[shakur1996]

   
 
Please share your opinions mate

Of course. I just gave it around 2 hours of listening. I'm on 1.4.02 wav firmware. I have some initial impressions but need to spend more time with it and first of all check the line out to my DIY Amp. For the time being I have very positive SQ impressions
 
Boot and library update is litghtning fast.
 
I only loaded folder with test music (converted to wav) so I don't care about the tags. But I do have one question - if I decide to buy 360 and I will load an album which is composed of 2 discs will 360 see disc number tag? For example HiFiMan 901 with latest official firmware does not read the discnumber tag and thus instead of having second song from disc one I have first song from disc two as the second song in order; in other words, 901 reads only track number tag.
 
BTW, did someone talk to QLS whether it will be possible in the future to have firmware identical in SQ to 1.4.02 wav only but which would play other formats as well?

 

[bahamot]

QA360 doesn't read any tag

 

[T.R.A.N.C.E.]

You can put each disc in a separate folder, and play will jump to next folder when first folder is done playing.

 

[shakur1996]

 
Of course. I just gave it around 2 hours of listening. I'm on 1.4.02 wav firmware. I have some initial impressions but need to spend more time with it and first of all check the line out to my DIY Amp. For the time being I have very positive SQ impressions
 
Boot and library update is litghtning fast.
 
I only loaded folder with test music (converted to wav) so I don't care about the tags. But I do have one question - if I decide to buy 360 and I will load an album which is composed of 2 discs will 360 see disc number tag? For example HiFiMan 901 with latest official firmware does not read the discnumber tag and thus instead of having second song from disc one I have first song from disc two as the second song in order; in other words, 901 reads only track number tag.
 
BTW, did someone talk to QLS whether it will be possible in the future to have firmware identical in SQ to 1.4.02 wav only but which would play other formats as well?

Thanks to headfier andi16, I spend last 2 days on listening to 360 on 1.4.02 wav only firmware. I listened to it via HO and via LO to my DIY Amp.
 
I'm not going to talk about UI, but only about SQ.
 
I did not check DSD. I played only WAV files (which were converted from FLAC files via Foobar2000).
 
The most important thing - please remember that I spend only 2 days with 360, maybe if I had it for a longer period my impressions would be different, this have to be taken into account since IMHO the differences between DAPs are usually very very small (they can be easily heard, but to my ears they are not night and day or to say it more precisly I'm that kind of person who thinks that the differences between good, very good and excellent DAPs are more than 10%; all those reviews saying that a given DAP is better ten times than the other...well I will just say that I don't agree with them; on the other hand usually I don't need to spend a lot of time to assess a given equipment although sometimes the additional time allow me to hear more pros and cons of a given equipment). Additionally, I tested 360 only with my CIEMs ie SE 5way Ref.
My experience: I owned several CIEMs like Custom Art Harmony 8 pro, Custom Art pro330v2, Cosmic Ears BA4r; I had a chance to listen to Roxanne, Hidition NT-6 and Earsonics EM32. In terms of DAPs I owned/extensively listened to Studio V 3ANW, iBasso dx90 (only 2.0 firmware), FiiO X5, iMod, ibasso dx100 and HiFiMan HM-901 w/ stock card (I compared all cards but it was a very brief comparison).
 
I briefly compared 360 to 901 (w/ stock card and on latest official fw) and dx100 (on 1.2.7 stock fw).
 
First of all, the difference between HO and LO to my DIY Amp were very very tiny. My DIY Amp is A class portable amp and is using the same opamp as 360. So most likely this is the reason why the HO and LO of 360 sounds so alike. My amp was maybe just a tad smoother and had just a tad blacker background. In opposite 360 seems to have just a tad more clarity, is just a tad brightish.
 
Regarding the 360 HO..I have mixed feelings. The first impressions were as follows: very detailed, balanced, very realistic, natural sounding, with a lot of clarity, playing out of my head, portraying a lot of emotions. But after few hours the sound became slightly fatiquing, slightly bright and slightly too clean It reminds me somehow the sound of Studio 3ANW; I'm not saying that 360 and Studio sound alike but I had the impression that they have something in common ie slightly bright, impressive clarity and slightly fatiquing sound after certain period of listening (of course presentation is different; to my memory Studio played music in the head and very wide but with not so good depth, whereas 360 plays music out of head, good in widith and very good in depth).
Overall I think that 360 has balanced, organic and realistic sound, very good resolution and a lot of details, but it also has slightly emphasized highs what results in extreme clean sound (and this so clean sound is to my ears slightly artificial), it is musical but at the same time it has something in common with term "analytical", it has more or less natural PRaT (although to my taste it has just a tad too short sustain) and due to this so very clean sound it lacks just a tad the blacker background.
EDIT: I would also add that 360 has very energetic/lively sound (BTW, is there anybody who heard both Hugo and 360? if yes and if my assumption - although not supported by any real proof but it is only based on pure speculation derived from some statements on headfi about Hugo - is correct that Hugo has somehow similar lively sound than Hugo will definitely not be my cup of tea).
 
As for the dx100/901 vs 360 I will only briefly say that IMHO dx100 and 901 have more refined sound, in addition dx100 has blacker background and the instruments are bigger. I find that 360 and 901 have something in common and I would say that dx100 has more natural tone (but in terms of comparison of dx100 and 901 I need to spend a little bit more time with 901 as I own 901 for about 1.5 month and dx100 for about 7 months; although for the time being IMHO 901 is slightly brigther and aggresive than dx100).

 

[T.R.A.N.C.E.]

^ Btw the latest revision of QA360 have smoother highs, pcb v1.4 and v1.5, I've come across two comparisons mentioning this, one on headfi and another on turkish forum. pcb v1.4 production was late 2014 and pcb v1.5 is from 2015. I hear no brightness in my v1.5 QA360, but it does have the overly pristine analytical type sound.  
 
