- Thread Starter
- #21
XLR, Sennheiser included the balnced XLR packaged and it fits int the hole of the THX
I am still running the campfire IEMs singled ended until I decide on a cable/adapter.
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Best Portable Player
- Thread starter andywylde
- Start date
I am still running the campfire IEMs singled ended until I decide on a cable/adapter.Different amp modules for the M11 pro.
Also, the m11 pro isn't slow. It's the fastest dap out. It's just android, nothing klunky about it, unless you don't like Android.
I'd love to send amir daps to test, but I feel like he's so backed up I wouldn't be able to wait.
Also, the m11 pro isn't slow. It's the fastest dap out. It's just android, nothing klunky about it, unless you don't like Android.
I'd love to send amir daps to test, but I feel like he's so backed up I wouldn't be able to wait.
- Thread Starter
- #23
Wow, how did I miss that? I am actually looking for a stand alone player at the moment but I just bought a dragonfly usb DAC to use with a raspberry Pi for my Haloween/Christmans light show. Looking at that I think I would have bought it instead. I think I could have made it work and the specs are awesome for the price. I'll keep that one in mind. I love my Topping D70, listening to it right now.
- Thread Starter
- #24
Is it a different AMP? That is what I was hoping for. I will go look, but the pro is hard to find info on.
Does the the PRO have a better processor as well? No info on the Fiio site.
All is on the headfi forum. That's your best spot since it's where a rep interacts with a community in one dedicated thread.
All high end daps from fiio will use the same soc. Again, this is the fastest soc out for a dap, you can't get a faster experience elsewhere.
The m11 pro uses thx amps for its amp compared to the m11. It's detailed on the first page of the thread. It's also got a larger battery. But, the new amps don't add more power. It's just supposed to be a higher quality amp. Keep in mind the monoprice Portable thx amp tested here did bad. So lots of people on headfi will freak out because it says thx (I just saw a post where a guy said its thx certified so you know it's good! Even though we can clearly see from measuring, how you implement matters.)
Also, the hiby r5 and Ibasso DX160(I wouldn't touch with someone else's money personally, but it has the same trash tier soc you would have gotten in the ak 240, and people actually think that's acceptable performance so to each their own) both use the same dac as the ak 240. Considering the hiby is $400 and has a better soc, no brainer to me, but some people belive magic fairies make the DX160 have "better sound" which makes it worth it to them.
- Thread Starter
- #26
Thanks Tential. I swear I searched for this on headfi but didn't get any hits. I guess I can just look through the forum.
Its all android, but some people do a better job of getting rid of cpu wasting stuff they don't need than others. CPU speed is a big one but the customizing of the Android OS and getting rid of unnecessary overhead is more important usually. There is just so much in there that is unnecessary for a a DAP.
Just like the DACs, the processor is only one chip, and how it is supported both with the quality of external components and design can make it either shine or suck but with a processor you have to consider the os programming as well.
I have no problem with THX chips, but you have to consider the design. Just like the ESS THD Hump, the design can exacerbate a problem or eliminate it. I would put the THX AAA 789 amp I got from massdrop up against pretty much any piece of audio equipment I have ever owned. Not for power but clarity and S/N ratio. Not only is it dead quiet when there isn't anything to listen to, it just makes everything I hook to it shine (headphones and IEMS) and I listen to it every day. I am still a huge power amp guy but it isn't practical with neighbors to drive thousands of watts a channel at 3AM when I spend a lot of time working. Other than that wonderful vibration of all your internal organs the THX and headphones, whether open or IEMs, give that sound I love. Amazingly my hearing is still pretty much intact.
Anyway, its all in the design. A lot of people from A&K to Fiio are using the same chips at vastly different price points. I think after all these dicsussions I am ready to buy a M11 Pro, was just hoping Ebay would send me one of those 10% off coupons they send me every few weeks as people are pretty firm on the price of these for now. I am very grateful for all this information as well as the pointer to the NX4. Thanks so much.
Once I get it I am going to put it side by site with the A&K with a blind sound test with a few audiophile friends. I think it will hold its own., but either way I will let everyone know. I agree it would be fantastic to have Amir evaluate and rank these as he has with the DAC list, but DAPs are a little more complicated to evaluate and I agree he is already overloaded. I will let you know my own subjective but as honest as possible results.
Its all android, but some people do a better job of getting rid of cpu wasting stuff they don't need than others. CPU speed is a big one but the customizing of the Android OS and getting rid of unnecessary overhead is more important usually. There is just so much in there that is unnecessary for a a DAP.
