[zeissiez]

The C4 has a very natural sound, but somewhat dated if u consider what the latest daps can offer in UI and sonic grip and control. The LP5 silver/gold inherent the C4 sound with some improvements in the bass and treble. What they didn't improve on the C4 was the UI. The L5 is very neutral, to my ears, more clinical sounding than the LP5s (I prefer the LP5s sound), but the UI is quite frustrating. I see the only L&P DAP which is more complete could be the L5 pro. As describe by John and Twister6, the UI is much improved. I haven't heard it, I hope it's not too warmish because that can limit the use of some warmish headphones/iem, a bit of warmth like the C4 is ok. And also another thing to consider is whether u use iem or fullsize headphone. I tried the QP1R, it's average for IEMs, but it's very nice with full size cans. I still prefer the L&P's sound over the Questyles', but it's personal.

Hi zeiss....awesome feedback.just 2 queries:
1. Why do you prefer the LP5 gold sound to the QPR1?
2. Have you ever heard the Fostex TH900 headphones which I have.....if so, which dap you feel they are best suited to?
Thanks so much

1.Because the LP5 gold sounded nice with all my IEMs and the QP1R was very average with them. But both are great with fullsize cans.
2.Yes, I love the TH900, very euphonic pair of headphones. But I have not heard them with either DAPs. Anyway, the L5 pro makes more sense than either of them. The TH900 is alright with a bit of added warmth in my opinion.

 

[deafanddumb]

1.Because the LP5 gold sounded nice with all my IEMs and the QP1R was very average with them. But both are great with fullsize cans.
2.Yes, I love the TH900, very euphonic pair of headphones. But I have not heard them with either DAPs. Anyway, the L5 pro makes more sense than either of them. The TH900 is alright with a bit of added warmth in my opinion.

Thanks again

 

[JohnYang]

My initial impressions

As usual, sorry for my english

 
It is a great open box video, a video is worth a thousand words.

 

[deafanddumb]

I've just thought....I'd totally miss the 1/4 inch Jack point on a L5 pro....but.....! It does have a graphic equaliser....even my C4 had a primitive one, but has the LP5 in some form?

 

[JohnYang]

I've just thought....I'd totally miss the 1/4 inch Jack point on a L5 pro....but.....! It does have a graphic equaliser....even my C4 had a primitive one, but has the LP5 in some form?

If you truely need a 1/4 inch jack and you only use big cans, LP5 is your best buddy. Other wise, a good 1/4 to 3.5mm converter is another option, plus more friendly support for IEMs.

 

[twister6]

I've just thought....I'd totally miss the 1/4 inch Jack point on a L5 pro....but.....! It does have a graphic equaliser....even my C4 had a primitive one, but has the LP5 in some form?

 
1/4" jack on a pocket friendly DAP? I'm glad they left it behind with C4 and LP5

 
No adjustable EQ yet, but there are 5 excellent EQ presets.  I hope they will be able to implement some kind of EQ in the near future.

 

[JohnYang]

Was comparing L5 Pro and Hugo earlier today, here are my thoughts.
IEM used: SE846
Used a silver SPDIF cable to connect between L5 Pro and Hugo.
 

 
Lets start with Hugo. In my opinion Hugo has a very well-balanced sound. By well-balanced I meant the three main frequency sections(bass, mid, and treble) sound very coherent with each other while the separation between vocals and instruments is extremely good. Even through IEMs like se846, you can feel huge sound stage of Hugo that you would not find in most portable devices. It is very easy to tell why Hugo is one of the most popular top of the line portable DAC.
 
Next up, L5 Pro. When I switch from Hugo to L5 Pro on the fly(L5 Pro works with using SPIDF and phone out at the same time.), I felt that something is missing from the sound of Hugo that I don't want to switch back to Hugo. As I listen more carefully, and I found the answer,  Musicality!  Music sound much more organic and alive with L5 Pro and it made Hugo sound somewhat analytic. I guess this is similar to what twister6 has mentioned earlier, L5 Pro has a very "analog" sound.

