[syazwaned]

can I Audio Cast from my phone to Hiby r3 II using Bubble UPNP?

 

[Eighty8]

can I Audio Cast from my phone to Hiby r3 II using Bubble UPNP?

You can! The R3II will show up as a renderer. You can even have the R3 connected to your phone via Wi-Fi hotspot and cast that way.

 

[XTF1]

You can! The R3II will show up as a renderer. You can even have the R3 connected to your phone via Wi-Fi hotspot and cast that way.

Also confirm it does work… pretty good actually as long as you understand the DLNA limitations: you can play/pause a track on the R3 side, but can’t skip to the next or previous track (unsupported by DLNA), album art may or may not show, and since it’s a fairly complex setup, it’s not bulletproof!
An important detail for me: MSEB & EQ can be used with the R3-II DLNA renderer (unlike the R3-II AirPlay renderer where they are disabled).

 

[Neweymatt]

I was fortunate recently to have the opportunity to demo the HiBy R3 II as part of a tour, many thanks to @Joe Bloggs for the kit and as ever @Damz87 for running the tours!!

R3 II is a fantastic mini-DAP! It pretty much disappears in any pocket, so if you are after something to use to go out walking, running or something more active, this is a great option. I used it a lot on my daily commute and it’s perfect for that.



The OS is fast and reasonably intuitive. Of course you’re not getting anything like a full Android experience, but for this type of device it’s not really missed, and the simple touch-screen gestures are pretty easy to work out. I didn’t test R3 II’s USB DAC, line out or other features, rather I was mainly interested in what it sounds like and how well it works as an out-and-around player. HiBy have clearly put in a good amount of effort to come up with a proprietary OS that is simple and works well. Luxury & Precision, for example, could learn a few things here based on my experience with their P6 Pro...

I had a few minor challenges copying files across to the microSD card, as I’m used to using Android File Transfer on my Mac and a USB-C cable plugged in direct to a DAP that’s running Android. I wound up using WiFi to connect to the R3 II, and that was a little slow, but got the job done. Eventually I gave up on the Mac and used my PC instead and that worked fine.

One thing that I was pleasantly surprised with was AirPlay streaming from my iPhone. It was a fairly simple 2-step process to hotspot the R3 II to my phone, and then enable AirPlay, but this worked 100% every time and I quite liked being able to just stream Tidal/Apple Music/whatever from my phone to the player without the hit to SQ you’d get with bluetooth.


As far as sound goes, I thought it was great, and the R3 II really surprised me with its performance at it’s modest price point. Tuning-wise it sounds warm with a slightly elevated mid-bass. Again, I was really impressed with the amp stage on this little DAP, it packs a surprising amount of juice for more demanding IEMs or even planar headphones. It was very pleasant to listen to with every IEM I tried including 64 Audio U6t & A12t, Campfire Andromeda 2020, FiR Xe6, Elysian Annihilator23 and a FatFreq Maestro Mini I also had from another tour. The basic character of each IEM was well preserved, and in isolation I could be pretty happy with just this baby DAP.

While it may seem a little unfair, I did do some comparisons against a few other HiBy DAPs I had around in the name of science, and it’s in the DAC stage especially you really do start to notice some differences. HiBy’s R6 Pro2 and RS6 both produce rather more detail than the R3 II, and while stage of the latter is fine, it’s smaller in every dimension, giving you a more closed-in, intimate sort of sound image.

Take for example the cymbal crashes around 0:55 of Radiohead’s “The National Anthem”. This sounds OK on R3 II if you’re not paying too close attention, but when you A/B you notice they are splashy and not near as refined as the RS6 or better yet HiBy's R8 II.



Of course this is a total mis-match, but A/B’ing with HiBy’s R8 II the better DAC in the latter is very obvious. R8 II has a near dead-black background, it’s much cleaner around the notes, and it has zero ‘fuzz’ or haze. And of course the amp stage of the R8 II pushes the sound stage out quite a lot and gives everything so much more room to breathe. This is all to be expected from a DAP 10x the price, and the obvious trade-off of course is the size/weight difference, with the R3 II being so much easier to just grab and go.

