[FiiO]

Chapter 1 Why does FiiO make a portable desktop-class player like M17?

Three years ago, many users felt very satisfied after they tried the THX (AM3D) on X7/X7II. In Japan, due to the limited quantity of the THX module for Q5/X7/X7II, the second-hand price even ramped up to 3 times the original price. We can see the popularity of the THX.

Therefore, after the FiiO M11 went on the market, many users hoped that we could also make a M11 with THX amplifier. Since the M11 did not adopt a modular design, we thus launched an M11 Pro equipped with THX amp.

Not surprisingly, it was also a success after its launch, and was loved and praised by numerous audiophiles. The combination of the normal version and the Pro version did meet various needs of users. Of course, this is also the same strategy of many digital products manufactures used. For example, almost all mobile phones now have different versions such as pro/ max.

Therefore, after the release of M15, many users hoped that we could launch the M15 Pro version equipped with THX amp on the basis of M15 too.

However, due to the high output power of the M15, it has far exceeded the THX78 used by the M11 Pro. To stand out, it is necessary to choose a THX module with a higher output. Otherwise, it becomes a M15 downgraded version.

In light of these, we’d best to break all the restrictions and just use the THX788, the desktop-class one in THX series. Then the output is high enough to widen the gap with M11 pro. However, the small package of the M15 would fail to meet our need in this case. Since the high output calls for demanding requirements on heat dissipation and the battery capacity. Under this circumstance, we have no other choice but to increase the size and weight. So we redesign the ID, and we finally choose the tough style that more people love because we don’t need to consider the hand feel.

However, the model has become M17 instead of M15 Pro. This is because we generally keep the original name and add a suffix only when the appearance of two devices are similar.

Besides, with the emergence of some large volume players, it can be said that a market segment has been created out of nothing, which I name "mobile players". This type of products, on the plus side, the sound quality is better than the portable players and is more convenient than the desktop one. On the downside, its sound quality is worse than that of a desktop player, and it is too heavy to be portable.

Therefore, considering the commercial value of our medium- and low-end music players and the large amount of money we invested in the Qualcomm Snapdragon 660, it is meaningful to make a high-end music player although there are many uncertainties. Of course, we still hope to keep the size and weight of this player within the limit of a portable player. Therefore, in terms of volume and weight, M17 is estimated to be the ceiling of our M series.

Finally, M17 is actually part of FiiO’s strategy of brand building. In the past few years, the most successful brand in China should be Huawei. It has grown from unknown to a high-end brand that keeps pace with Samsung and Apple, and is widely recognized by consumers all over the world. It is not easy at all. Though Xiaomi/OPPO/VIVO are trying hard to copy the success of Huawei, they failed. I think one thing is obvious, that is, through the continuous evolution of Huawei's Mate series with the price risen slightly for each model, and after the few years, it has become a high-end serious of Huawei.

For FiiO, we have been following this strategy too. X7 can be seen as considered a success, breaking the ceiling of 600USD. M15 is another breakthrough, which we succeeded in entering the level of 1300USD. However, as a pioneer among the Chinese HIFI brands, FiiO does need a 1500USD-class device to further enhance the brand.

Therefore, we can say that it is user needs, market competition, and company's development that have prompted us to invest lots of manpower and resources to develop the M17.

 

[Dixter]

just curious... does the M17 support playback of Apple Music Streaming....

 

[FiiO]

just curious... does the M17 support playback of Apple Music Streaming....

Yes.

Best regards

 

[whitedragem]

Nice breakdown; it is good to read some of the forces that led to this part coming about.

I read, elsewhere (probably the M17 literature), that FiiO worked with/‘had modified’ the THX amp modules - and that FiiO have previously tweaked their output (gotten familiar with them- eg the m11pro=>m11+).

Reading the above, with some insight for ‘we consumers’ as to decisions that may arise to make great use of R&D dollars spending (eg investment in Snapdragon implementation)- and that the idea of the M15 netting an audio ‘downgrade’ if a THX version was built (no doubt signal to noise rates would prove higher if the amps had to be pushed harder to hit ‘worthy’ spec sheet numbers (cough stupid, but many will buy based purely on them...).

Seeing, as told above, just how much there proves to be a high adoption rate for ‘patents’ (THX), FiiO do get left with tricky decisions to make)-eg previous Research & Development, and refinement with amplifier (circuit) implementation has led to tuning and ‘great output’ vs needing to tune anew, adopt different power path or aspects of implementation that comes with ‘differing parts’ and making them work ’*well’. ( *well here meaning: not just amping but amping in a way that is musically pleasing or reveals the cleanest presentation and has been orientated to deliver most optimal performance)

I suppose it comes down to consumers feeling safe with known variables; like eating from an international fast food outlet, we are familiar with, when travelling through an overseas country (not personally my choice/‘cup of tea’). THX means a ‘known quantity’ and when DAC chips are perceived as having a ‘house sound’, thoughts of ‘sizzle’ (images of bacon and eggs frying); considering buyers can almost start to image the sound -erm- ‘quality’ that they might just get from a combination of parts. Which ,given many of the best audio reviewers would never dare have an opinion on parts they haven’t heard (cause adoption of chips - the circuits they sit in and the design as a whole (eg shielding/layout/power deliver) all greatly effect sound), this fallacy or fantasy (expectation) placed on some new part, and the excitement we consumers can receive when hunting (/researching) tech is fascinating and fun. (and I feel the notion of this thread is written in that light, ‘hence “chapter 1”).

THX seems to be what ‘reference’ means to many, so the idea of the highest price point part using a THX configuration makes perfect logic, as the info brief above shares so clearly.

