[iFi audio]

Join the force.......head over to our competition for a chance to win some iFi goodies and get the latest on the iCan SE Micro!
 
Thread: http://www.head-fi.org/t/790869/ican-micro-se-intergalactic-launch-competition

 

[Allvey]

How does the the iUSB3.0 compare to the iPurifier2+iUSB?

 

[GHoldridge]

How does the the iUSB3.0 compare to the iPurifier2+iUSB?

Well I can only compare the iusb 3.0 to the original ipurifier + iusb and the iusb 3.0 is more silent. Ifi audio says the iusb 3.0 = iusb + ipurifier2. Personally if I had neither I'd go with iusb 3.0

 

[iFi audio]

Well I can only compare the iusb 3.0 to the original ipurifier + iusb and the iusb 3.0 is more silent. Ifi audio says the iusb 3.0 = iusb + ipurifier2. Personally if I had neither I'd go with iusb 3.0

 
Hi,
 
You are correct BUT there are a few iUSB owners and while we recommend new customers to try the iUSB3.0 first (as it WAAAAY more feature packed) for those who own the iUSB, we wish to still look after these guys. Would be far too easy to say "upgrade the iUSB to the iUSB3.0." But we like to look after all our customers - prospective and current!
 
It serves to show our products have good longevity built-in because they are trickled-down from AMR which is uber luxury audio. 

 

 

[canali]

what i'd be interested in is a comparison between both the newly released nano and micro usb 3.0 versions.
esp when iFi says the following on the nano thread on helping to choose the appropriate conditioner/hub (below)
(italicized and emboldened are mine)
 
Southport, UK – 11^th February 2016
 
the difference in ground noise, if i am right is,
.000000001(0.1uV) (micro)
vs 0.0000005V (0.5uV)(nano)...
 
my question: would that make any difference?
my dac is the imicro dsd
 
below is the thread on the newly releaesed nano usb 3.0
http://www.head-fi.org/t/797988/ifi-product-launch-nano-iusb3-0-the-baby-bentley-to-the-micro-iusb3-0
 
 
Total Audiophile USB Solution: nano only in price & size
For $500 to $5000 usb devices, the nano iUSB3.0 is the one-stop, future-proofed solution.
It is the sibling of the flagship micro iUSB3.0. It operates in all USB modes to 5 Gigabit USB3.0,
supplies pure, clean power and reconditions the USB data. The USB3.0 active chipset at the heart
is backwards compatible with USB2.0 so all USB devices - DACs, Mixers and DJ Controllers benefit.
 
 
1 week, 4 days ago

THREAD STARTER 


 

1. [img]http://cdn.head-fi.org/1/19/100x100px-LS-19ff24e9_iDACtop.jpeg[/img]

1. iFi audio
2. Sponsor: iFi Audio
3. 
4.  
5. offline

1. 1,483 Posts. Joined 3/2013

  Would a beginner be able to appreciate a bit of kit this advanced?

The specs look solid to my amateur eyes and it's a modest investment comparatively.

 
Hi,
 
To answer your question, the following would be our recommendation.
 
If your USB DAC is:
 
1) USB dac <US$500 eg nano DSD = iPurifier 2 (ie. no need for mUSB3.0 or nUSB3.0).
 
2) USB dac US$500 to US$5k eg iFi/Chord = nano USB3.0.
 
3) USB dac >US$5k eg DCS/AMR = micro iUSB3.0.
 
Hopefully this summary shows that if you have a <US$1k DAC, then the micro iUSB3.0 is overkill as unlikely to hear the additional performance.
 
But if you are thinking of upgrading in the future your DAC, then the nano USB3.0 is the ideal one as it is
half the price of the micro USB3.0 flagship but has 85% of the performance/features.
It does need the mains from the iPOWER so is not portable like the iPurifier2 which is USB-powered.
 
Cheers.

Edited by iFi audio - 2/13/16 at 3:42am

 

[iFi audio]

Hi,
 
Here you go:
 

Features Comparison of micro iUSB3.0, nano iUSB3.0 and iPurifier2

 

Or better still download this pdf, print it off and take your time to go through it. Should be clear there is a lo of technology in there. Others have the basics, the iFi stuff includes the kitchen sink.
 
For the download, please go to www.ifi-audio.com

 

[canali]

Hi,

Here you go:

[COLOR=0070C0]Features Comparison of micro iUSB3.0, nano iUSB3.0 and iPurifier2[/COLOR]

Or better still download this pdf, print it off and take your time to go through it. Should be clear there is a lo of technology in there. Others have the basics, the iFi stuff includes the kitchen sink.

