[ClieOS]

You make good points. I am certainly not as experience as you do in the DIY world, nor in the electronics world. But here is the deal - you make the point that you want something to be done your way and that's why you DIY (in the general sense of the DIY world). So let's go back to the original point of this thread, about the X3 - just go back the first page and you will see what I have asked people to do, submit their idea to FiiO on whatever feature they want to see on X3, and FiiO will take it under consideration and implement it if they can. As far as I know, FiiO did get in touch with the RockBox team (as suggested back than) and talk to them about the possibility of custom firmware, even though the chance of it working was very slim. If you really have some great idea about how you think they can implement and you are willing to share, just tell them about it. If it isn't impossible due to some hardware limitation or budget, I am sure they will love to incorporate your idea into X3. Even if it doesn't make in to X3, surely it will prove to be useful for their future DAP project. I know they are taking the community's suggestion very serious so I would think any constructive opinion will be more than welcome. I mean, FiiO engineers ain't audiophile themselves. They just do design the way they think will work the best and that doesn't necessary be the best of idea. I don't think you can deny that not every engineer can design good audio circuit and they can certainly use some pointers.

 

[Anaxilus]

Nobody is talking about competing w/ the 901 or DX100.  Make the X3 as a DAP if you like, but think about making a X1 as well.  Just a modular transport.  Personally I think it's less efficient to do both whereas an X1 type concept plays w/ the existing line in every manufacturers profile including their own.  
 
As for size/bulk, an 'X1' w/ an E17 should be roughly equivalent to a X3, the difference is you get unparalleled versatility.  Like qusp, I think the opportunity to do something really significant is here and better than tossing another generic out there.   Proper design and planning could allow for both quite easily it seems to me.  

 

[shotgunshane]

^ This. Simply stated.

 

[qusp]

well put Anaxilus, thats exactly what I mean. As many know I have a tendency to get bogged down in the technical detail.
 
this type of product would find a home in home audio as well, not just every existing portable dac/amp line including their own. the power supply and battery would not need to be anywhere near as complex either, as everything in the box would survive on positive voltage. do it properly and you'll make some serious waves
 
get Demian Martin to design the clock circuit (ground isolated output), I gather they may already have some link. I have some very clever schematics of his, but I wont share because it was shared in the spirit of DIY. pretty sure it could be licensed though.
 
 
software/logic/navigation->file management->fifo buffer->master clocks->spdif transceiver->transformer->output

 

[lee730]

Quote:

Nobody is talking about competing w/ the 901 or DX100.  Make the X3 as a DAP if you like, but think about making a X1 as well.  Just a modular transport.  Personally I think it's less efficient to do both whereas an X1 type concept plays w/ the existing line in every manufacturers profile including their own.  
 
As for size/bulk, an 'X1' w/ an E17 should be roughly equivalent to a X3, the difference is you get unparalleled versatility.  Like qusp, I think the opportunity to do something really significant is here and better than tossing another generic out there.   Proper design and planning could allow for both quite easily it seems to me.  

If they were to just make it a transport so that I can connect my UHA6 to it then I'd definitely bite. Just make sure it is very portable and all those little goodies referring to clocking are in order. I'd possibly even be willing to pay around $200 for it alone. So portability/form-factor, durability, battery life, expandability, ease of use. Keep the UI simple but straight to the point. I don't need frills but I also don't need high-blood pressure pills .

 

[ClieOS]

Nobody is talking about competing w/ the 901 or DX100.  Make the X3 as a DAP if you like, but think about making a X1 as well.  Just a modular transport.  Personally I think it's less efficient to do both whereas an X1 type concept plays w/ the existing line in every manufacturers profile including their own.  

As for size/bulk, an 'X1' w/ an E17 should be roughly equivalent to a X3, the difference is you get unparalleled versatility.  Like qusp, I think the opportunity to do something really significant is here and better than tossing another generic out there.   Proper design and planning could allow for both quite easily it seems to me.  