 

[zeissiez]

 
At the store now, this is on firmware 1.0.0.3 
 
I like the sound, can't stop listening. It has one high-end, natural, non-fatiguing sound. And doesn't sound warm to me. The treble is one of the best I heard, detailed and no harshness at all.

 

[JohnYang]

 
 
At the store now, this is on firmware 1.0.0.3 
 
I like the sound, can't stop listening. It has one high-end, natural, non-fatiguing sound. And doesn't sound warm to me. The treble is one of the best I heard, detailed and no harshness at all.

Think L5 Pro has a bug that require to format it to FAT32(internal storage) to get the sorting to work, pretty weird. You should tell your local store buddy that too.
 
Yep, the treble is great, I expect any device from Mr.Wan with great treble since C4. Hows ociulus pairing up with L5 Pro?

 

[Ultrainferno]

  Was comparing L5 Pro and Hugo earlier today, here are my thoughts.
IEM used: SE846
Used a silver SPDIF cable to connect between L5 Pro and Hugo.
 

 
Lets start with Hugo. In my opinion Hugo has a very well-balanced sound. By well-balanced I meant the three main frequency sections(bass, mid, and treble) sound very coherent with each other while the separation between vocals and instruments is extremely good. Even through IEMs like se846, you can feel huge sound stage of Hugo that you would not find in most portable devices. It is very easy to tell why Hugo is one of the most popular top of the line portable DAC.
 
Next up, L5 Pro. When I switch from Hugo to L5 Pro on the fly(L5 Pro works with using SPIDF and phone out at the same time.), I felt that something is missing from the sound of Hugo that I don't want to switch back to Hugo. As I listen more carefully, and I found the answer,  Musicality!  Music sound much more organic and alive with L5 Pro and it made Hugo sound somewhat analytic. I guess this is similar to what twister6 has mentioned earlier, L5 Pro has a very "analog" sound.

 
Hugo is technically better but what you are noticing most is the that the mids have bigger body. At the same time Hugo sounds more spacious as well and that gives the impression the L5P is more musical sounding with IEMs.

 

[zeissiez]

Thanks John for the info.

I become more and more of a fan of Mr Wan's mastery in sound tuning. And finally his latest device is user friendly too. The screen is very responsive. My only quibbles are the volume knob is still a bit DIYish and it doesn't seem to support AAC format. But overall, for USD699, this is one great buy, the SQ is at the very top level. But really, the big deal is the improved UI. Top DAPs are not very far apart in SQ, usability is a major factor.

It's a good match for the Oriolus. Spacious, natural, the warmth of the Oriolus is more or less maintained at the same level. The Merlin is not a good match though, as it's already laid back sounding, the big soundstage of the L5pro makes the Merlin more distant sounding. But this happen to most other DAPs for the Merlin. My fav portable device for the Merlin is iPhone 6+ . And lastly, with the L5pro, 846 sounded slightly less congested too.

 

[Ultrainferno]

That being said, I prefer my CIEMs as well directly from the L5P

 

[deafanddumb]

1/4" jack on a pocket friendly DAP? I'm glad they left it behind with C4 and LP5

No adjustable EQ yet, but there are 5 excellent EQ presets.  I hope they will be able to implement some kind of EQ in the near future.

You mean 5 pre sets on the LP5 gold?

 

[Ultrainferno]

I have been testing the gain stages yesterday with my inears (Lime Ears Aether) as I promised someone on here.
It's clear that if you can, you should set the gain as low as possible. The gain effect is most audible in the mids section, where the lowest gain sounds the most natural and the highest gain sounds the most forced, aggressive. You will find the lowest gain is the easiest and most natural to listen to. There is no real audible difference for what bass and treble is concerned in my opinion.
 
Let me know if there any other questions

 

[zeissiez]

I have been testing the gain stages yesterday with my inears (Lime Ears Aether) as I promised someone on here.
It's clear that if you can, you should set the gain as low as possible. The gain effect is most audible in the mids section, where the lowest gain sounds the most natural and the highest gain sounds the most forced, aggressive. You will find the lowest gain is the easiest and most natural to listen to. There is no real audible difference for what bass and treble is concerned in my opinion.

Let me know if there any other questions

Yes, I heard the same, now I keep it at the lowest gain setting.