BUT the R3 II is still quite a nice device considering its size and price. As long as expectations are kept in check, I think most people would be very happy with this DAP for something simple, cheap and easy to take anywhere you want.

Me, I’m still waiting to see how one or two things shake out, but I’m pretty sure I’ll be getting my own R3 II sooner than later.

 

[saturnfreeway]

Hey everyone - anybody know if there's a fix for the Tidal login problem, i.e. the having-to-login-every-single-day problem?

Thanks

 

[rlw6534]

Hey everyone - anybody know if there's a fix for the Tidal login problem, i.e. the having-to-login-every-single-day problem?

Thanks

+1

It's a real pain, also what about Tidal Max support?

@Joe Bloggs

 

[silverfishla]

Any word on an upcoming firmware update? What would you guys like to see improved with the R3II? I would like to see full frame display of Album Art on the display. I think it was an interesting choice to go...smalller? But for the real estate, I think bigger is better, like on the R3 Pro or ANY other DAP.

 

[Polterzeitgeist]

Hi

I was looking into this device and could not find much about bluetooth sound and connection quality. How is it compared to Q5K?

 

[XTF1]

Hi

I was looking into this device and could not find much about bluetooth sound and connection quality. How is it compared to Q5K?

BT sound is really determined by the codec you use. R3-II and Q5K are built around the same integrated DAC/Amp chips, so not much left to “implementation” differences.
IMO (I have both), they sound the same in BT mode, and the connection quality is largely equivalent—maybe not the best around, but certainly not bad!

 

[CactusPete23]

Hi

I was looking into this device and could not find much about bluetooth sound and connection quality. How is it compared to Q5K?

IMHO, the R3 is OK at Bluetooth reception and transmission. A Smartphone will transmit bluetooth further and with better connectivity. The Q5K has better bluetooth connectivity, as they specially designed it with a better antenna; Q5K is among the best in it's bluetooth reception. The R3 II has better DAC and Better Amp than the Q5K, The Q5K does have a parametric equalizer that is better than most portable devices. The R3 has a somewhat easier to use equalization system of HIBY design; but you can't save different equaliations for different earphones like the Q5K can.
- So, If not using EQ, and not using far from your phone or other bluetooth yransmitting device, the R3 II will be better,
- If looking for an LDAC Codec ( higher bit rates) Blue tooth Receiver, with extended range, and ability to store multiple custom equalization curves, then the Q5K is the better choice. ( HIgher bit rates and longer distances are both better with the better bluetooth antenna of the Q5K. The R3II will be the same stablity at the same distance with " a something lower than highest quality" bit rates. If out and about with background noise, you may not be able to hear the difference that full LDAC Bit Rates can acheive. )
All just my personal opions. I do not have golden ears; and others could perceive differently.

 

[XTF1]

The R3 II has better DAC and Better Amp than the Q5K

Better in which way? Both use a pair of ES9219 DAC/Amp…

 

[rlw6534]

Better in which way? Both use a pair of ES9219 DAC/Amp…

I think the early Q5K (like mine) had the older ES9218... Same performance IMO.

The Q5K has a Qualcomm BT chip and the R3 (I believe) has a Broadcom chip. My experience is that for BT, the Q5K is better in range.

 

[Polterzeitgeist]

BT sound is really determined by the codec you use. R3-II and Q5K are built around the same integrated DAC/Amp chips, so not much left to “implementation” differences.
IMO (I have both), they sound the same in BT mode, and the connection quality is largely equivalent—maybe not the best around, but certainly not bad!

Thanks! I was thinking buying a Q5K but really like to use DAP sometimes so Hiby R3 II seems like good option.

