[shotgunshane]

Quote:

My guess would be that at 200 or under fiio can sell many multiples of the numbers of those listed combined. 
 
Maybe our attention would be better directed in trying to bring companies such as colorfly, hifiman and ibasso into making these products that are suggested such as transport with the features we would like that trying to shift a budget company such as fiio into stepping up to "premium" game.

 
I don't know how this is getting misunderstood.  We're not asking for a premium product.  Just a small ~$200 transport.  Nothing more, nothing less. I'll be happy to throw my money at any of these companies that decide to make it with a usable gui.  So far it's only available in brick size b/c they all currently contain a dac/amp.  Most are legacy models no longer made.
 
Fiio is one of the few companies that solicits feedback, wants and desires, so we here we are giving it.

 

[stozzer123]

Totally get what your saying, and for that matter i like the concept.  As clieos seems to put it though it doesn't seem to have much ground as a fiio product (yet), so why not throw it out there to others and hopefully somebody will pick up the idea and run with it.  What I'm saying is surly it cannot hurt to make the folks over at the other companies that provide high end portable audio solutions that there is a lot of info here, that there is a market for a new product etc.  This thread contains very specific information from very knowledgeable people that they could only hope to gain such a testing pool (one which contains the people that actually use the product) to band about idea's.

 

[AnAnalogSpirit]

I wish FiiO the best with their resurrected plans for the X3, in whatever form-factor/feature-set they decide to put into production.
 
That said, I really like the Idea proposed by the "X1" transport "concept" in this thread...
 
I already have an iRiver H120, and H140, with optical out. It would be REALLY NICE to have modern replacements for them with better quality jitter and signal paths.
 
What I personally would like in a Digital Transport would be something with a screen, either a 5-way joystick (like the iRiver, or a scrollwheel like the Fuze or iPod), a decent GUI without loads of "fluff" that is quick and for example not painful to navigate (lets use the T51 as an example of what I'm not after), Tactile Buttons for Play, Pause, Stop, Fast-Forward, Rewind, Skip Forward, Skip Backward, and Hold, and perhaps A/B.
 
Now, the tricky issues for me would be (as a massive FLAC user) which storage interface to make available? SDXC? microSDHC? or 1/8" HDD? or some combination? I guess the best tradeoff would be 8-16GB Flash on board, an SDXC slot, and a bay for a 1/8" HDD. That way the transport could be sold with JUST the flash memory on board, but the user could choose to purchase and install their choice and size of SDXC card, or 1/8" solid state SSD on their own without overhead for the manufacturer.
 
For connections, I agree with qusp: a clock for 44.1 kHz based signal multipliers and another for 48 kHz based signal multipliers, its illogical to cheap that out, and just plain chintzy. If you're going to do that, just get an ipod, and scrap the external amp.
 
The point of a Digital Transport is to carry your files, in a relatively high density, compact, music jukebox fashion, with high quality outputs to your personal choice and flavor of DAC and subsequently AMP to go the "LEGO" route of mix/match/stack, to get together what you personally need out of your superset of devices for your personal needs. It ultimately minimizes manufacturer and user costs and investments, because nobody is forced to buy needless components; or multiple components they aren't going to be using that are tacked onto pieces of their stack. It also makes the stacks as slim as possible by making the individual components as spare as possible.
 
This is all of course food for thought, and hypothetical, but maybe less is more is an approach that audiophiles/music enthusiasts & audio equipment manufacturers could strive for to improve the hardware experience going forward. Or perhaps i'm just some sort of idealist.
 
Anyway, whichever company decides or can be convinced to get a device like this together will definitely be getting some of my cash.
 

 

[musicday]

Can please Fiio update as on the X3 project?
We need to know if the player will still be a hi rez player 96/24.
Thanks in the name of all Head-fi memebers.

 

[FiiO]

Quote:

Can please Fiio update as on the X3 project?
We need to know if the player will still be a hi rez player 96/24.
Thanks in the name of all Head-fi memebers.

 
Sorry, we just restart the project, in fact,we will love to open anything to our fans and user, but we are worry about that the situation out of control again because the firmware is design by other company, and 
 
it will hurt you guys if there are any bad news again. 
 
Anyway, the new X3 is better than old X3 in specification and features. 

 

[labcoat]

I would love to see the x3 or x1 concept paired with E9 ish DAC/AMP with the same or similar form factor. So I could use a E7 or 17 on the go and a E9 DAC at home.

I am also torn over is there anything worth upgrading to in the $150 $250 over a rockbox'ed sanus. Sure a USB or digital out might make it worth doing. So might a good easy to use EQ and sound effects.