[ATTACHMENT=2080]iFIUSBtechtable.pdf (671k. pdf file)[/ATTACHMENT] 

Hi,

Here you go:

[COLOR=0070C0]Features Comparison of micro iUSB3.0, nano iUSB3.0 and iPurifier2[/COLOR]

Or better still download this pdf, print it off and take your time to go through it. Should be clear there is a lo of technology in there. Others have the basics, the iFi stuff includes the kitchen sink.

[ATTACHMENT=2080]iFIUSBtechtable.pdf (671k. pdf file)[/ATTACHMENT] 

 

[canali]

thanks iFi
 
.and for any iFi owners out there who've listened to both side by side,
are there any significant discernible diffs?
Tech specs are one thing vs actual listening.
 
i mean,  why get the micro usb when the nano usb can allegedgly achieve
85% of its performance--per iFi's statement
if i read it correctly?
--------------------------------------
 
.... the following would be our recommendation.
 
If your USB DAC is:
 
1) USB dac <US$500 eg nano DSD = iPurifier 2 (ie. no need for mUSB3.0 or nUSB3.0).
 
2) USB dac US$500 to US$5k eg iFi/Chord = nano USB3.0.
 
3) USB dac >US$5k eg DCS/AMR = micro iUSB3.0.
 
Hopefully this summary shows that if you have a <US$1k DAC, then the micro iUSB3.0 is overkill as unlikely to hear the additional performance.
 
But if you are thinking of upgrading in the future your DAC, then the nano USB3.0 is the ideal one as it is
half the price of the micro USB3.0 flagship but has 85% of the performance/features.
It does need the mains from the iPOWER so is not portable like the iPurifier2 which is USB-powered.

 

[dmbr]

I'm considering upgrading from an iPurifier2 + iUSB to an iUSB 3.0....has anyone tried both and have any thoughts on how much of an improvement this would be?

 

[Dadracer]

I'm considering upgrading from an iPurifier2 + iUSB to an iUSB 3.0....has anyone tried both and have any thoughts on how much of an improvement this would be?

This is the system I have feeding a micro iDSD and I think it has almost the functionality of the new nano iUSB which ifi Audio recommend is suitable for DACs up to the $5000 level. So unless your DAC is this expensive then it appears ifi Audio are saying you'd be wasting your time/money in getting the iUSB 3.0. 

 

[glassmonkey]

 

Hi,

Here you go:
 

Features Comparison of micro iUSB3.0, nano iUSB3.0 and iPurifier2

Or better still download this pdf, print it off and take your time to go through it. Should be clear there is a lo of technology in there. Others have the basics, the iFi stuff includes the kitchen sink.

  

Hi,

Here you go:
 

Features Comparison of micro iUSB3.0, nano iUSB3.0 and iPurifier2

Or better still download this pdf, print it off and take your time to go through it. Should be clear there is a lo of technology in there. Others have the basics, the iFi stuff includes the kitchen sink.

  

Thanks...and for any iFi owners out there who've listened to both side by side, are there any significant discernible diffs? Tech specs are one thing vs actual listening.

There are discernible differences between the iPurifier2 and micro iUSB3.0. The micro iUSB3.0 is fuller sounding (especially on bass) with better soundstage and note separation/body. I also found that the iPurifier2 didn't really pull extra performance from my LH Labs Lightspeed 2g split cables, whilst the iUSB3.0 had a noticeable improvement in detail (especially on the top end) when I upgraded from the Supra USB/Lightspeed 2g to double Lightspeed 2g. The micro iUSB3.0 is more gives a more 3-dimensional improvement to sound stage. I only noticed improvement to depth of stage with the iPurifier2. Both make notes tighter and improve timing, giving the music a more natural flow. Because the background is blacker notes have better separation and are more distinct.

 

[canali]

  There are discernible differences between the iPurifier2 and micro iUSB3.0. The micro iUSB3.0 is fuller sounding (especially on bass) with better soundstage and note separation/body. I also found that the iPurifier2 didn't really pull extra performance from my LH Labs Lightspeed 2g split cables, whilst the iUSB3.0 had a noticeable improvement in detail (especially on the top end) when I upgraded from the Supra USB/Lightspeed 2g to double Lightspeed 2g. The micro iUSB3.0 is more gives a more 3-dimensional improvement to sound stage. I only noticed improvement to depth of stage with the iPurifier2. Both make notes tighter and improve timing, giving the music a more natural flow. Because the background is blacker notes have better separation and are more distinct.

thanks glassmonkey
yet my query isn't about the ipurifier 2....as stated
its instead about the the listening/audible diffs between the nano and micro  usb 3.0

 

[glassmonkey]

 

