• 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!

Looks like FiiO just dropped the K17 R2R.

Pete Townshend had one of those somewhere along the line, didn't he?
... but I digress...
(inconceivable, nein?)
 
well i mean people who buy a DAC is probably a few percent or less of the general audio buying consumer anyway and so R2R is the thin edge of the wedge and so since dacs are a solved scientific solution then they will try to inject some 'magic' in like R2R and that other hoary fiction, replaceable opamps... if there's a chance to make money then yeah...
 
AgarWave said:
As someone who believes that chasing DAC architectures is mostly audio snake oil once SINAD clears human hearing, I'm highly skeptical of the R2R hype.

Is there any actual engineering reason to upgrade to this unit? Does the K17 R2R offer significantly better amp power, features, or cleaner I/O to justify the price tag? Or are we just paying a marketing tax for a resistor ladder?
Click to expand...
The latter IMO.
Marketing and the belief of many people that somehow R2R will bring more 'analog'/'warm' to the table and they can ask more for it.

I actually like the brand, like the looks and performance is fine (Only have FiiO FT7, JT7, X3 and X3-II) and while looking really nice have no need for different electronics until it fails.
I see no reason to replace a regular K17 with the R2R version unless one believes it will sound superior in which case it will, just not for technical reasons.
I have no need for the device even when I like its looks.
 
solderdude said:
The latter IMO.
Marketing and the belief of many people that somehow R2R will bring more 'analog'/'warm' to the table and they can ask more for it.

I actually like the brand, like the looks and performance is fine (Only have FiiO FT7, JT7, X3 and X3-II) and while looking really nice have no need for different electronics until it fails.
I see no reason to replace a regular K17 with the R2R version unless one believes it will sound superior in which case it will, just not for technical reasons.
I have no need for the device even when I like its looks.
Click to expand...
At this price point, the DAC chip itself is the least of my concerns as long as it's audibly transparent. What really matters in day-to-day use is device stability, heat management, and how robust the PEQ implementation is across different inputs. FiiO's FT7 and JT7 you mentioned are great examples of solid audio engineering, but applying an R2R tax to the K17 seems unnecessary if the software experience remains unchanged.
 
The public wants R2R (because of the myths around it, the promise of warm analog sound) and as they can sell it with a higher profit margin it is a logical step.
It is pretty easy to implement and when OS is used also easy to build acoustically transparent.
 
There already is a K17 R2R thread.
www.audiosciencereview.com

Looks like FiiO just dropped the K17 R2R.

As someone who believes that chasing DAC architectures is mostly audio snake oil once SINAD clears human hearing, I'm highly skeptical of the R2R hype. Is there any actual engineering reason to upgrade to this unit? Does the K17 R2R offer significantly better amp power, features, or cleaner I/O...
www.audiosciencereview.com www.audiosciencereview.com
 
solderdude said:
There already is a K17 R2R thread.
www.audiosciencereview.com

Looks like FiiO just dropped the K17 R2R.

As someone who believes that chasing DAC architectures is mostly audio snake oil once SINAD clears human hearing, I'm highly skeptical of the R2R hype. Is there any actual engineering reason to upgrade to this unit? Does the K17 R2R offer significantly better amp power, features, or cleaner I/O...
www.audiosciencereview.com www.audiosciencereview.com
Click to expand...
thanks my dear
 
I agree with you. I own the K13 R2R unit, and it is excellent. However, it struggles with low-impedance headphones—like those from HiFiMAN—that require high current. When driving them on the "High" setting, a "High Load" warning often appears, which is disappointing. It makes me worry about the unit's build quality, thermal stability, ability to handle high current, and overall longevity.
AgarWave said:
At this price point, the DAC chip itself is the least of my concerns as long as it's audibly transparent. What really matters in day-to-day use is device stability, heat management, and how robust the PEQ implementation is across different inputs. FiiO's FT7 and JT7 you mentioned are great examples of solid audio engineering, but applying an R2R tax to the K17 seems unnecessary if the software experience remains unchanged.
Click to expand...
 
AliAlshwq said:
When driving them on the "High" setting, a "High Load" warning often appears, which is disappointing. It makes me worry about the unit's build quality, thermal stability, ability to handle high current, and overall longevity.
Click to expand...
Usually the 'high load warning' or current limiting becoming active is always dimension-ed in such a way that the temperature does not become too high and before any parts can break or deteriorate. Such circuits actually prolong longevity by preventing the output stage to be stressed to its limits.
 
R2R ladder aside, I have to say that FiiO's Roon implementation is the best I've ever seen. The K17 R2R allows you to control the K17's own (IC-controlled analog) volume attenuator remotely through the Roon app, and the remote control included with K17 R2R is able to control Roon playback (play/pause/skip/rewind). This level if integration is superior to the implementation in other similar devices with Roon bridges (for example Gustard X26 III or Audalytic DR70N), where the only way to control playback is through the Roon app, and/or the volume of the end device/DAC itself is not controllable through Roon (Roon can only separately attenuate volume further digitally upstream/in DSP).