Just like the DACs, the processor is only one chip, and how it is supported both with the quality of external components and design can make it either shine or suck but with a processor you have to consider the os programming as well.
I have no problem with THX chips, but you have to consider the design. Just like the ESS THD Hump, the design can exacerbate a problem or eliminate it. I would put the THX AAA 789 amp I got from massdrop up against pretty much any piece of audio equipment I have ever owned. Not for power but clarity and S/N ratio. Not only is it dead quiet when there isn't anything to listen to, it just makes everything I hook to it shine (headphones and IEMS) and I listen to it every day. I am still a huge power amp guy but it isn't practical with neighbors to drive thousands of watts a channel at 3AM when I spend a lot of time working. Other than that wonderful vibration of all your internal organs the THX and headphones, whether open or IEMs, give that sound I love. Amazingly my hearing is still pretty much intact.
Anyway, its all in the design. A lot of people from A&K to Fiio are using the same chips at vastly different price points. I think after all these dicsussions I am ready to buy a M11 Pro, was just hoping Ebay would send me one of those 10% off coupons they send me every few weeks as people are pretty firm on the price of these for now. I am very grateful for all this information as well as the pointer to the NX4. Thanks so much.
Once I get it I am going to put it side by site with the A&K with a blind sound test with a few audiophile friends. I think it will hold its own., but either way I will let everyone know. I agree it would be fantastic to have Amir evaluate and rank these as he has with the DAC list, but DAPs are a little more complicated to evaluate and I agree he is already overloaded. I will let you know my own subjective but as honest as possible results.
The best ones are colorfly u8 and u6(new).
I'm not sure where the bold comes from among audiophiles, but it's just so wrong. It's not right at all. We've had pcs which work similarly, and it's like saying you need to optimize windows... That's not what made windows good. Windows needed ssds to be invented, faster cpus, etc. Before it was usable. You can use windows with the old processors from when it was a pain to use with the new os... No optimization can save a bad soc.
It's like saying Dell implents an Intel cpu better than Hewlett-Packard, and their implementation will give you more performance.... There's a reason everyone who uses xyz snapdragon processor is all within 5% performance.
If you believe the bold, then show me one example of an android dap that adheres to it. As I know every single android dap, their performance level, and their soc, I know this is impossible, but if you can than great. Otherwise let's not spread that on a science forum and leave it for audiophiles.
Sorry, as a hardware nerd, especially one that knows his processors whether on desktop or mobile, it's one of the beliefs that's spread, that has zero real life evidence, but makes sense to those who just don't follow this stuff religiously.
I just saw your example of dacs, and there is zero example in real life of any of this. Just none. Dacs are different than an soc/processor. You can have wildly different dac performance. I've never seen a processor perform with that much discrepancy. Ever.
Just don't mix up soc/processor and how it works with how a dac works. It's just two different things. If you've got the evidence to prove it, show it.
Again sorry to rant, I just don't want this to be spread on here. I come here for a relief from that type of thinking and I've followed how this area works for 16+ years religiously, and it's frustrating to see people still don't understand exactly how the devices they use every day work.
To add to this, I think it comes from people using smartphones from Samsung and the bloatware from those types of manufacturers. But we're talking open android, so it's already removed most bloatware.
When someone says "optimized" but can't tell you the exact lines of code they altered, and the exact performance benefits, that's when you know you're being fed marketing bs.
Similar to how fiio has a "pure music mode" you'll see audiophiles insist there must be a reason why the mode is there, and it MUST improve audio quality, but they will not bother to give any technical reason why. Just the most bland "optimize" type junk comment.
I mean, this even digs into soc/processor construction. On non node shrink years, they'll give you a ton of marketing bs, but usually, you can not optimize a cpu architecture much once it's done other than eek out a other 5-10% performance. The type of performance difference you're implying is essentially what amounts to a node shrink level of performance difference, which just can't be achieved by software. Hell, if you could, amd wouldn't have been screwed for years and could have just optimized the software for their bulldozer level cpus.... But again, you just can't optimize software for those types of performance differences beyond super niche instances.
When someone says "optimized" but can't tell you the exact lines of code they altered, and the exact performance benefits, that's when you know you're being fed marketing bs.
Similar to how fiio has a "pure music mode" you'll see audiophiles insist there must be a reason why the mode is there, and it MUST improve audio quality, but they will not bother to give any technical reason why. Just the most bland "optimize" type junk comment.