Thank you @FiiO (James) for a humble/‘non bragging’ incite.
I’d have talked up the customisations that you had made to the THX chips’, and the ‘design ideal’ you are striking for !)

From what I read many of your parts receive market tunings, and I like that you can do flatline reference.
The exemplary transport quality found in the M11+ (limited), possibly in part to the dual femto clock implementation, really shows that you have the capability to output sound quality that fights well/“holds its’ own” in the higher tiered price brackets.
I love consideration given to (noise/RF) isolations and no doubt many years of designing and redesigning multilayer PCBs and chip layouts has meant that these refinements can give the FiiO team an edge. To be fair the reason I always look to FiiO first for DAP products and cool do-dads and do-hickeys (eg BT dongles) is the after sales service and ongoing software support for products even beyond any notion of a ‘present market cycle’.
Long term dedicated service is a rarity it would seem in the modern world, and I learnt, awhile ago now, that the easiest voice I can share with the world is to ‘vote with my wallet’. (Support businesses that earn your trust)

I hope the M17 is something that drives consumer audio products into a new wave of higher quality capable with exceptional value for money ‘outstanding’ audio products.
May the M17 have a long and ‘joy bringing’ shelf life.

edit: fleshed out/fixed typos, and want to add “yay excited”, reread OP and saw “chapter 1” and realised that ye probably will cover ‘many more aspects’ of the M17 design in soon to come postings.
I dropped my icecream (you have my attention).

 

[rlw6534]

just curious... does the M17 support playback of Apple Music Streaming....

Yes, the lack of Apple Music compatibility is a big disappointment with M11, M11 Pro and M15. And FiiO seems to have given up on trying to fix. It makes no sense when every other streaming app works.

 

[Dixter]

Yes, the lack of Apple Music compatibility is a big disappointment with M11, M11+ and M15. And FiiO seems to have given up on trying to fix. It makes no sense when every other streaming app works.

some manufacturers don't think the iphone is direct competition to their products.... if you stack an iphone onto a DAC/AMP then it sounds and performs as well as a stand alone DAP.... I would think the Apple Music app would be an important option for playback... seems its a Android vs Apple issue though....

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 2 How to Evaluate the Combination of Player/AMP and Headphones
- Take M17 and HD800S as an Example
There is a common question that I am often asked when chatting with others. That is, how much effect can be achieved when using the XXX player to drive the XX headphones?
Frankly speaking, as a consumer, I hope someone can help me with this question too. However, being a manufacturer and an experienced engineer, this question is indeed difficult for me to give an answer. Because any answer requires a reference standard in nature, and this standard shall be recognized by everyone. But such a standard does not exist in the audio industry.
If there is only one answer, it must be calculated based on the curve of the maximum undistorted power of the player versus its output impedance, the impedance curve and the sensitivity of the headphones, to determine whether a certain player can drive a certain pair of headphones to achieve a maximum undistorted sound pressure that can fulfill the user requirement.
In professional audio designs, the maximum undistorted sound pressure is an essential indicator. Specifically, the THX certification for cinemas requires that the maximum undistorted sound pressure at all seats should reach the level of 105dB at 1kHz. And the sound pressure difference of the left, middle and right channels between each seat shall not exceed ± 3dB.
In China, the relevant industrial standards state as follow. The maximum sound pressure level of indoor sound reinforcement systems in various venues is, for sports: level one 105dB, level two 98dB, for music and opera performances: level one 109dB, level two 105dB, for modern music, rock music: level one 109dB, level two 106dB, for theatrical performances: level one 106dB, level two 103dB.
Of course, the requirements of these standards can only meet one of the most basic requirements. That is to say, at the very least, you can hear a sufficiently loud and clear sound when you go to watch ball games, musicals, or other performances.
Then what is the sound pressure level of the scenes in our daily life? According to Wikipedia, the heavy traffic (10 meters away) can be 80~90dB. The loud noises generated by rock drills used for road construction (1 meter away) reaches 100dB. For the aircraft engine, (100 meters away) it would be 110~140dB. The Vuvuzela horn (1 meter away) takes 120dB, and the shot of M1 rifle (1 meter away) is 168dB.
Therefore, theoretically, it would be demanding and difficult to completely restore these sounds. Some people may say that according to data, 120dB may cause hearing loss, and the ear pain threadhold value is 130dB. But one thing should be noted is, the 120dB here refers to a long sustained sound pressure. A short, quick one will not cause damage. Otherwise, those soldiers with M1 rifles will have bad ears. Or say, we shall see all soldiers participating in the war should wear 3M noise-canceling ear muffs.
In fact, I had written an article concerning the power and some combinations of HiFi products based on some researches and materials.
To talk about it in a more simple way, I personally don't think it is recommended to use a 10-point system to describe whether a certain device can drive a certain pair of headphones well. Instead, it can be roughly evaluated as follows:
Level one, it makes a sound.
There is basically no problem with it, haha. Even if you use a mobile phone that has a 3.5mm jack with HD800, it can make a sound at least.
Level two, it works.
The front-end (DAP/AMP/dongle) is able to drive the headphones to achieve an undistorted sound pressure of 90dB. It works when it plays some pop music, and the basic need of most of people can be met.
Level three, not too bad.
This refers to the front-end drives headphones that can achieve an undistorted sound pressure of 110dB. Most of the non-audiophiles should feel good and it can also satisfy the need for some beginners.
Level four, good.
It requires the front-end is able to drive the headphones to make an undistorted sound pressure of 120dB. It is more demanding than the requirements of THX and Chinese industry standard. It is also the aim of most audiophiles.
Level five, ideal.
The ideal level should not only be a matter of maximum sound pressure. For example, when playing the 1812 Overture, the sound of the gun shots should not only be loud and clear enough, but also involves various factors such as timbre matching, which is closely related to personal preferences. In general, it can be said that there is no absolutely ideal driver. However, if a DAP can drive the headphones to make the undistorted sound pressure far more than 120dB, it can be considered to be a relatively ideal choice.
These are my personal opinions, for reference only.
Finally, let's see what extent the M17 can drive the HD800 to.
Given:
1, The maximum undistorted power of the M17 is 3000mW at 32 ohms, and 500mW at 300 ohms.
2, For the HD800S, its impedance is 300 ohms, the sensitivity is 102dB/1Vrms, and the nominal continuous power is 500mW.
So we can do a simple calculation.
According to P = U²/R, supposed R=300 ohms, then the undistorted effective voltage of M17 should be: V=√(P x R)=√(0.5 x 300)=12.25Vrms. Obviously, the result is far more than 1Vrms.
Then what is the maximum undistorted sound pressure that can drive the HD800S when the voltage is 12.25Vrms? First we need to convert the Sensitivity to a value that can be calculated with Power value. The formula is: Sensitivity (db/mw) = Sensitivity (db spl/V) -10*(3 - log(headphones impedance)) = 102 - 10*(3 - log(300)) = 102 - 10*(3 - 2.477) = 102-5.23 =96.77dB/mW
To be honest, this sensitivity is not high enough and requires higher driving power. Let's see how much power is required to achieve an undistorted sound pressure of 120 dB.
Given the sensitivity ( A ), the sound pressure needs to be achieved ( B ), then the driving power should be: P = 10 ^ ((B-A)/10)
Put the data into the formula,
P = 10 ^ ((120-96.77) / 10) = 10 ^ 2.323 = 210 mW
Remember that this 210 mW is the power at 300 ohms load. It's nearly impossible for average dongles and mobile phones to achieve. In fact, the M17 can only output 250 mW at 300 ohms load under battery power supply, and can only reach 500 mW under DC power supply in Enhanced Over-ear Headphone Mode.
Therefore, back to the question at the beginning, the combination of the M17 and HD800S can achieve good results. If ignoring the factor of timbre matching, the M17 can be considered as an ideal choice to drive the HD800S under DC power supply in Enhanced Over-ear Headphone Mode.