Of course the less expensive K15 probably has this same exact level of Roon functionality, if I had to guess (don't know with 100% certainty, have never played around with K15).

Just this functional/ergonomic advantage is actually quite a big deal in day to day usage and makes for a much improved listening experience. That the performance/sound is performant enough to be fully transparent is icing on the cake.
 
SoySalsaPicante said:
R2R ladder aside, I have to say that FiiO's Roon implementation is the best I've ever seen. The K17 R2R allows you to control the K17's own (IC-controlled analog) volume attenuator remotely through the Roon app, and the remote control included with K17 R2R is able to control Roon playback (play/pause/skip/rewind). This level if integration is superior to the implementation in other similar devices with Roon bridges (for example Gustard X26 III or Audalytic DR70N), where the only way to control playback is through the Roon app, and/or the volume of the end device/DAC itself is not controllable through Roon (Roon can only separately attenuate volume further digitally upstream/in DSP).

Of course the less expensive K15 probably has this same exact level of Roon functionality, if I had to guess (don't know with 100% certainty, have never played around with K15).

Just this functional/ergonomic advantage is actually quite a big deal in day to day usage and makes for a much improved listening experience. That the performance/sound is performant enough to be fully transparent is icing on the cake.
Click to expand...
"I completely agree that ergonomic advantages often outweigh raw measurement chasing. Out of curiosity, how does the K17 handle PEQ implementation when running through Roon? I typically rely on devices like WiiM or FiiO for my desktop rigs because their native DSP headroom is so reliable. If the K17 allows for straightforward EQ adjustments while maintaining that analog volume control, it’s a very compelling all-in-one package."
Click to expand...
 
solderdude said:
The public wants R2R (because of the myths around it, the promise of warm analog sound) and as they can sell it with a higher profit margin it is a logical step.
It is pretty easy to implement and when OS is used also easy to build acoustically transparent.
Click to expand...
"This perfectly captures the reality of the current market. The diminishing returns hit like a brick wall once you move past well-engineered budget gear. Manufacturers push these discrete R2R designs because it's an easy upsell based on nostalgia. If you want true high-fidelity without the 'audio jewelry' markup, pairing a clean Class-D amp from Fosi Audio with a reliable WiiM streamer is all you really need. We definitely need more focus on sensible engineering and less on myths that our ears can't even verify."
Click to expand...
 
@AgarWave The K17 and K17 R2R work the same way in terms of DSP (by DSP, not only do I mean the 31-band PEQ, but also the other advanced functions present in K17, including limiter, compressor, dynamic range compression/expansion, etc.)...

Its DSP is able to be applied to any and all inputs (even Roon and AirPlay!), but only to analog outputs (so DSP cannot be applied to audio if it is to be sent out via coaxial S/PDIF or Toslink outputs of K17). Additionally, DSP is limited to 96KHz PCM and below, so any DSD material and any PCM material higher than 96KHz sample rate will be downsampled in order to get DSP to work (and in the case of DSD source material, converted to PCM before downsampling). I am not sure if sample rate domain is maintained (so, for example, if something is DXD/352.8KHz, I do not know if it is downsampled to 88.2KHz, which is fine, or if it's downsampled to 96KHz, which is not ideal). If you do not listen to anything DSD, and all of your music is 96KHz or lower sample rate PCM, then you need not worry!

Given that the DSP only works with analog outputs, then yes, remote volume control via Roon is completely compatible with the 31-band PEQ in K17 (which beats Roon's more limited PEQ).
 
This was posted by Fiio. Compares the new R2R set up in the K17 R2R to the older K13.

1000010218.png
 
Chanur said:
This was posted by Fiio. Compares the new R2R set up in the K17 R2R to the older K13.

View attachment 548028
Click to expand...
One has got to love the "improvement" metrics (especially for inarguably quantitative parameters such as the number of precision resistors)!

EDIT: So... if @amirm tests a PRO, is it reasonable to expect him to count precision resistors to verify the manufacturer's spec?
;)
 
Those of you who remember the 80s and 90s will remember the Covox Speech Thing — an 8-bit DAC. I built a couple of them by soldering a bunch of resistors into a DB25 connector, making a rudimentary audio output that fed a mono powered speaker. It was all crackles: some from the limited bit depth, some from the mismatch of the resistors I used, and plenty from the fact that the CPU itself had to time every sample. The Covox was a revolution over the PC buzzer. It amazed us back then — but all its shortcomings were already audible. You could try to build a better one by meticulously selecting components, but sooner or later you hit the tolerance wall.


Today, various techniques mitigate those errors. Even so, the achievable resolution stays modest — roughly 17 to 19 real bits at the high end — and it comes at considerable effort and cost. Getting there also leans on oversampling and digital filtering, which sits awkwardly with the purist case for the architecture in the first place.
 
I like the front panel of the K17. Built like a President CB radio. Got style.

But the prices and the general R2R hype.. different topic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

DrCWO
ABX and R2R DACs
Replies
18
Views
3K
Ruediger
R
Y
Aiyima A80 - User Review
Replies
3
Views
4K
Bleib
Bleib
Back
Top Bottom