I mean, this even digs into soc/processor construction. On non node shrink years, they'll give you a ton of marketing bs, but usually, you can not optimize a cpu architecture much once it's done other than eek out a other 5-10% performance. The type of performance difference you're implying is essentially what amounts to a node shrink level of performance difference, which just can't be achieved by software. Hell, if you could, amd wouldn't have been screwed for years and could have just optimized the software for their bulldozer level cpus.... But again, you just can't optimize software for those types of performance differences beyond super niche instances.
- Thread Starter
- #30
OK, I've read your post several times and I am not sure exactly what you are trying to say, and far be it from me to argue with someone who knows every single android dap and everything about them, but you are seriously misguided when it comes to saying that we just need we need to keep building faster processors and IO to make a bloated operating system good.
I cut my teeth writing code for hardware which I quite sometimes bought or sometimes built, usually in machine language because we didn't have either the cpu cycles or the memory to do it with a high level language. Sometimes we just wrote critical parts of in in machine language and put inline with the C or other higher level code. Many times we could get 100x or better performance in machine code than even basic C, not even mentioning object oriented compilers (which I love BTW if I want to knock out something fancy fast and don't care about performance).
IMO, There is no amount of fast processors or SSDs that will ever make Windows a good operating system. I don't want to sidetrack this thread talking about how many fundamental flaws it has that can be masked somewhat by better hardware, but it is still very flawed. And just so you know I have been running windows since the mid 1980s, and while the first versions were pretty bad by the late 1980s as it was as useful then as it is now for basic tasks on hardware thousands of times slower, albeit with fewer features and little to no security. It actually got bloated around 2000-2010 with CPU and memory sucking things that exceeded the advances in processor, memory and disks speeds ability to keep up.
If the OS doesn't matter we would all be looking at Windows based DAPs. There are some things windows does well, BTW, and I have a substantial number of Windows servers in my business as well as other OS options but I really don't want to talk about Windows anymore. The beauty of an OS like Linux or Android is that it is open source and you don't have to waste countless CPU cycles on tasks that are of no value to you if you know what you are doing. When a machine has a special purpose you can ALWAYS get better performance by eliminating unnecessary tasks or writing key functions in a less general purpose way. There are less and less people left who can really code well because hardly anyone has to do it anymore but to deny that it makes a difference is patently false.
I am not in any way saying that you are going to get substantially increased performance out of a properly designed processor circuit without overclocking it but there are a lot of things you can do to screw up the performance with bad designs or inferior components. Processors spend a lot of time waiting for the data to get to them and to write it back out. If it isn't ready you waste another clock cycle just waiting. Memory speed mismatches cost people tremendous performance on CPUS because they think they are saving money and instead they run out of CPU power waiting for the RAM. Sure, if you are talking about HP or Dell, they are going to do it right but not everyone does. Most people at the level we are looking at now how to properly build a processor circuit, especially one that isn't going to have various components switched in and out, so its not an issue so much any more I would agree.
Does that affect the DAC section?, again, depends on how the DAC is implemented. A lot of lower end DAPs still lean on the Main CPU heavily, so yes. I can (and have) build a perfectly functional DAC with no CPU at all, just a clock and data resisters in, but with the features we all want require a much higher level of interaction getting the data to the DAC whether it is streaming, format conversion, etc. so it does matter. If you are saying that as long as the data gets to the DAC in time that it doesn't matter for the sound, then I could probably agree with you. But if you are saying that using a bloated general purpose operating system doesn't matter then I have to disagree.
At least we agree about the implementation of the DAC.
I cut my teeth writing code for hardware which I quite sometimes bought or sometimes built, usually in machine language because we didn't have either the cpu cycles or the memory to do it with a high level language. Sometimes we just wrote critical parts of in in machine language and put inline with the C or other higher level code. Many times we could get 100x or better performance in machine code than even basic C, not even mentioning object oriented compilers (which I love BTW if I want to knock out something fancy fast and don't care about performance).
IMO, There is no amount of fast processors or SSDs that will ever make Windows a good operating system. I don't want to sidetrack this thread talking about how many fundamental flaws it has that can be masked somewhat by better hardware, but it is still very flawed. And just so you know I have been running windows since the mid 1980s, and while the first versions were pretty bad by the late 1980s as it was as useful then as it is now for basic tasks on hardware thousands of times slower, albeit with fewer features and little to no security. It actually got bloated around 2000-2010 with CPU and memory sucking things that exceeded the advances in processor, memory and disks speeds ability to keep up.