---

To be continued

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 3 Will FiiO release more players that are better than M17 in the near future?

In the Internet age, the transparency of information is really high and everyone can easily get access to various information. I have no idea of what the purpose of people who check certification and registration information of M17 is, but some people do search for China Compulsory Certification (3C Certification) of M17. And they see on the certification that there are M17S, M17Pro, M17Plus, M17K and M17MKI listed in the blank of derivative models. For this reason, I am often asked recently that when will these models come out, and they even worry about the stainless steel version and the titanium alloy version of M17. Of course, I can fully understand this feeling. In fact, the reason why I spend so much time on social media is, to be as open and transparent as possible so that consumers have right to know more about products. Let's talk about this issue today. Firstly, any products made by FiiO will follow the form of a certain product line under normal cases. The M series starts from M3 and reaches its limit by M17. If there are more expensive and larger ones, they should not belong to the product line of portable player. Of course, what I mean the larger and more expensive ones refer to the relationship similar to M17 and M15, rather than the relationship between M11 Pro and M11 Plus. M11Plus is an updated version of M11Pro, and there is an alternative relationship between the two. However, M17 and M15 do not have such an alternative relationship, but coexist with each other at different prices, targeting at different needs. It can be said with certainty that M17 is the top of the M series. Unless the naming rules of the model change in the future, there will be no such thing as M18/M19/M20. Secondly, Why are there so many derivative models in the FiiO 3C certification? Generally speaking, due to the high cost and long time of certification, we usually do related certification in advance. Just like, when you register a company, in order to save time, you will also prepare several company names in advance for future use. Therefore, this is also a common practice in case of something unexpected happening in the future. It doesn't necessarily mean the derivative models will be made or even be in production. For example, the attached picture is the 3C certificate of M7. There are a bunch of derivative models such as M7S and M7PRO listed. But more than 3 years have passed and the M7 has been discontinued, most of these models didn’t made even now. Thirdly, M17 is regarded as the limit of a handheld HIFI audio player in terms of size and weight. If there will be other models with bigger size and greater weight, they should belong to other categories, maybe R series or X series. FiiO adheres a philosophy of stability when producing and planning. M17 is a great leap and breakthrough for FiiO in terms of price, size, performance and functions. It can be said that our imagination and creativity are squeezed out for some innovative designs of it. We need some time for reflection and review, so it is unnecessary and impossible to launch a better device that can replace M17 now. Fourthly, will there be titanium, copper or stainless steel versions of the M17? It can be said with certainty that there will not be any. Because the FH9 that we are about to release is equipped with a titanium alloy shell, and the production capacity is too low. It won’t be easy to produce 100 units with a titanium alloy shell as large as the M17. In addition, stainless steel will be heavier and this material is as difficult to process as titanium. Copper will be easier, but it has much greater weight and easy to oxidize and discolor. Besides, no matter titanium, copper, or stainless steel, they all mean a huge increase in costs. We think this way is of little significance to FiiO. In fact, we have only produced the M11 Pro stainless steel version and M11 Plus stainless steel version for all these years, both of which are strongly requested by our users. For FiiO, we really do not have the will and motivation in this regard. Though it meets the needs of a small number of people, it will inevitably lead us to be blamed and cause many people to criticize us for unreasonable price, even if they are not going to buy.