IMHO, the R3 is OK at Bluetooth reception and transmission. A Smartphone will transmit bluetooth further and with better connectivity. The Q5K has better bluetooth connectivity, as they specially designed it with a better antenna; Q5K is among the best in it's bluetooth reception. The R3 II has better DAC and Better Amp than the Q5K, The Q5K does have a parametric equalizer that is better than most portable devices. The R3 has a somewhat easier to use equalization system of HIBY design; but you can't save different equaliations for different earphones like the Q5K can.
- So, If not using EQ, and not using far from your phone or other bluetooth yransmitting device, the R3 II will be better,
- If looking for an LDAC Codec ( higher bit rates) Blue tooth Receiver, with extended range, and ability to store multiple custom equalization curves, then the Q5K is the better choice. ( HIgher bit rates and longer distances are both better with the better bluetooth antenna of the Q5K. The R3II will be the same stablity at the same distance with " a something lower than highest quality" bit rates. If out and about with background noise, you may not be able to hear the difference that full LDAC Bit Rates can acheive. )
All just my personal opions. I do not have golden ears; and others could perceive differently.

I will not be far away from device so that's not a problem. I heard some Fiio devices have problem even at short distances, I wanted to know if that is the case for Hiby too.
Only having one EQ preset kinda sucks. I have Chu and m50x. I use PEQ on my pc and it really makes a difference. I find presets from web and change them a little. It really changes the sound even if you don't have golden ears.

 

[CactusPete23]

Thanks! I was thinking buying a Q5K but really like to use DAP sometimes so Hiby R3 II seems like good option.

I will not be far away from device so that's not a problem. I heard some Fiio devices have problem even at short distances, I wanted to know if that is the case for Hiby too.
Only having one EQ preset kinda sucks. I have Chu and m50x. I use PEQ on my pc and it really makes a difference. I find presets from web and change them a little. It really changes the sound even if you don't have golden ears.

Bluetooth Signal problems also depend on exactly where the devices are. For example, Since Water absorbs Bluetooth signals, if you have phone in your hip pocket, and the bluetooth receiver in your breast pocket, you are more likely to have signal loss even at a short distance. (i.e. The devices are not in line of sight, and have a lot of water/solids between them. A room full of people between you and the transmitter also reduces range for the same reason. Bluetooth also drops if you are behind a refrigerator, or metal filing cabinets, Steeel Reinforced Concrete wall, etc. Also if the bluetooth antenna on either transmitter or receiver, is flat and facing a metal desk, then the bluetooth signal may get absorbed by the metal desk; "Standing" them on edge can help prevent that problem.
The Q5K has better bluetooth range. To me, the R3 Pro Sounds better/warmer (gives a bit more/better but still neutral bass ) when both are used as a wired dac/amp. PEQ on the Q5K should be able to correct that... My 5K is the original and it's a different dac/amp than what Qudilex puts in the newer 5K's. So things could be different than my experience.
20 Years ago, both would have been considered great sounding; And for entry level portable devices they do sound great. But neither will be as good as a mid-fi $400 to $500 DAP. Neither is a bad choice for "on the go".

 

[rlw6534]

Bluetooth Signal problems also depend on exactly where the devices are. For example, Since Water absorbs Bluetooth signals, if you have phone in your hip pocket, and the bluetooth receiver in your breast pocket, you are more likely to have signal loss even at a short distance. (i.e. The devices are not in line of sight, and have a lot of water/solids between them. A room full of people between you and the transmitter also reduces range for the same reason. Bluetooth also drops if you are behind a refrigerator, or metal filing cabinets, Steeel Reinforced Concrete wall, etc. Also if the bluetooth antenna on either transmitter or receiver, is flat and facing a metal desk, then the bluetooth signal may get absorbed by the metal desk; "Standing" them on edge can help prevent that problem.
The Q5K has better bluetooth range. To me, the R3 Pro Sounds better/warmer (gives a bit more/better but still neutral bass ) when both are used as a wired dac/amp. PEQ on the Q5K should be able to correct that... My 5K is the original and it's a different dac/amp than what Qudilex puts in the newer 5K's. So things could be different than my experience.
20 Years ago, both would have been considered great sounding; And for entry level portable devices they do sound great. But neither will be as good as a mid-fi $400 to $500 DAP. Neither is a bad choice for "on the go".

The beauty of the R3s is that they do so much for the price: BT receive and transmit, Airplay, DLNA, Tidal, Qobuz, DAC in or out, etc... Oh, and it's a DAP also...