If the OS doesn't matter we would all be looking at Windows based DAPs. There are some things windows does well, BTW, and I have a substantial number of Windows servers in my business as well as other OS options but I really don't want to talk about Windows anymore. The beauty of an OS like Linux or Android is that it is open source and you don't have to waste countless CPU cycles on tasks that are of no value to you if you know what you are doing. When a machine has a special purpose you can ALWAYS get better performance by eliminating unnecessary tasks or writing key functions in a less general purpose way. There are less and less people left who can really code well because hardly anyone has to do it anymore but to deny that it makes a difference is patently false.
I am not in any way saying that you are going to get substantially increased performance out of a properly designed processor circuit without overclocking it but there are a lot of things you can do to screw up the performance with bad designs or inferior components. Processors spend a lot of time waiting for the data to get to them and to write it back out. If it isn't ready you waste another clock cycle just waiting. Memory speed mismatches cost people tremendous performance on CPUS because they think they are saving money and instead they run out of CPU power waiting for the RAM. Sure, if you are talking about HP or Dell, they are going to do it right but not everyone does. Most people at the level we are looking at now how to properly build a processor circuit, especially one that isn't going to have various components switched in and out, so its not an issue so much any more I would agree.
Does that affect the DAC section?, again, depends on how the DAC is implemented. A lot of lower end DAPs still lean on the Main CPU heavily, so yes. I can (and have) build a perfectly functional DAC with no CPU at all, just a clock and data resisters in, but with the features we all want require a much higher level of interaction getting the data to the DAC whether it is streaming, format conversion, etc. so it does matter. If you are saying that as long as the data gets to the DAC in time that it doesn't matter for the sound, then I could probably agree with you. But if you are saying that using a bloated general purpose operating system doesn't matter then I have to disagree.
At least we agree about the implementation of the DAC.
- Thread Starter
- #31
And by the way I agree with pretty much everything in this post. it popped up after I put my last reply in. Yes, trying to sort out marketing BS from fact is while we are all here. I am not trying to perpetuate any incorrect myths, I'm actually trying to sort facts from fiction out a lot of the information I see which is substantial. If I knew everything I wouldn't need to post here.
And yes, you can usually only do better than the OS if you have a special limited case where you have tight control over the data as opposed to the more general case the OS is made for. On the other hand, improvements in small bits of code that are hit frequently can have substantial impact on overall performance. Do these people really do that? Not sure without measuring every DAP out there, but it is certainly possible as a DAP is a very limited case. I agree that not saying exactly what they have improved makes me skeptical as well. Modifying an OS also can lead to issues down the road with adopting new features so it certainly better be worth it.
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2018
- Messages
- 506
- Likes
- 752
LG V20 can be had new on eBay for slightly over $100 and has the same dac/amp chip. With it's big screen, fast CPU and modern Android OS it's got a much better user experience than all but the best dedicated DAPs. I love mine.
putting either a HiBy R3 or iPod touch together with a Mojo has been a portable solution that allows me to drive all my headphones on the road. Of course if I'm just using IEMs or Grados, I can just drive them from the portable player alone, and not notice any difference. It only seems to matter for either high impedance Beyers or Senns, or planars (HE560 needing the most juice out of things I have)
The R3->Mojo is the most compact stack I could find, connected with coaxial. The iPod touch has the advantage of being able to run a fair number of streaming apps that the R3 can't do. I could of course use an iPhone with the Mojo, but when they're stacked together with Wifi/LTE/etc turned on, I can hear RF interference bleeding into the Mojo. So the iPod touch wins, just using Wifi to download stuff, and then going to airplane mode.
The R3->Mojo is the most compact stack I could find, connected with coaxial. The iPod touch has the advantage of being able to run a fair number of streaming apps that the R3 can't do. I could of course use an iPhone with the Mojo, but when they're stacked together with Wifi/LTE/etc turned on, I can hear RF interference bleeding into the Mojo. So the iPod touch wins, just using Wifi to download stuff, and then going to airplane mode.
All of the benches for all the daps are out there and all of the user experience corresponds. It's not hard to find them all. That's the point, I've already done that legwork for you. I've gathered that data too many times to count and it's a hard post to put together. And I don't want to make this too long this time lol.
The end conclusion is the same. You really do want the fiio m11 if you don't need Google play. You pay ~$400, same as the other daps, and get an soc that's far superior. It's one with big cores, like your current smartphone, vs little cores like the background cores on your smartphone for multi tasking. Those little cores make the cpus of hiby, and Shanling daps. There's an actual reason behind the fiio m11 user experience. This is a science forum... Are you seriously surprised that better socs performed better? Lol.
I've wanted a dap for years but the industry didn't want to make a device with performance specs I'd use, on the android platform, while getting around android src.