---

To be continued

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 4 The process of designing the M17 leather case, and relevant answers about some suggestions from our users

The design of the M17's leather case was a challenge. In this chapter, I would like to introduce our design process and some eliminated solutions.
The first challenge came from its mech-style appearance. There are many diagonal planes on the body of the M17 while the leather material is rather soft than the body of the M17. Therefore, a lot of just-needed materials need to be pressed to ensure the case is not too thick. Otherwise, it will affect the grip comfort and operation. The other challenge was that the 6 sides of the case have functional requirements of buttons, connectors, volume knob and heat dissipation. Also, it needs to protect the whole M17 comprehensively.
1. Design and manufacture of the M17 leather case
The design of the M17 leather case is the same as that of the M17. It also includes a large number of hexagonal elements on the hollow at the knob, the press button, and the stainless steel heat dissipation grille on the back. Even if the entire leather case protects the M17 strictly, we can still sense it.

Let me share with you the interior design and production process of the leather case, and then talk about why we would finalized it. In order to maintain a soft touch while strengthening the back cover with stainless steel grilles, the leather material should be processed as thin as possible. First, we tailed an expanded view of the M17, as well as openings of every connector and port out of a whole piece of cattle hide.

After finishing the cutting of the case, the next step was to hot-pressed the buttons with copper-formed mold. So did the FiiO logo.

To make the case a mech style, we pasted a manganese steel sheet that has already been molded to every side of the case. This key step not only achieves a mech styling, but also makes it more resistant to fall.

Finally, through the hand-made process by craftsmen, the final case fits perfectly with the M17.
From the expanded view of the case above, you may be curious why we did not fill in the button positions on the leather case? The picture below well explains it. If the buttons were protruding from the leather case, then the M17 cannot be pushed into the case.

2. Other schemes
Before choosing the above schemes, we had discussed several other schemes.
(1) A design with full openings on the side
Since leather is soft, it will be easily deformed with over-long openings when cutting it, and the subsequent processes will be more difficult. The leather can be better shaped with the help of manganese steel or other hard materials. Over-long opening edges will be easy to flange and warp, and will affect the grip comfort during using. In addition, the larger the opening, the weaker the protection when the device falls down.

(2) A design with semi-openings on the side
It will also be easy to flange and warp with semi-openings on the side. In addition, it will cause another problem, i.e. the leather between buttons will be very narrow and weak to fracture.

(3) Partial openings of the button
This design also has narrow links between buttons. And FiiO is an international brand, so we have to meet most users' needs by making the opening size fit as many users as possible around the world.

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 4-1 How about a cost-effective transformation of the M17?
--Portable desktop-class DAC/Amp Q9
Feedback from users after the release of the M17 is ideal. However, it is true that the price is quite high, especially at this moment when the market environment and economic conditions are not so good. To prove this point, I also did a small survey, inviting Chinese users to participate in it. The survey results showed that more than 42% of users thought that price is the biggest obstacle for them to purchase the M17. Secondly, 26% of users thought that the M17 is too big and heavy.
For users who think the M17 is too big and heavy, I believe they have other choices, such as the M11 Plus, M15, and even small USB DAC and amplifiers ( like the BTR5). But for sure, from the current technical conditions, there are no other alternatives that can compete with the M17 which has strong functions, driven capacity and rich connectors. Because whether by size or weight, the M17 has basically the highest power density among portable music players with such a high-driven capacity at present.
For those who think the price of the M17 is too high, I was thinking if I could do something for them. From the product itself, the highest cost of the M17 is the SoC module, followed by 2 ES9038PRO modules, and then the all-CNC integrated aluminum alloy shell, followed by a display screen and so on.
Can we simplify the M17 by giving up the processor and display screen for users? Anyway, we have smartphones, tablets, laptops, computers and other desktop devices for extra connections.
We can replace the Qualcomm 660 SoC with a single-chip module, and the display screen with a small one (or get it away). The price of the ES9038PRO is still rising. If we give up the SoC module, we can save more space to strengthen the power supply, ensuring the same sound quality as the M17's. As a result, the final price can be set to within 1000 USD.
Will you be interested in such a DAC/Amp?

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 5 Why is the RAM and FLASH of M17 only 4G+64G?

In fact, when the M17 was in the internal beta process, our users raised this question. In fact, it was uncontrollable. Here I would like to explain it in detail.

At present, there are very few processors appropriate for android-based music players. FiiO has already adopted processors from Samsung, Rockchip, Qualcomm, etc. Rockchip's has weak performance, Samsung's has poor compatibility while Qualcomm's is currently the most appropriate. Therefore, four Chinese brands all applied the Qualcomm processor to their music players.

Due to the small order in the player industry, we had to order standard modules which have fewer optional configurations, including RAM+FLASH of 4+64 and 6+128. However, there are several problems with the module.

--Long lead time: the current lead time is 6 months.

--Minimum order quantity (MOQ) restriction: the current MOQ is 3000 RMB.

--High cost: each processor module is very expensive.

--The configuration of 6+128 is much more expensive than the 4+64, which means the retail price will be correspondingly increased.

Therefore, if we adopted the 6+128 module to the M17, there would be some problems.

--For consumers, it is worth buying a high-capacity micro SD card than paying more money for higher RAM and FLASH storage.

--We have to invest several million for the order of the module, which would be stressful for our production.

--The price of the M17 is relatively high. It was difficult for us to predict the sales at the beginning, so we were cautious about the order quantity of the module. And if we choose the 4+64 module, we can reserve more because we have other products also using it.

More details:

In the business world, the sales mode of micro SD card and HiFi portable player is exactly the opposite. As a digital accessory, micro SD cards have an annual sales volume of hundreds of millions. It is standardized with a large market. Commercially speaking, the cost of brand promotion and R&D can be ignored. Therefore, its retail price and hardware cost are very close.