The DAP vs. PMP is a debate I have with myself often. Ether way I look forward to seeing how this turns out for Fiio and the x3.

R-

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

 
Anyway, the new X3 is better than old X3 in specification and features. 

 
And......?  

 

[ClieOS]

On the far end of the price scale we have the DX100 behind them comes in Colorfly and on the bottom end we have the Hifiman player. Why can't Fiio find a comfortable medium and maybe put something out in the 400 to 500 dollar range that could match any of those players in sound quality? Yes I know I'm asking a lot but I think it could be done. From what I understand the biggest cost is R&D specifically getting whatever OS they choose to work well. What a lot of these companies seem to not understand is keep that OS as simple as possible and above all make sure it runs as fluid as possible meaning keep the code as simple as possible so it doesn't demand more power from the processor thereby slowing down the player. Have playlists and music listing by genre, artist and album and very little else and it should be doable. This is a product made for the music enthusiast who couldn't care less about wi-fi Angry Birds or video codec support so why bother wasting time and money on a gimmicky features that will stink to begin with and probably never be used by the end user. By the way where did the magic 200 dollar price point come from? Has Fiio made a statement on pricing yet?

I am not saying FiiO will never make a mid range DAP, I am only saying the X3 project isn't about a mid range DAP. From what my understanding is, the X3 project started as a goal to design an entry / consumer level DAP that also features some more audiophile-ish feature (COAX-out and dedicated line-out) that are generally not being found on most other consumer level DAP. With their first DAP, of course they would want to appeal it to their existing customer first, which isn't the high paying crowd but more on the entry level. So the price can't be set too high, and $200 is about as best as they can do. The number 200 is released very early on from the original X3 project. I don't know whether it will still be the same or not, but I know FiiO is trying to keep the price tag reasonably low - again, it is because that's where most of their customer are at, and also that's where the distributors are most comfortable with (remember FiiO isn't a direct sale company like iBasso, HifiMan, or ColorFly. Distributor needs to order and pay for those order first before getting any goods, and naturally that put them partially sharing the risk from the project).

As FiiO has responded, firmware isn't actually developed by FiiO. The SoC company is responsible for it since buying an SoC doesn't just give you the chip, you are paying for the 'SoC solution'. Thus FiiO needs to custom contract the SoC company to design the whole PCB (with FiiO direct input of course), and because the number is relatively small, it leaves very little room for negotiation on pricing (Note: because whether you are ordering 100 or 100K units, it still takes the same time for SoC company to design the PCB solution and customize the firmware, so naturally they will have to charge you higher per unit when you are only ordering a small number in order to worth their while). The reason why the original X3 project has failed is because the previous SoC company isn't producing the firmware in reasonable time frame (they pushed the deadline back months after months) and instead turn their resource to bigger customer. It has nothing to do with hardware production (which has been finalized at that point). I have repeated this point before: FiiO doesn't have the resource to afford an software engineering team because it is extremely hard to hire a good software enginees in China without paying hm/her high salary. Most (if not all) of the good software engineers are working for the either big or foreign companies because those companies are the one that can afford them (which cause the shortage of software engineer in the first place). Since FiiO has not direct control over the OS development, you can imagine the difficulty they face even with a simple request as 'to smooth out the OS' - ask, and they might or might not receive, and that's the reality of the current Chine electronics market. Why do you think it took HiFiMan in-house firmware team almost 3 years to design the firmware on HM901? It is exactly the same reason that bother the X3 project in the first place. The only difference is that FiiO doesn't want to spend 3 years on X3 to get the firmware right before the release. Ultimately, it is the same problem that plagued every DAP maker in China, from top to low end.

A $200 product that can play nice w/ better sounding amps/dacs whatever the cost would be nice.

I think X3 can do that role just fine. There should be a coax-out for UHA-6MKII and the whole package will still be fairly small.

 

[DigitalFreak]

Quote:

I think X3 can do that role just fine. There should be a coax-out for UHA-6MKII and the whole package will still be fairly small.

Well at least that's something. Maybe this might still be worth the wait even though the DAP will only be entry level. If it has large SDcard storage and will allow me to shoot out the digital signal to my DAC/amp it could still be worth the time. Thanks for filling me in ClieOS I never knew the Chinese electronics market was tight for software engineers. It explains a few things.

