state a mastering engineer might listen to a purists system and say it sounds like crap. And the eq'd system might be found to sound really good. Best advice, please yourself.

You're preaching to the choir so to speak, I just try to look at both sides of the coin. I was in the studio when sound engineers were using tape. lol