Since portable HiFi players are a very niche product, there is almost no standardization. Therefore, the retail price includes marketing, research and development expenses. It is expensive for retailers. Therefore, the retail price and hardware cost are far away from each other.

Therefore, considering that 4G RAM is completely sufficient for music players. Larger RAM only allows the player to run more apps, yet it is bad for sound quality. More FLASH capacity can be achieved via a micro SD card. If it's still not enough, we have designed dual Type-C ports for the M17, so that it can be connected to a large-capacity hard drive.

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 6 Why would the M17 cost thousands of dollars? Does FiiO break their price rules?

Since the announcement of the M17, most users expressed that the price is reasonable. But there are indeed some consumers who didn't know much about the player industry and products said the M17 is too expensive!
So, today I would like to talk about the pricing of the M17.
You may agree that the price of a commodity should be determined by its exact value. To evaluate the price of a product, we cannot ignore the design, configuration, material as well as market competition, supply and demand.
The materials used in the M17 are rich enough to achieve excellent performance. Here I will give some examples.
--Contains the best high-resolution display screen in the current player market.
--Contains Qualcomm 660 SoC with the fastest computing speed in the current player industry.
--Contains two of the most expensive top-level ES9038PRO DAC chips.
--Applies currently the most powerful THX788+ analog amplification technology.
--Contains a top-three 9200mAh battery.
--Contains currently the Bluetooth receiver chip QCC5124 with the highest configurations.
--Contains currently probably the only standard supercapacitor.
--Applies currently the most state-of-the-art VC heat dissipation technology.
--Contains currently probably the most luxurious accessories, such as a heat dissipation cooling fan stand and DC power adapter.
The commonly-seen unibody aluminum alloy CNC housing is a sure existence. Actually, some expensive music players used stainless steel, copper and even titanium alloy which are harder to process with higher costs. Also, I would skip similar designs like the FPGA. In a word, the M17 is absolutely the best music player in hardware configurations in the same price range.
Some of you may question that it is just piles of materials heaped up together yet without paying attention to real stuff at all. Frankly speaking, rich materials are the greatest respect to users.
Therefore, from the user's point of view, it is a bit weird to criticize manufacturers for stacking materials in a product.
Let us talk about the pricing of the M17 from the perspective of supply and demand and market competition.
As we all know, the price ceiling of portable music players was broken by imported brands 7 years ago. The market and users were shocked. They did not expect that there were many people who were willing to buy one, and after that, the price became higher and higher. The price ceiling of portable music players in the China market was constantly broken again and again, not only for foreign brands, but also brands in China.
In fact, FiiO has not followed the trend, and has been steadily making cost-effective music players. In the first two years, we have successively released popular music players like the M11 and M11Pro. With users' encouragement and support, we continued the success of releasing the M15.
In general, from the X3 in 2013 to the M17 in 2021, time has proved our effort and progress. The birth of the M17, which was widely praised and popular among users, proved that FiiO has taken a space in the HiFi player market at the same price range as similar products.
We have received a lot of feedback from our old users, especially the M15 users, that they were expecting a music player that could better meet their needs when listening to music in different ways. After all, we are always chasing better, newer and more powerful products within our budget.

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 6-1 Get to know more about the desktop-quality power supplies of the M17

The desktop mode of the M17 benefits from the more abundant energy of the DC power supply, faster power response, and lower internal resistance of the power source. Also, the power supply of the internal amp has been increased to ±11V, and the driven capacity has reached a desktop-grade 3000mW+3000mW in balanced output.
In addition, thanks to the DC mode, we also designed the BAT/DC switch. In the DC mode, the internal battery will not work. This helps to better protect the battery. Therefore, the M17 can be placed on the desktop for a long time and used as a desktop device yet without worrying that the battery would be degraded.

Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the energy flow under the battery power supply. Under the battery power supply mode, the M17 is completely battery-powered, so it is particularly convenient to take it around anywhere you want.

Figure 2 shows the energy flow when plugging in a 12V/3A DC adapter, and the DC/BAT switch is at the BAT position. At this time, the M17 is powered by battery and DC hybrid power supplies. First, the 12V power source will flow into the battery through the internal circuit, and then the battery will power the whole device. We can imagine the battery as a large pool with water in and out. In the hybrid power supply mode, the battery capacity can be kept full at all times, which is suitable for use in short-term fixed scenarios. At this time, the battery life will be longer than in pure battery mode.

Figure 3 shows the energy flow when plugging in a 12V/3A DC adapter, and the DC/BAT switch is at the DC position. At this time, the M17 is completely powered by the DC adapter, and the power supply of the internal THX788+ headphone amplifier is also increased to ±11V. So it can drive most headphones thanks to the larger voltage swing and output power. For sure, heat generation will be more serious in this mode. But don't worry, we can put the M17 on the included cooling fan stand for effective heat dissipation. In DC power supply mode, the battery life can be greatly extended because the battery is not involved in the working process at all. So we have no worries about the battery.

 

[FiiO]

Chapter 7 Is it worth taking the big M17? Talk about the size, weight and heat of the M17

As a manufacturer, we are quite afraid of consumers buying our products before thinking about it. Because every product has its own specific target customers. Those who are not one of them would complain and criticize if this product cannot meet their needs. Therefore, they would no longer trust this brand and give up successive new products. More seriously, these negative comments would probably be spread on social media and cause bad effects on the brand.

Therefore, we have already informed consumers that the M15 and M17 were designed for those who are chasing ultimate sound quality instead of ordinary users.

Take cars as an example. What ordinary people need is reliable quality, safety, good passability, comfortable driving experience, good-looking interiors, and low fuel consumption. However, for those tens of millions of sports cars and supercars, we would find that they are far away from the above characteristics. However, I guess no one will buy a sports car and complain about that.