 

[stozzer123]

I dont know why you would persist that this is entry level.  It seems quite obvious fiio are probably trying to make whats subjectivley the 4/5th best dap on the market in regards to hp out sq, audio features and file support.  SQ wise im sure they are aiming for the around or above hm-601/602 / rocoo / sflo, but then on top of that they will be offering coax and line out among other features.   It has been said plenty of times even in the last few pages that it would be able to put that signal to the dac/amp, not to mention the rest of the thread.  How anyone would regard what they are trying to do as entry level is beyond me.
 
teir 1:  generic *****
tier 2: samsing archos etc
tier 3: Clip, fuze, ipod, cowon
tier 4: rocoo, hm-601, (x3?)
tier 5: c4, 801, studio v, dx100
 
 
imo

 

[DigitalFreak]

Quote:

I dont know why you would persist that this is entry level.  It seems quite obvious fiio are probably trying to make whats subjectivley the 4/5th best dap on the market in regards to hp out sq, audio features and file support.  SQ wise im sure they are aiming for the around or above hm-601/602 / rocoo / sflo, but then on top of that they will be offering coax and line out among other features.   It has been said plenty of times even in the last few pages that it would be able to put that signal to the dac/amp, not to mention the rest of the thread.  How anyone would regard what they are trying to do as entry level is beyond me.
 
teir 1:  generic *****
tier 2: samsing archos etc
tier 3: Clip, fuze, ipod, cowon
tier 4: rocoo, hm-601, (x3?)
tier 5: c4, 801, studio v, dx100
 
 
imo

Because others on here have said it would be entry level. As for the digital out comment it was a passing comment and I knew it was discussed in past pages. It was my attempt to see the cup half full instead of half empty. Having a good night on your end friend? You seem a little annoyed.

 

[lee730]

Quote:

I dont know why you would persist that this is entry level.  It seems quite obvious fiio are probably trying to make whats subjectivley the 4/5th best dap on the market in regards to hp out sq, audio features and file support.  SQ wise im sure they are aiming for the around or above hm-601/602 / rocoo / sflo, but then on top of that they will be offering coax and line out among other features.   It has been said plenty of times even in the last few pages that it would be able to put that signal to the dac/amp, not to mention the rest of the thread.  How anyone would regard what they are trying to do as entry level is beyond me.
 
teir 1:  generic *****
tier 2: samsing archos etc
tier 3: Clip, fuze, ipod, cowon
tier 4: rocoo, hm-601, (x3?)
tier 5: c4, 801, studio v, dx100
 
 
imo

Stozzer I think from comments we have been getting this player was going to be on par with tier 3 DAPs. That is what all the commotion is  about. Why pay $200 for a player like that that will be thick as well in this price range when most would rather just have a great transport with small form-factor, properly implemented clocking, great UI and battery life. From that perspective I understand and would not want to spend $200.00 on such a player if its comparable to a Sansa Fuze or ipod for that matter. At that point I'd rather forgo the internal DAC and Amp section and have the other functions improved IMO.

 

[Calikeane]

Quote:

I dont know why you would persist that this is entry level.  It seems quite obvious fiio are probably trying to make whats subjectivley the 4/5th best dap on the market in regards to hp out sq, audio features and file support.  SQ wise im sure they are aiming for the around or above hm-601/602 / rocoo / sflo, but then on top of that they will be offering coax and line out among other features.   It has been said plenty of times even in the last few pages that it would be able to put that signal to the dac/amp, not to mention the rest of the thread.  How anyone would regard what they are trying to do as entry level is beyond me.
 
teir 1:  generic *****
tier 2: samsing archos etc
tier 3: Clip, fuze, ipod, cowon
tier 4: rocoo, hm-601, (x3?)
tier 5: c4, 801, studio v, dx100
 
 
imo

Quote:

Stozzer I think from comments we have been getting this player was going to be on par with tier 3 DAPs. That is what all the commotion is  about. Why pay $200 for a player like that that will be thick as well in this price range when most would rather just have a great transport with small form-factor, properly implemented clocking, great UI and battery life. From that perspective I understand and would not want to spend $200.00 on such a player if its comparable to a Sansa Fuze or ipod for that matter. At that point I'd rather forgo the internal DAC and Amp section and have the other functions improved IMO.

 
 
I think this is a great summary of the last several pages. 

 

[musicday]

Anyway guys we got the answer to my question from Fiio. This time the X3 is for real, and if will be priced 200$ usd, great battery life and better SQ then J3, Clip+ and 24/96 playback, i am willing to wait 6 months for this to come true.
I have faith that Fiio won't let us down, so let's just let then do the job.
I hope Rockbox will be ported in the future to the X3.

 

[lee730]

It will be interesting to see it come to fruition. Not really in the market for a new DAP at this time but still will keep my eyes open . musicday didn't you buy a DX100 or am I thinking of someone else?