Similar to you I also find that sound quality differences between daps are very small, I feel that in terms of technical capability most daps are pretty much equal, they only have differences in how they express the music, meaning that it will purely come down to preference, not one dap being better than another. In a perfect world our daps and headphones would be completely transparent, but I've not yet heard a dap or headphone that manages to sound like real life. Until such a technology exists preference will be the deciding factor, and directly relating to this, Pairing of headphone.
 
We all use different headphones so trying to tell each other how much we like a dap is pointless because we aren't listening to the dap, we are listening to the dap + headphone lol. We can of course get an idea of the dap's sound sig with comparisons using different headphones and daps, but end of the day we are listening to the pairing, and that's what we base our thoughts on. My favorite pairing at the moment is Teac P90SD + Jvc FX1100, it makes me emotional listening to music with this combo. It is all about the pairing, because no dap or headphone sound completely transparent, the best we can do is find a pairing that play's to our preference, that sounds natural to ourselves.

 

[shakur1996]

  ^ Btw the latest revision of QA360 have smoother highs, pcb v1.4 and v1.5, I've come across two comparisons mentioning this, one on headfi and another on turkish forum. pcb v1.4 production was late 2014 and pcb v1.5 is from 2015. I hear no brightness in my v1.5 QA360, but it does have the overly pristine analytical type sound.  Similar to you I also find that sound quality differences between daps are very small, I feel that in terms of technical capability most daps are pretty much equal, they only have differences in how they express the music, meaning that it will purely come down to preference, not one dap being better than another. Meaning that for different people different daps might invoke an emotional response. In a perfect world our daps and headphones would be completely transparent, but I've not yet heard a dap or headphone that manages to sound like real life. Until such a technology exists preference will be the deciding factor, and directly relating to this, Pairing. We all listen using different headphones so trying to tell each other how are daps sound is pointless because we aren't listening to the dap, we are listening to the dap + headphone lol. We can of course get an idea of the dap's sound sig with comparisons using different headphones and daps, but end of the day we are listening to the pairing, and that's what we base our thoughts on.

As for the version: I don't know. I think that andi16 bought it few weeks ago, but of course he could get older version. On the other hand, maybe I'm very sensitive to highs (I loved bass and mids of CA H8pro but I just could get along with its highs) and thus this too energetic, slightly analytical sounds of 360 is something that puts me off this DAP.
 
As for the pairing and differences between DAPs: I fully agree. This is why I also included information which phones I was pairing with 360. Of course there are some technical differences between some DAPs, but in most cases everything comes down to preferences and pairing. For example I see that there is a group of people who like very much: smooth, warm, analogue type of sound and not suprisingly all of those people highly praise DAPs like Tera and they claim that it is the best sounding DAP ever. This is just an example. And to be clear I don't have anything against Tera.
IMHO due to the above any firm, objective like statements about that a given DAP is better than the other should not be used.

 

[T.R.A.N.C.E.]

  As for the version: I don't know. I think that andi16 bought it few weeks ago, but of course he could get older version. On the other hand, maybe I'm very sensitive to highs (I loved bass and mids of CA H8pro but I just could get along with its highs) and thus this too energetic, slightly analytical sounds of 360 is something that puts me off this DAP.

 
I'm same as you! I sold my H8P in a week lol, I just found the highs too energetic. But I am fine with QA360 highs lol, but yes it is analyitcal, not warm or smooth. 

 

[andi16]

Well, what can I add to this discussion...
I'm happy to let my qa360 to shakur1994, even more happy now getting it back - because I love the sound.
I agree, We are in the realm of personal preferences, headphones parring and fine differences.
My findings are quite opposite, I find qa360 highs are smooth and a bit on the "low" side (still, not sure if I'm on 1.5 or 1.4 pcb).
Dilemma now is to choose one side in dx100 vs qa360 battle, but I'll give them both enough time to convince me.
 
As for qa360 - for me it "moves" vocals back one step, makes them "in line" with instruments (but it doesn't "shut them down"), then he "wraps" instruments around it a bit like "curved" tv screen.
I found that quite unique, and it makes "perfect"(for me)  3d scene balance between vocals and instruments.  Love the dynamics and clarity, for me its even more realistic then dx100.
The Dx100 - brilliant "You just arrived at the concert hall" mode + much frustration with poor android implementation.
 
Anyway, I enjoy my music collection "a lot".

 

[solopedro]

Is in massdrop right now!

 

[jk47]

  Is in massdrop right now!

i had come across mention of the qa360 before and crossed it off since i read a comment saying that it could only read a folder structure 2 folders deep. seeing it on massdrop made me reconsider.  so is the 2 level limitation of folder depth still the case with the latest firmware?

 

[bahamot]

Yes, it's still the same. (If you count the root, then it's 3 levels.)
They make it this way to speed up boot time.

 

[jk47]

  Yes, it's still the same. (If you count the root, then it's 3 levels.)
They make it this way to speed up boot time.

thanks for the information.  i can stop researching it now.  i have all my music in a folder structure that is up to 6 levels deep, e.g. classical>schubert>chamber music>late quartets>quartet 14>belcea quartet

 

[Frederick Wang]

I have like 20 folders on the sd card, it reads only 15, this happens a lot, don't know why, and don't see people discussing it

 

[puffmtd]

I have like 20 folders on the sd card, it reads only 15, this happens a lot, don't know why, and don't see people discussing it

Are you using the WAV only firmware?  The only time I have had this happen is if I put a file with the wrong format on the SD card.  Other than that, it reads my card completely.

 

[Frederick Wang]

Yes it is the wav only. I made sure the files were wavs. The weird part is, some folders don't show in the playlist