The M17 is positioned as a "portable desktop-class player", which includes many desktop-grade designs and configurations, almost an ultimate level.

From the perspective of portable products, the size, weight, and heat generation are indeed the upper limit. But if we compare it to desktop devices, it is compact and light. This reflects the great progress in the design of music players which can integrate a digital audio streamer and DAC/Amp inside such a mini package. We have also seen many users express their affirmation and appreciation for our superb designs.

Usually, the M17 is not used when commuting or going out. Because it is not so convenient to hold it just like a mobile phone.

The commonly-used scenarios of the M17 are placing it indoors to listen to music, or taking it for a long business trip or travel.

Basically, we can make a simple analogy: traditional desktop music devices = desktop computers, portable players = mobile phones, while M17 = laptops/tablets.

From this analogy, you may have a further understanding of the M17.

We FiiO make products to provide more options for the market and consumers instead of making choices for users.

Therefore, if you want lighter, smaller, and more portable products, we have the M11 Plus, and other portable products such as the Q3/Q1/BTR5/KA3 ranging from large to small. In the future, we may develop an M15S between the M11 Plus and M17. You can rationally choose one according to your own needs.

Of course, some people may say that some similar foreign devices have a compact size, long battery life and are uneasy to generate heat while national players are limited in technologies. If it was a few years ago, 90% of audiophiles may agree. But since some foreign brands released some music players with higher driven capacity, things were different.

Because consumers have discovered that it is difficult to do well in size, weight and heat generation for players to have strong performance and high driven capacity. Under the current technical conditions, there may be slight differences between different devices. The size, weight, and even driven capacity of the M17 are superior to other foreign devices. After all, Chinese national brands are well experienced in this respect.

In general, to choose the most appropriate device for ourselves, we have to know our needs, as well as the pros and cons of the products.

 

[whitedragem]

[ed....... ] how much effect can be achieved when using the XXX player to drive the XX headphones?
Frankly speaking, as a consumer, I hope someone can help me with this question too. However, being a manufacturer and an experienced engineer, this question is indeed difficult for me to give an answer. Because any answer requires a reference standard in nature, and this standard shall be recognized by everyone. But such a standard does not exist in the audio industry.

(Excellent thread btw)

This is the crux of it; its why audio science review (as a site filled with ‘users’) proves toxic, as the science of it all falls apart quite quickly. Speaking as someone who has leaned 90%+ of their studies towards humanities/‘mind science(s)’; we humans are not ‘scientific’ with regards to auditioning kit. We cannot be. We ARE NOT experiencing the same things, and thusly cannot report on ‘baseline’ metrics.
Interpretation gets in the way of the data, sure- but- “what data should we encompass”?

My best amplifier had a phenomenal slew rate, and there once was a time I wouldn’t dare bi-amp without knowing the damping factor of an amp on the speakers...
I believe the electrical engineers and solderers/tinkers who swap op-amps and redo circuits with subtle variances would have a wealth of knowledge that the everyday pundits would be arguing for decades; experiences these blacksmiths’ ‘of the modern age’ have seen (heard?) first hand and have zero doubt in their relationship to the audio path- yet are discounted on popular sites for not having done ‘very specific’ double blind testing.

The notion of double blind testing (which I am happy to setup and perform for others as an intro to audio), serves a purpose, sure... but it isn’t the be all and end all to audio nirvana (which should involve a relaxed environment and HUNDREDS of hours of listening...); my experience has educated me to believe(see) that I can instantly pick up nuances in a playback that have been previously hidden, and that any aspects that render a particular playback ‘different’, are obvious. I do not need to fast switch sources in a specific setup.. (although a baseline setup I AM FAMILIAR WITH has been my base for operating, adjusting ONE VARIABLE at a time).. When a violin is the most isolated in its’ stage space it has ever been rendered, or a lyric, previously muffled or obscured can finally be heard clearly; aspects of playback can reveal improvements from previous kit, and “EAR TRAINING” and familiarity are my two best assets.

The ear training part is the killer- it took two decades for me to get many basics of understanding hifi behind me... (involving rotating hundreds of pieces of kit, and being a pro installer /‘in the industry’; much EXPOSURE); a lot of which was listening to test tracks (non musical) at ‘the threshold of observation’.
What would have required 10% total harmonic distortion to drive me insane, became around 3% threshold (circa 2000), and probably 1% by 2005... 0.1% THD takes around a second for me to discern during a listening session, and I wouldn’t keep listening, generally wanting to find/fix issues BEFORE sitting down for hours reviewing...

Much playback with class A amps, and having seen intro of class D amplification for audio that isn’t car subwoofers (pre 2000), watching the industry ‘evolve’ (cough) over the last fourty years has been amusing...

So I am one of those zealots that doesn’t fit the nice neat holes that we stereotype everyone into on this site (I use scientific method a LOT, but wouldn’t leave a purchasing decision to a spec sheet).
Whilst I have experienced first hand much of the stuff that is theoretical at best, and wives tales/witchcraft ‘most likely’, have important changes to playback, and I can explain scientifically why USB cables matter (more than just about any other cable in the stack(to get a baseline of ‘built right’)) etc.. I acknowledge that the majority have no idea about slew rates/benefits of ‘class A’ amplification/damping factors etc; most are happy knowing the ‘yellow belt’ basics of distortion rates given in the white sheet specifications for any given DAC chip etc...

We all have differing ideas of what scientific observations matter most to musical playback..
And thats the rub- because test tones have little to do with the relationship between five musicians on a stage playing rock and roll; or that the fifty years of artisan craftery a master puts into their recording will have wrist inflections or breath work that will not vary the source by .1dB (insignificant to measuring tools and ‘spec sheets’), but will be identifiable to every student of the instrument as being the trademark of a master.