  There are discernible differences between the iPurifier2 and micro iUSB3.0. The micro iUSB3.0 is fuller sounding (especially on bass) with better soundstage and note separation/body. I also found that the iPurifier2 didn't really pull extra performance from my LH Labs Lightspeed 2g split cables, whilst the iUSB3.0 had a noticeable improvement in detail (especially on the top end) when I upgraded from the Supra USB/Lightspeed 2g to double Lightspeed 2g. The micro iUSB3.0 is more gives a more 3-dimensional improvement to sound stage. I only noticed improvement to depth of stage with the iPurifier2. Both make notes tighter and improve timing, giving the music a more natural flow. Because the background is blacker notes have better separation and are more distinct.

 my query isn't about the ipurifier 2....as stated
its instead about the the audible diffs between the nano and micro  usb 3.0

'As stated' works better if it was actually stated in the post that was replied too. The terse tone and bolding (akin to raising your voice without yelling) is not befitting genial discussion. The diagram that you responded to from iFi had three devices on it. I have two of them on me right now and gave impressions of those. Since the nano is barely in the wild, I'd wait a while to ask for comparisons between both iUSB3.0 devices. The micro iUSB3.0 is good for comparing two dacs. I'm doing it right now. Also the iUSB3.0 allows you to use a split cable and hook up an external hard-drive, which did have a positive effect on the sound when I compared. It made the sound more organic. 
I hope you have your answer soon, but I'd just go get the nano, unless you need extra USB slots. 

 

 

[canali]

  'As stated' works better if it was actually stated in the post that was replied too. The terse tone and bolding (akin to raising your voice without yelling) is not befitting genial discussion. The diagram that you responded to from iFi had three devices on it. I have two of them on me right now and gave impressions of those. Since the nano is barely in the wild, I'd wait a while to ask for comparisons between both iUSB3.0 devices. The micro iUSB3.0 is good for comparing two dacs. I'm doing it right now. Also the iUSB3.0 allows you to use a split cable and hook up an external hard-drive, which did have a positive effect on the sound when I compared. It made the sound more organic. 
I hope you have your answer soon, but I'd just go get the nano, unless you need extra USB slots. 

 

hey glassmonkey...sorry man, i wasn't trying for a terse tone or yelling....just saw your reply twice and i thought i wasn't clear...so i emboldened it.
...also i emboldend due to my iFI insertion and quotes...so was just trying to have my query stand out.
i sometimes will embolden important items (imo)...ie hyperlinks etc.
 
ive since edited (a bit) so I don't come across as such.
...i do appreciate your imput.

  and hopefully we'll get more reviews as this product gets out there.

 

[iFi audio]

  There are discernible differences between the iPurifier2 and micro iUSB3.0. The micro iUSB3.0 is fuller sounding (especially on bass) with better soundstage and note separation/body. I also found that the iPurifier2 didn't really pull extra performance from my LH Labs Lightspeed 2g split cables, whilst the iUSB3.0 had a noticeable improvement in detail (especially on the top end) when I upgraded from the Supra USB/Lightspeed 2g to double Lightspeed 2g. The micro iUSB3.0 is more gives a more 3-dimensional improvement to sound stage. I only noticed improvement to depth of stage with the iPurifier2. Both make notes tighter and improve timing, giving the music a more natural flow. Because the background is blacker notes have better separation and are more distinct.

 
Hi,
 
A few people pm'd us about the clocks and are they Femto clocks - in the iFi equipment.
 
 
 
Short Answer
No - they are not Femto clocks. Femto Clocks are good but they are usually worse than a simple straight crystal clock.

Hence we do not use Femto clocks as they are good, but not the best for audioband use.
 
 
Long Answer
From the micro iUSB3.0 to the nano iUSB3.0 to the iPurifier2, they ALL have very low audio band jitter, compared to Femto Clocks which tend to have fairly high audio jitter as a result of being optimised for ultra-low jitter at > 12kHz and usually including a PLL to reduce noise at very high frequencies, which then raises the jitter at lower frequencies.
 
A specific high-grade crystal clock with a clean power supply offers around 100 femtoseconds jitter in the 20Hz-20kHz band. By comparison a SONET¹-targetted Femto-Clock, despite being a very expensive clock analysed in the same bandwidth, ‘clocks in’ (pun intended) at around 500 Femtoseconds or five times as much jitter.
 
Therefore, we do not use Femto clocks as they are good, but suited to delivering lowest jitter for audio use.
 
Except for not being formally specified in the same manner and advertised thusly as so-called Femto Clocks; a competently designed true crystal clock is actually a 'Femto Clock' usually with lower audio band phase noise/jitter than those advertised as such.
 
¹https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_optical_networking. Because this is the primary use for Femoto Clocks.