[Ross]

  Interesting you say the M sounds resolving.  How about the stage and dynamics?  Have you compared masterings that you know are perfect?  Which player is transparent to the mastering and outputs the uncompressed dynamics of the recording?  I have heard that Calyx M is warm, and does this mask the recordings from it's true intentions?

 
As I mentioned, the AK240 is more three-dimensional, but the Calyx M sounds bigger and more natural. The Calyx M has better dynamics - it is faster, particularly the treble which is incredibly fast while remaining smooth. I don't know how you would know what "perfect masterings" are (not having been present in the recording studio at the time), but I have tried a range of music from classical, opera, instrumental, rock, and electronic, including 24/96 files. The M is not what I would call a "warm" player, compared with the HM801 (for example) which is much warmer. It is fairly balanced, with perhaps just a touch of warmth. It doesn't mask anything. It also has a big, bold, colorful sound which I haven't previously heard from any DAP. If only they would fix the absence of folder browsing in the next firmware, it would be close to perfect.

 

[M Coupe]

I decided on the AK240 after waiting to demo the Calyx M.  I felt very different from this review.  The Calyx M played like a fraternity party, it was big bold and fun but lacked finesse.  I am sure that is a function of preference vs. anything else.  However, the AK240 seemed to give me what the recording had to offer.  The recording I knew sounded good from years on my home 2 channel stereo setup sounded brilliant on the AK 240.  Lesser recordings also got a polite treatment with the AK240.  It seemed to elevate the source but soar with higher resolution music.  The Calyx seemed like the player that had too much cowbell.
 
Furthermore, listening to IEMs like the SE846, it was a complete mess.  I was dialing in volume ins such small increments that I could never seem to get the right volume.  If you have an SE846, don't bother.  The W60 faired a little better but not much. And yes,  I did play around with the gain control.  Thinking that maybe the calyx was meant for harder to drive headphones, I tried the HD800...The sound was so thin and well...aweful to my ears.  I do realize the hd800 is picky btw..   I ran my RSA intruder between the calyx and the IEMs and headphones and things did get better.  However, the same could be said for the AK240 but it started off in a much better footing.
 
So for my ears, the Calyx M is not in the same league.
 
(There were many things I like about the Calyx but I was making a money decision based on sound).

 

[SilverEars]

   
As I mentioned, the AK240 is more three-dimensional, but the Calyx M sounds bigger and more natural. The Calyx M has better dynamics - it is faster, particularly the treble which is incredibly fast while remaining smooth. I don't know how you would know what "perfect masterings" are (not having been present in the recording studio at the time), but I have tried a range of music from classical, opera, instrumental, rock, and electronic, including 24/96 files. The M is not what I would call a "warm" player, compared with the HM801 (for example) which is much warmer. It is fairly balanced, with perhaps just a touch of warmth. It doesn't mask anything. It also has a big, bold, colorful sound which I haven't previously heard from any DAP. If only they would fix the absence of folder browsing in the next firmware, it would be close to perfect.

Doesn't this mean it's not transparent to the mastering?  Which one is transparent to the recording?

 

[Ross]

No, it means that the Calyx M reproduces space, tonal colour and dynamics better than any other DAP I have heard, including the AK240.

 

[kawaivpc1]

  No, it means that the Calyx M reproduces space, tonal colour and dynamics better than any other DAP I have heard, including the AK240.

 
Wow... a lot of people here have said AK240 sounds slightly more refined than Calyx M.
Do you think Calyx M sounds better than AK240?
In terms of detail, which one would you choose?
and does Calyx M have wide sound stage like AK240?
Are you comparing them with IEMs or Headphones? personally, I don't prefer IEMs.
 
Btw, I really hate sound of HM901. I think it's terrible.
How would you compare sound of Calyx M to HM901 or other DAPs? have you heard AK120, DX100, etc?

 

[Ross]

   
Wow... a lot of people here have said AK240 sounds slightly more refined than Calyx M.
Do you think Calyx M sounds better than AK240?
In terms of detail, which one would you choose?
and does Calyx M have wide sound stage like AK240?
 
Btw, I really hate sound of HM901. I think it's terrible.
How would you compare sound of Calyx M to HM901 or other DAPs? have you heard AK120, DX100, etc?

 
Yes, I think the Calyx M sounds better than the AK240.
 
Both are equally detailed, but they present the detail in different ways.
 
The Calyx M soundstage has a bigger soundstage, but is not quite as three-dimensional.
 
I've never heard the HM901, so can't comment on it, although I do own the HM801, which I find a little too warm and dark sounding for my tastes.
 