SO the subtle stuff is often what sorts the wheat from the chaff...
It is also the stuff most affected by a bad file compression/moving to class D amplfiication/having ‘dark’ playback chain/‘insert argument between two people saying “differences are subtle and ‘not worth it’”; it is subtle, sure, but ‘not worth it’? -Its decades of mastering an instrument - that contributes to MEANINGFUL artistic expression...

If a cable change makes one music genre have one instrument play more meaningfully, there are MANY audiofools, like myself, out there finding noticable differences. (unscientifically, no doubt).
That same change would prove inconsequential majority of the time (to the masses), and so ‘science’ goes out the door.. (we are not scientific, either in our observation methods, OR in our methods for appreciation: what we look for and our training/education to apprecizate MEANINGFUL SUBTLE changes.

____________________^^^humans are not scientific^^^___________________________

Me?
_________________________________=> why a great DAP is the source of it all and ‘a very good place to start’: __________________

I have had a few FiiO parts, and like what they do.
I believe the company gives exceptional support for products beyond typical ‘end of life’, and that I see many decision ‘pro consumer’ and it looks like the mission statement or ‘motis operandi’ is to do well in the (sales) market by constant due dilligence and dedication to the end customer..
I agree that many times it has taken them a year (or more) of constant firmware updates to get their ‘multi faceted’ products firing on all cylinders PERFECTLY; but I see them do these efforts year in/year out and have been consistently DEDICATED to being pro consumer/‘pro planet’.
I will buy a FiiO part unresearched and ‘impulsively’ - and I cannot say this about more than a handful of audio manufacturers. (well done FiiO).

I have made comment that I’d take (my) M11+ over the M15 or the M17.
This was a comment, mostly unresearched, based on how perfect a transport the M11+ is (and my usage scenario; which has it transporting 0s and 1s into offboard DACs or analogue via external headphone amps).
Having read more about the M17 in this thread, I have now been actively promoting that part.
The guy I loaned a nice Burson pre/DAC/headamp to yesterday now knows that the M17 in ‘desktop’ mode might be the part they are after...
What I do know is that the transport quality of the M11+ is ‘SOOOOOOOOO GOOD’ (‘great‘ to anyone using an interpreter/translator); the improvements it brings to EVERY DAC is generally more than the change one might experience between two different DACs (at the entry level price points/‘same class’).
Even bluetooth is better, which indicates the improvements are ‘in part’ due to perfectly reading the source files. -Remember: most consumer class equipment is simply built to be ‘compatible’ and is happy relying on all sorts of ‘error correction’ which will ‘fill in the gaps’ with predictive math.. ; which is the difference with why a ladder DAC with accurate ‘half voltages’ vs normal methods interpolating and ‘guessing’ the half steps, as ‘averages’; fast transients and long bass (sound) waves all noticable improve; whether that is instantly noticable to YOUR preferred music genre is semantics- playback equipment has real and measurable ‘scientific’ variables, that manufacturers DO NOT WANT US TO LOOK AT (cause manipulating a few common variables is easy, and so ‘smoke and mirrors’ regarding the ACTUAL things WE SHOULD BE LOOKING FOR....) which will make very discernable differences that effect the emotional engagement with a piece of kit. *(whether bass notes be more exteneded or ‘tighter’/‘tauter’, or ‘the dirt unders ERICs’ fingernails..’ or a particular wrist flick or breath movement....)(the subtle stuff is where the magic is often at)

The FiiO M11+ is such a good reader or *transport* that even bluetooth has faster more musical response to file playback. This blows me away and was not expected.. but, DAPs generally flog phones as transports; funny that... (not really, but the consensus from savvy consumers is ‘why spend money on a box when I already have one that does the same’?!)

Truth is when spec sheet wars favour specific measurements (ONLY) and consumers couldn’t argue their way out of a wet paper bag as to what makes audio kit GOOD, then a lot of grey areas of digital music reproduction fly under the radar of the noses of ’would be’ pundits... Due to all the obsfucation of the relevant data, many are happy just leaving some arguments ‘on the fence’. (eg cables)

As an example about spec sheets and ‘chasing numbers’:
not all numbers are equal, yet we as consumers treat them so... so as to get out of delicate ‘audiofool’ standard arguements- I will take the discussion to ‘digital camera sensors’ for a brief second; a 4 megapixel fovean sensor has detail more/equal to a 16 megapixel x-trans sensor which is more/equal to a 24 megapixel CMOS sensor.
There is a very simple reason CMOS sensors rule the market- mostly it is due to consumers having been educated to believe that megapixels matter (MOST).
Whilst there is truth to the notion of ‘megapixel matters’; it is mostly due to the number indicating ‘when’ in history said tech came to market (the timeline favouring CPU evolution and the ‘power’ of ancillory/processing chips to handle the data.
I still shoot with a 4 megapixel fovean camera (from the 2000s), and it is interchangeable (in daylight shooting conditions) with any of my nice fuji xtrans stuff (that I downgraded to from ‘full frame’ Sony A7ii)... If I was a ‘yellow belt’ consumer pure and simple, with no ‘real world’ useage /testing or understanding of the kit I use, I’d probably still use the full frame sony (and talk up its ‘technical prowess’ (like dynamic range)), and I would go on believing in my ‘well specified’ full frame.
The reality is the two smaller camera systems mostly deliver equal performance, in some areas better, and in one area worse; and none of it matters due to handling and usablity of the two ‘non Sony’ camera systems- they both consistently give better photographs, and in part that is due to enjoying using them/having them with me/usable controls that I can autopilot my way through...
I worked in a pro camera store (before Sonys’ recent takeover of the full frame market) and we kept a Sony camera in store to show how unusable they were ‘in the real world’.
All camera store staff would laugh at me for the years I endured with Sony kit.. (I have had 40+ digital camera systems since the mid-late nineties, quite a few have been Sony, some good, some not so good)
Would I recommend a Sony camera to an end user?
Maybe, but it wouldn’t have anything to do with SPEC SHEETS.