I have messaged every manufacturer multiple times to start using socs like the hiby but Better, and I've bugged hiby about lte access.
I'm a patient fellow so I'm happy using my es100, and now they've all hopped on except Ibasso, but I have options so they can enjoy losing sales. And hiby announced lte access.
So I care because I've invested time actually asking them for this. Because I don't think the SoC in previous daps costing $600+ was acceptable and I'd rather message a manufacturer for what I want, than just capitulate and give them money unless the device is actually good.
So far, I was wrong about the fiio m11 (on basically everything long other story) and it's good in every regard if you don't need Google play.
From all of the scientific knowledge we know about the daps. Until someone reputable provides other data (there's a chart showing all these daps Snr, amp power etc. From someone in China but who knows who reputable that is), the fiio is your best bet because we can't logically conclude any of these daps have any significant sound performance difference. But we can easily conclude fiio is giving you a large amount more of soc performance (and a more modern soc design, the snapdragon is on 28nm vs the Exynos used here on like 14nm process) I mean... It's a steal. The rep didn't understand dta, and said they bypassed the src, but then said something to the effect to make me believe they hadn't. So I had disregarded the product. I must have misunderstood, because they do say it right on their site. So I hope it does.
This is why I want to send amir an m11. And maybe someone can buy a worse dap soc and send that in, so they can deal with the crappy user experience, and we can see if there is a significant scientific difference. I was not impressed by the Ibasso dap review on here.
Have you used your R3 and the ipod touch, with the r3. Receiving through airplay? This works with a lot new daps. Almost any newer one. You could essentially use airplay(on any ipod. Touch or iPhone) to your dap to wirelessly and losslessly listen to high-quality music through many devices. It's an interesting use case anyway. You can also airplay things to a dap from macos device to watch a movie wirelessly with headphones. Just things to jog your imagination of the fun with airplay if you hadn't thought about it yet.
I was looking at m11 vs r6 if I wanted to get a higher end dap, my old fiio x5 ii never really cut the mustard and I felt like they dropped the ball not fixing the existing firmware issues on it, and moving on to newer models. For a purely offline player, it's hard to beat my old ipod classic 160GB, since I generally don't need support beyond 44/16.
Main issue was that I would have to get different cables (4.4 mm) for some of my larger headphones, where I can play them with a standard single ended cable now with the mojo/dap combos I have, and get enough power.
Main issue was that I would have to get different cables (4.4 mm) for some of my larger headphones, where I can play them with a standard single ended cable now with the mojo/dap combos I have, and get enough power.
I did try for a bit using the HiBy link app on my phone to connect/control the R3/mojo combo, but it was kind of buggy. I recently updated the R3 firmware and might give it another shot.
- Thread Starter
- #38
I volunteer to send in my AR. Not becasue it sounds bad ... it is actually sonds pretty good, not the best but better IMO than the Higby, but the user interface is so bad I will honestly never use it. I've been trying to figure out a use for it but I can't. I don't even think I can use it for my christmas lights. Bought a dragonfly USB to go in the raspberry pi to get decent sound out of it.
That's using the phone as a remote.
Would you ever use your apple phone or ipod touch as src? Then airplay it to the dap, to use tbr dap amp/dac, but apple product as src? Not sure if that's of use to you, I can't use apple as my src so if it's not of use to you I get it. If I could, I think I'd use it to use apples amazing soc that's truly just a marvel, for the best user experience possible and any dap that supports lossless airplay, and just use that as a dumby bluetooth device like a q5s or es100.
- Thread Starter
- #40
Yeah, from all the objective data it seems the M11 is the best value. I can't deny the smooth sound of the A&K, but I think that is more in the analog section than the DACS. I just can't justify the price of the A&Ks for the objective data. Until you have an objective app you can put on the the DAPs I am skeptical of all the benchmarks for the soc because they are too easy to skew if you know what you are trying to make measure well.
DACs are easier, feed them data, see what comes out.
I do appreciate all the information you have supplied. And yes, I am going to most likely purchase a M11 or M11 Pro in the very new future. I will absolutely put it to the test against the much more expensive DAPs and put an honest and objective as possbile evaluation up. I really like the other inputs I have seen, so many I had not considered. I had never even seen the colorfly before today. It looks great, but its beyond my budget for a portable DAP becuase I would only use it for traveling. I am very happy with my stationary setup so I am really sub-$1000 on this item. The M11 has some unique features that let you measure its performance but since most DAPs don't I don't know what to compare it against.
Thanks again for all your messages, I know you care very much.
Similar threads
