1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Shanling M0 - Nano size, touch screen, LDAC & aptX BT, USB DAC/transport and ESS Sabre ES9218P, FW 3.2

Discussion in 'Portable Source Gear' started by Shanling, Mar 16, 2018.
157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166
168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177
  1. sunshine83
    So, what would you recommend me to do? Shall I re-update my player with the 2.1 firmware?
  2. fish1050
    I sold high end audio for many years and I got to read a Sony sales brief outlining the specs for LDAC so I have known the LDAC bit rates since the codec specs were first announced.

    I have been using LDAC with my A17 and multiple Sony LDAC devices for almost 4 years. When I transmit via LDAC from my A17 to my Sony receiver I can see track information and the LDAC transmission bit rates displayed on my television. Though HQ is rated at 990 kbps it tops out for me at 906 Kbps max, 660 is typically around 600 Kbps and 330 is typically 320 Kbps. So I know it changes depending on BT connection quality. At home where I listen to music via bluetooth most the bit rates are very stable as the connection and distance are constant. On my A17 the LDAC quality options are named differently, LDAC HQ is "Sound Quality" then "Standard" (660 Kbps) and "Connection" which is 320 Kbps.

    I think we worry to much about numbers especially with bluetooth devices. A portable bluetooth speaker isn't likely to sound noticeably better at 990 Kbps vs 660 Kbps. Even when streaming bluetooth to my Sony STRDN860 receiver which is infinitely better sounding than any DAP and my high quality home speakers I can't hear a difference 99% of the time between HQ and standard even with 24 bit HiRes files. So I don't really worry about what the actual bit rate is from track to track especially with bluetooth speakers. I am strictly a wired headphone guy but I can imagine bit rate is more important when using bluetooth headphones.
    bflat likes this.
  3. HuoYuanJia
    Just a short question about the filters: Does the Fast/ Slow refer to the roll-off, e.g. "Fast" roll-off having better extension up to Nyquist or does the "Fast" refer to the ringing, e.g. less ringing (stronger roll-off but better temporal resolution)?

    What's the difference between the two Apodizing filters? I assume they both try to be N.O.S. but why are there two?
  4. fish1050
    I played around with the filters some, don't ask me to speak about differences as I couldn't hear a noticeable difference between most. I settled on "corrected min. fast" as it is apparently what many DAP makers use when they don't offer filter choices. From what I understand this is what my A17 essentially uses according to a Sony sales rep I spoke to. I found brickwall added to much edge to the treble and I really couldn't hear much of a difference between the other filters. The one I am using sounds really good to me so I think I will stick with it.
  5. abitdeef
    I’m using minimum fast and it sounds good to me but really the difffernces are hardly noticeable. It doesn’t change the base sound really at all, just some cut off or gentle smoothing of the digital wave form I believe.

    Which does alter the attack and sustain a bit to me, but is very subtle.
  6. endgame4
    All cards I tried worked. I have that one in 128GB version and it worked fine without reformatting or anything.
  7. martiniCZ
    I have red EVO too, there is only one problem, always need a more space :)
  8. ThEvil0nE
    Thank you kinds sirs... should be getting the M0 Monday. Hopefully all goes well and I'm off to my much anticipated 2 month vacation in Asia :smile_phones:
  9. HuoYuanJia
    Thank you, but my question was not aimed at personal experience. Filters will react differently according to the material anyway.
    For me, personally, it is all not important because the filters interfere around Nyquist which is outside of the audible area and absolutely unimportant with higher-than-CD-sample rates. I also think linear phase is only important for electronic music, if at all. Frequency roll-off is easily countered with an EQ. But only for theory, I want to know what Shanling means with "Slow". Is "Fast" the same as Sharp?
  10. abitdeef
    Another 128 red evo user here and absolutely no problems at all :)

    and to the gent above asking about filters yes fast means sharp and slow means a more gradual roll off. Brick wall is supposed to be the closest/ smoothest to Nyquist transition from the LPF but that might have some transient ringing in theory so I’m choosing the compromise of fast (sharp minimum) to have a slightly narrower band but not too narrow :wink: I don’t have a clue what fast corrected is.

    Of course as you know this effects audio in the non audible range unless you have dog hearing ha ha.
  11. fogma
    I'm 64gb EVO owner and sometimes it makes m0 reset few settings (not all). Old 8gb kingston works fine.
  12. gazzington
    I have some far more expensive daps but for ladt few weeks this one is my favourite. Tonight I'm listening to some opeth flacs and they sound incredible on this
    barondla and abitdeef like this.
  13. abitdeef

    Yes they sure do :)

    gazzington likes this.
  14. neo_styles
    Damnit, now I have to listen to Orchid when I get home tonight.
    abitdeef likes this.
  15. gazzington
    Can't believe the power this little dap puts out. Blackwater park sounds detailed and full as if I'm listening on a far more expensive set up
    abitdeef likes this.
157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166
168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177

Share This Page