Regarding audio then, how crazy is it that we would shortlist equipment based on a harmonic distortion rating or channel seperation figure.
They help us understand the kit; eg if a balanced amp has the same channel seperation spec for Single ended output as the balanced jacks, then that TELLS US something about the design ideals and ‘actual delivery’ of said design.

Getting back to my M11+; Exceptional trasnsport/good DAC/acceptible amp/great tool (eg bluetooth send/receive, DSD conversion etc)
When I feed it to other DACs- the device proves itself as an audio essential (would never use a phone/‘other’ USB transport vs the FiiO transport); it is of a high class nature and would hold its own against some reference transports I have used/owned (some being highly modified).
When I feed the audio into a great external headphone amp, the DAC quality can be appreciated. - a little shy of the iFi Diablo DAC (which is the closest to a ladder DAC sound I have ever heard in non R2R kit)
But when comparing the internal ‘THX’ amps vs the rest of the circuit; they are the ‘low quality‘ “holds the part back” part of the kit. (the weakest link)
VS desktop ‘class A’ amp kit (worth vastly more than the full cost of the M11+), the M11+ is obviously lacking... The aforementioned iFi Diablo is a step up in amplification quality,..

Is a FiiO M11+ paired with an iFi Diablo a pretty neat ‘end game’ (mid-fi) setup? Yes - absolutely. For four times the cost a consumer could start building a hifi rig in the tiers above such kit.. but this is two tiers of kit ABOVE entry level, and the point where ‘best bang for buck’ starts to seriously falter.

The notion of the M17 that goes the route of fixing the achilles heel (the amp section), is terrific. One box to ‘rule them all’.
Portable and desktop-able. More swiss army knife that even the M11+ AND has a flick blade that is effectively a full on medieval broad sword!!

My comments here might not look focused on any topic; they are not- I don’t care to argue semantics of double blind AB testing with extremists to their belief system (who have no ability to hear others’ points of view, or understand the lack of evolution in the measuring tools that science often needs do when playing catchup to a new field of enquiry (sound science is a ‘broad term’ and does in no way cover all sound, as science, in meaningful ways to how music reacts to a soundspace and ‘as played’ by masterful musicians); what we do know is that manufacturers will chase any flavour of the moment ‘consumer spec sheet interest’ to sell to their FEARS; vs a few honest hifi companies that tailor for audio quality and sell to our DESIRES..

It is easy to obsfucate numbers towards what consumers (think they) want. When consumers knew that IPS (in-plane switching) LCD screens had better colour accuracy and were generally ‘the more expensive product’ on the market (accounting for <10% of market share), manufacturers started pairing 6bit (colour inaccurate) contollers (cheap) with IPS LCDs. The result was MORE IPS screens on the market (meet the demand of ‘savvy consumers’) who were now misled by their ‘yellow belt’ education. (IPS = good)

When we buy audio kit not for how it sounds, but rather ‘how it measures’; we are doomed to audio kit that measures well and sounds horrible, or at least ‘unmusical’.

As a consumer who has consciously bought ‘inferior’ (spec sheet) kit to replace ‘well regarded kit’, on multiple occasions, I have found that the more musical heritage brands massively outpunch kit that often is 10x better in some specifications.
It is fair to say I learned decades ago to ‘trust’ a few of the hifi brands, and to take spec sheets with ‘a grain of salt’.(a handful of salt sometimes)
FiiO as a company have often done ‘market tuning’ of parts.
Now that they have dediced to compete with ‘the big dogs’ on the international market, they have output a run of machines tailored to western neutrality sound.
In my eyes FiiOs’ present market strategy and production puts them at the top of their game.
This is a market player who has matured, rolled with the punches over the years, and now has clear objectives to target and is ‘hitting it out of the park’.

I’d replace a stack to an M17 / use an M17 as a ‘b’ setup (eg office) for any big $ audiofiles that do not want to ‘give up’ much...
using the lowly M11+ (whose weakest aspect is the amp), driving some Ultrasone edition 5 using the 4.4mm balanced output- they will take the full 120 volume output (low gain). Most comfortable listening is between 86 and 102, and irrelevant to the volume level chosen, the music is lacking weight to the instruments (that would come with expensive headhphone amps - costing more than the total cost of the M11+).
Knowing that the M17 has directly addressed this ‘weakest aspect’ of their latest designs, and that the TOTAL BUILD is ‘perfect to make use of the high power output’ AKM4499 - this is evolution of tech, with the marriage of ‘right time/right place’.
I’d hope the M17 proves a market rejuvinator like the iPhone 3Gs was to ‘smart phones’; the M17 is really good ‘one box’ does all that looks to be able to deliver on the promises that such boxes have been pushing for, for..,well, for aeons.... (Hifiman 60X/80X DAPs back inthe 2000s)

If it wasn’t for the great writeups being given here discussing the M17 I wouldn’t know any of this, of course, and would be simply comparing its’ specs vs another... (and was why I was happy believing that it had nothing to give me over the M11+).
I use the M11+ basically as a transport; if I wanted an amp built in that matched the ‘tier’ of the rest of the circuits’ sound; that would be the M17!

With that ‘heat diminishing’ custom case; I would buy the M17 knowing I was solid for a decade, and that some lucky relative would net an (massive) upgrade in sound quality and usability when I was ready to move on....