You can read my comparison with the AK120 above - they sound surprisingly similar to me, with the AK240 being a little brighter, and with slightly more detail, but really very close. I did own the DX100 briefly, before I returned it, since I didn't like the sound. It's quite a long time since I heard it but my memory was that the DX100 produced a rather flat, colourless and uninvolving sound. Both the AK240 and Calyx M are better in my opinion.

 

[kawaivpc1]

   
Yes, I think the Calyx M sounds better than the AK240.
 
Both are equally detailed, but they present the detail in different ways.
 
The Calyx M soundstage has a bigger soundstage, but is not quite as three-dimensional.
 
I've never heard the HM901, so can't comment on it, although I do own the HM801, which I find a little too warm and dark sounding for my tastes.
 
You can read my comparison with the AK120 above - they sound surprisingly similar to me, with the AK240 being a little brighter, and with slightly more detail, but really very close. I did own the DX100 briefly, before I returned it, since I didn't like the sound. It's quite a long time since I heard it but my memory was that the DX100 produced a rather flat, colourless and uninvolving sound. Both the AK240 and Calyx M are better in my opinion.

 
Thanks for confirming this!
Now, I'll just wait for Calyx Audio guys to fix its firmware and battery life.
 
I think DX100 has a very wide sound stage. That's why I really like it.
As long as Calyx M has a bigger sound stage, I think it's perfect.
 
Can you drive your T1 and HD800 with Calyx M? Do you need an external amp?
I will buy both of them pretty soon. I'm planning to use them with a portable player.

 

[Ross]

   
Thanks for confirming this!
Now, I'll just wait for Calyx Audio guys to fix its firmware and battery life.
 
I think DX100 has a very wide sound stage. That's why I really like it.
As long as Calyx M has a bigger sound stage, I think it's perfect.
 
Can you drive your T1 and HD800 with Calyx M? Do you need an external amp?
I will buy both of them pretty soon. I'm planning to use them with a portable player.

 
At the risk of stating the obvious, try to hear the Calyx M before you buy it, to make sure it suits your taste.
 
My signature equipment is a little out of date. I sold the T1s a while ago. The Calyx M will drive the HD800s (and other high impedance heapdhones) but not to satisfactory levels. It really needs an amp for HD800s. Personally, I would rather use this player with low impedance IEMs or portables (such as the AT-M50X), and keep the HD800s for home use with my RSA Apache.

 

[kawaivpc1]

   
At the risk of stating the obvious, try to hear the Calyx M before you buy it, to make sure it suits your taste.
 
My signature equipment is a little out of date. I sold the T1s a while ago. The Calyx M will drive the HD800s (and other high impedance heapdhones) but not to satisfactory levels. It really needs an amp for HD800s. Personally, I would rather use this player with low impedance IEMs or portables (such as the AT-M50X), and keep the HD800s for home use with my RSA Apache.

There aren't many stores which sell Calyx M in the states.
That's why I'm asking for a comparison.
 
I might use Calyx M with Audeze LCD 2 or 3... I hope they work.

 

[Bechti]

  At the risk of stating the obvious, try to hear the Calyx M before you buy it, to make sure it suits your taste.

 
I think that's the best posting so far
 
I'd like to only add one comment to your review. I had a similar experience with the JH13 and the AK players. The sound was rather thin. Also with the SE846 I liked the Chord Hugo a lot better. 
However with the right IEM, right now I'm using a Noble K10, the AK players sound terrific, in particular the AK240 is awesome and the difference to the Hugo is so small, that I have decided to sent the Hugo back (it's an awesome device, however the AK240 is just more handy).
 
It's annoying that even with a 2500$ device you have to look for a headphone/iem that matches, but that's my learning. The AK's output impedance is rather high, that has an impact on some IEM (especially the SE846).

 

[dsincere]

My 240 sounds great with my SE846 I love it also sounds good with my iE800...but I prefer the Shures more as they bring out that little extra....but I'm also running them in balance mode

 

[nevin]

 
Where ? where ? where ? I need to get one

Haha.. it's gone.

 

[Bechti]

  Haha.. it's gone.

Of course it's gone. You could also sell it for 1000$ and it would be gone immediately.
I don't think that price was representable.

 

[streetcar]

Has anyone heard of the Lotoo Player?

May give the ak240 a run for its money

It has a 2 TB sd card storage and native dsd

http://www.lotoo.cn/page/Default.asp?pageID=93

 

[Mimouille]

I own a RWAK240 and tested the Calyx M. The M indeed sounds bigger and in a way more engaging. I was concerned however that this type of colored sound, although very tasty at first might be too much after a while. And might not pair well with warmer iems such as the Roxannes. Anyways the reason why I will not get it is mostly size...I find the M quite unwieldy.