You mean like how Little Dot make the DP_I and DP_II (the amp-and-DAC-less version of DP_I)? They can do that, but the question is how may people outside of HF is going to buy a DAP that doesn't output analog signal, how many unit need to be sold (and what kind of price it has to be) to make sure it won't put the project in red. I am not saying I won't want a player like that (in fact, I had that same discussion with James before X3 project), but you have to convince FiiO's management to venture into audiophile market first. I believe they did carry out a survey among their distributors around the world and most (if not all) of them don't see how they can ask their customer to buy into the concept of digital transport, instead of just a normal DAP. Which is the reason why X3 has COAX out as well as regular headphone-out and line-out. As some has put it adequately, it is designed to please everyone.

Do remember FiiO is selling most of their products to non-HF'er, and those are their main customer. What the average consumer, the audiophile and the manufacturer want can be totally different things. We might think that X1 could be as simple as cutting most out circuit out of X3, but it will likely require some redesign of the units, go back to the SoC to order some minimum number of SoC with the prefabricated PCB plus likely some firmware changes, then it will have to be sold under the price of X3 (which only makes sense that way) and sell enough to cover cost and profit enough to move on. These are all the same reason why DP_II is so expensive even though it doesn't have that many hardware inside, but now we are asking FiiO to do the same but cut the price in half if not more. All I am saying is, the idea might be great, but making it into a product and selling it with profit might not be quite that easy. If X3 somehow becomes much more popular than expectation, then perhaps we will have an X1 in the future. However, It probably is not a risk FiiO want to take now, especially since DAP is an unknown market for them.

 

[Anaxilus]

Wouldn't a modular X1/3 transport designed to 'snap' or bundle onto a E17 or similar Fiio product give everyone what they want?  If people want a DAP then toss in the E17 w/ it.  Perhaps if the engineering and design are too much for them then it is too much for them.  To me, the idea that efficiency and modularity to save costs and expand markets needs to be 'sold' to anyone from a business perspective makes no sense.  If the idea is just to push out something that got stalled in development then we are talking two very different perspectives between the big and long view and the small and short one.
 
To quote Sgt. Drucker from the movie 'Heat'.
 
http://www.quotes.net/mquote/41857
 
But I see your point wrt where Fiio is atm.  This is a conversation that should have been had years ago as part of an overall product strategy.  My view of Fiio is probably colored by the level of relative product finish and quality along w/ the plethora of product offerings.  It's probably an overestimation to think a mid stream adjustment to a product and brand philosophy would even be a consideration in this particular reality.

 

[qusp]

i'd pay $200 in a snap if it was done well. a digital out and clocking for both 22.x and 24x integers that isnt just an afterthought is something that hasnt EVER been offered.

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

i'd pay $200 in a snap if it was done well. a digital out and clocking for both 22.x and 24x integers that isnt just an afterthought is something that hasnt EVER been offered.

 
Sign me up.

 

[ClieOS]

Wouldn't a modular X1/3 transport designed to 'snap' or bundle onto a E17 or similar Fiio product give everyone what they want?  If people want a DAP then toss in the E17 w/ it.  Perhaps if the engineering and design are too much for them then it is too much for them.  To me, the idea that efficiency and modularity to save costs and expand markets needs to be 'sold' to anyone from a business perspective makes no sense.  If the idea is just to push out something that got stalled in development then we are talking two very different perspectives between the big and long view and the small and short one.

Think of X3 this way in the current FiiO line-up. It will have a WM8740 most likely, so pairing it (assuming it is a digital transport) with E17 probably won't make it better sounding on the DAC aspect ( as compared to it as full DAP). So the benefit is mainly on amp stage and perhaps the hardware EQ (a minor point). But this will take away X3 ability to be dock directly to E9 / E09K as a line-out source (or any future FiiO products that uses the dock connector), unless the owner already own an E17 in the first place. It is also unlikely they will be able to keep it under $60 as a digital transport in order to keep the whole package (with E17) under the targeted $200, as E17 alone is already a $140. Go on and think about selling these two version of X3 to your regular consumer - one is a $200 all-in-one DAP, another is also a $200 digital source+E17. I wouldn't be surprised if the majority are going to pick the former because that doesn't require them to charge and maintain two devices at the same time, have a less bulkier size, plus an option of expansion to other existing accessories, etc. The idea of a digital transport itself is quite alien to people who have already used to their all-in-one DAP, but not to us of course.

