[arcticears]

Gee a pretty picture, what does it mean.  Posting a graph without proper identification and lables does not provide any information or aid in the discussion.  The first graph posted by xnor shows what?  The point is what?  It looks like the Icon has a missmatch with the Sony, ok.  It shows nothing else.  The second graph shows nothing.  Is it of the Icon, what type of noise is being measured we don't know.  Data is good but it needs to be meaningful.  These two graphs don't mean much as presented.

 

[xnor]

If you'd taken a look at RMAA or any RMAA measurement you'd know.
 
The first shows the frequency response and bass roll-off.
 
Please try to explain what a "missmatch with the Sony" is. 

 I'm quite curious.
If you compare the green to the white line you see what the Icon Mobile does...
 
And the second one is, as I wrote, noise or to be precise "noise level" when using the Icon Mobile as an usb dac.
Btw, connected to usb there's also a roll-off at the higher frequency end, down about 4 dB at 15 kHz, heh.
 
 
 
 
The funny thing is that despite "poor" performance there's so much praise around here. Oh yeah I forgot, the hype is strong.
If actual performance doesn't matter on a high fidelity forum what does?
 
/rant end, sorry..

 

[arcticears]

My point is that it is normal protocol to provide tests run, test methods, and other facts about the tests when presenting data.  Some of us may know what RMAA is but some may not.  RMAA has many tests or test methods, clairification is important. 
 
By mismatch I mean that the first graph shows frequency response for the Sony vs the Sony + the Icon Mobile.  The roll off in the bass region is for the pair we do not know if it is due to the Icon or the Sony.  The Icon Mobile may perform fine with other DAP's or it may not, we just do not know based on the graph.  This type of performance could well be an indication of a problem with the Icon Mobile, further tests would be indicated.
 
The second graph shows nothing.  What type of noise was tested?  A noise level of - 90dB is not very poor. 
BTW, neither of the graphs presented show a roll-off in the high frequencies for the Icon.
 
I fully agree that actual performance does matter in a high fidelity forum, too often the hype does run strong.
I am not saying the Icon Mobile is good or bad, just that the graphs as presented do not show that.

 

[xnor]

Why should the Sony behave drastically differently if you switch from a sound card line-in to the Icon Mobile line in?  Line-in has an impedance of several kOhms, so the Sony isn't loaded at all in either case. Additionally, somebody wrote that the Icon Mobile "tamed the bass" of his IE8s, which just supports what the graph shows, bass roll-off.
=> The Icon will most certainly not behave different with other DAPs.
 
The second graph shows a very, very bad implementation of an usb dac. For comparison take a look at Sansa Clip noise levels:

 
And don't forget that the noise level measurement of the Icon Mobile was without a load!
-90 dB? Not even close! More like -55 dB. It's all noise you see in those graphs.. else RMAA wouldn't rate it "very poor".
 
The high frequency roll-off, as I wrote, only happens with usb input. I don't have that graph handy, not that it'd be necessary to post it after seeing the other two graphs. Imo.

 

[roker]

graphs ... heh
 
It's a great amp.  I heard quite a few.  It's clean and powers my D2000s efficiently.  I don't need a graph to tell me that.
 
pffft

 

[bdr529]

I bought one a couple summers ago because of hype and whatnot (i was new) and thought it sounded good until I actually tried to do a real comparison. It also was an awakening call to how burn in, at least with this was in my head. It was easy to tell it sucked out the bass and I was pretty convinced it was coming back through burn in. Only after not using it for a while and the trying it again did I realize how much it didn't change and how it made things sound worse.

 

[xnor]

 @roker: Without measurements we'd still be in the dark ages. 

 It's not great or clean, but cheap.

 

[arcticears]

Sorry to all, I did not mean to hijack the thread.  @XNOR and I can carry on our discussion elsewhere.  Now, more to the point of the thread -- from personal experience I can say that the Icon Mobile, and the udac, for that matter, does not handle dirty (noisy) power from a usb connection well.  The noise will be passed along to the output and might result in a "noise" test result as shown in the posted graph.  It would be interesting to see the results of a test where a different usb source was used with the same Icon Mobile, it would then be possible to say if the Icon Mobile's handling of the usb signal was "noisy" or was it the result of the source.  I can not say how other portable amps handle dirty usb power but I do not think that the performance of the Icon Mobile in this regards is surprising considering that we are talking about a $100 amp/dac combo that was probably designed to run primarily from its battery and not off of the usb power.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Good point, I have only been using the uDAC or Icon Mobile with a Macbook or Macbook Pro, and not something with a noisy USB port.  I haven't tried them with a noisy USB source ever.
 
I found the Icon mobile to be a little forward sounding, and good with bass heavy recessed phones like Denon, Ultrasone, IE8 or W3, but not so good with Grados or AD2000 and lacking power with Sennheiser HD600.  I also felt it sounded slightly less bright with USB as source instead of iPod, and I didn't like it as much via my iPod Nano LOD.  I also posted that the uDAC (1 and 2) are better than the Icon Mobile, and still feel that way.  But Icon Mobile didn't suck for $99 either - In my review I put the Icon Mobile on about the level of the iBasso D2 with some phones, better with others, and worse with some.  The D2 had better detail and space, but slightly boosted lower mids/upper bass, and recessed upper mids.  Neither one made it to my top tier of DAC/amps.  In that respect I preferred the sound of the uDAC (original) more than either of those DAC/amps.  I would prefer the iBasso D4 over any of these - it will cost you over 2x as much, however you get a bigger jump in performance and power and features that holds it own vs the big guys.

 

[arcticears]

Thanks for your comments HPA.  I bought the Westone W2's based much on your comments.  I think your were right on with the sq, I rank them the best I have heard.  What is a good amp to use with them, I take it the Icon Mobile would not be it.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Thanks for your comments HPA.  I bought the Westone W2's based much on your comments.  I think your were right on with the sq, I rank them the best I have heard.  What is a good amp to use with them, I take it the Icon Mobile would not be it.

For computer audio only, the uDac 1 or 2 are very good with the W2, as is the DACport.  
 
For portable, the iBasso T3 and T4 work well with them although the T3 is more detailed and transparent than T4, but still not up to the high level of the D10/D4.  The stock D10 or opamp rolled D4 and P-51, or Pico Slim are better choices than the T3/T4.  I don't recall how the W2 sounded with 3MOVE or Vivid V1, or if I even tried those amps with W2.  
 
For desktop amps, the HDP was pretty good with them. Nuforce made some changes to the amp based on my experience with the prototype, and it went from "so so" with W2 to great with W2.  The HiFiMan EF2 is good with them, but not as detailed and spacious as the HDP or some portable amps. 

 

[arcticears]

Thanks, I have been looking at the D4 or T3.  I have the udac 1 but have not tried it with the W2's.
 

 

[Budgie]

Geez, so what do you want for 100 bucks? Is it perfect? no. Is it a great little dac/ amp?  Yes!  Sounds better then anything I can get out of my laptop's native sound card. Maybe it's better as a dac and amp then used as an amp only, but it does a great job as a cheap sound card. And for 100 bucks it's way below the price of most audio gear, and if your disappointed then welcome to the wonderful world of Hi Fi audio and sorry about your wallet.

 

[xnor]

For 30 bucks you can get USB interfaces that are a) far less noisy, b) don't have such a steep roll-off ...

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

For 30 bucks you can get USB interfaces that are a) far less noisy, b) don't have such a steep roll-off ...

I would be interested in trying that $30 USB interface myself.  I've tried the Behringer UC202 for that price, and it was a bit worse in noise and roll-off.  This hiss with IEM is so bad that it really can't be used with them.