 

[Anaxilus]

Bulkier size and twice the devices to charge also brings about potential for twice the capacity and battery life.  Guess what's even bulkier and more ridiculous?  The X3 DAP strapped to another DAC/Amp combo acting as a transport.  Like I said, in the short view your concerns are valid, the long view has more potential.
 
Anyway, not my company.  Fiio will release something and I'll decide whether it's worth it or not.

 

[doublea71]

How could Fiio believe that they are not an audiophile company? Is it because their products aren't top tier? Who is buying their products if not audiophiles on a budget? Their E09K has improvements over the original E9 based on feedback from the audiophile community AFAIK. They seem to be very open to feedback as some have said, and I don't know of any other target market buying their products that cares about this stuff enough to tell them what they want improved. I think they need to take a risk and try to deliver something audiophiles will embrace because of its utility and innovation rather than trying to please everyone by making something that doesn't excel in any one area. Will people who have ipods make the switch if it's just a lateral move soundwise? With massive storage capacities, Rockbox, and a line out available with ipods, probably not. I think Qusp has some really good and ballsy ideas, but I understand that all of this is possibly easier said than done. They have an opportunity to innovate and release something unique, but it seems they would rather play it safe and put out something that has already been done before. As a business decision, that may be the smart move. However, let us be reminded of the famous words: "Fortune favors the bold." Apple certainly didn't get where they are by playing it safe and putting out products that already exist.
 

 

[goodvibes]

Quote:

Bulkier size and twice the devices to charge also brings about potential for twice the capacity and battery life.  Guess what's even bulkier and more ridiculous?  The X3 DAP strapped to another DAC/Amp combo acting as a transport.  Like I said, in the short view your concerns are valid, the long view has more potential.
 
Anyway, not my company.  Fiio will release something and I'll decide whether it's worth it or not.

There's also SPdif jitter to consider when tranceiving and reclocking. I've never been a big fan of ASRC resampling and they're the most common jitter solution. An I2s isn't in the cards without an amp redesign.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

How could Fiio believe that they are not an audiophile company? Is it because their products aren't top tier? Who is buying their products if not audiophiles on a budget? Their E09K has improvements over the original E9 based on feedback from the audiophile community AFAIK. They seem to be very open to feedback as some have said, and I don't know of any other target market buying their products that cares about this stuff enough to tell them what they want improved. I think they need to take a risk and try to deliver something audiophiles will embrace because of its utility and innovation rather than trying to please everyone by making something that doesn't excel in any one area. Will people who have ipods make the switch if it's just a lateral move sound wise? With massive storage capacities, Rockbox, and a line out available with ipods, probably not. I think Qusp has some really good and ballsy ideas, but I understand that all of this is possibly easier said than done. They have an opportunity to innovate and release something unique, but it seems they would rather play it safe and put out something that has already been done before. As a business decision, that may be the smart move. However, let us be reminded of the famous words: "Fortune favors the bold." Apple certainly didn't get where they are by playing it safe and putting out products that already exist.
 

Well to be fair apple rather did "play it safe" from a certain point of view. Their very controlling nature is how they are playing safe. Whether it be from the million patents and standards associated with their products, the law-suites they have brought forward, and their methods of control through their software. But they definitely are innovative as well.

 

[doublea71]

Qusp has some really good ideas on something they could produce for not a huge amount of money that would fill a need nobody else is catering to. Maybe the market for it isn't big enough - I have no idea about that. I just find it hard to believe that they're going to come out with a dap that is going to effectively pull customers away from Apple, Sony, Cowon, Sansa, etc. at that price point. They'll have to come out with something really special to carve out much market share. I hope they surprise us all.