Loxjie D40 Review (DAC & HP Amp)

[Zensō]

@amirm Did you test the channel balance?

 

[Shorty]

@amirm Did you test the channel balance?

Yes he did. See “Linearity”.

 

[Zensō]

Yes he did. See “Linearity”.

This is the measurement I’m looking for:

 

[JeyElDee]

Only 1 left in stock on Amazon. Who is gonna get it???

Got it ! (From Germany)

 

[PeteL]

This is the measurement I’m looking for:

View attachment 187797

They are typically for analog volume potentiometer performance. I doubt you could see anything else than perfect for a digital attenuation control. And yes, as previously mentioned, the linearity graph do give the information differently.

 

[Zensō]

They are typically for analog volume potentiometer performance. I doubt you could see anything else than perfect for a digital attenuation control. And yes, as previously mentioned, the linearity graph do give the information differently.

Well, they’re not always for analog, as seen by the example above.

 

[PeteL]

Well, they’re not always for analog, as seen by the example above.

Sure, but the exemple above show perfection, this is where I feel Amir may have had reconsidered it's relevence in this context, but can't speak for him.

 

[Zensō]

Sure, but the exemple above show perfection

Which is what we’re expecting to see here, but without the actual test being run we’re only guessing.

 

[PeteL]

Which is what we’re expecting to see here, but without the actual test being run we’re only guessing.

OK, in all cases it would be really screwed if an algorithm was assigning a different attenuation value for the two streams... I can't see how any programmer could make that mistake, you'd have to work for it, let alone pass trough QC... And yes the Linearity test show no channel imbalance if you digitally attenuate the signal, yes it's attenuated at the generator, not by the control, but you see my point right? It's a little more than "guessing" at this point .

 

[Azathoth]

Beautiful looking, love how the front face looks.

 

[Zensō]

OK, in all cases it would be really screwed if an algorithm was assigning a different attenuation value for the two streams... I can't see how any programmer could make that mistake, you'd have to work for it, let alone pass trough QC... And yes the Linearity test show no channel imbalance if you digitally attenuate the signal, yes it's attenuated at the generator, not by the control, but you see my point right? It's a little more than "guessing" at this point .

I assume there is a reason Amir ran the channel balance test for the Element III and numerous other DAC/amps with digital volume control. Not seeing there’s anything different in this case.

 

[PeteL]

I assume there is a reason Amir ran the channel balance test for the Element III and numerous other DAC/amps with digital volume control. Not seeing there’s anything different in this case.

OK, I personally think that the testing suite is an evolving process, when you realise a certain test give the same result 99% of the time, you may feel that this page space can be better used. It is my guess but no need to speculate, let Amir comment on this if he feels like it when he comes back.

 

[jhaider]

Not bad at all. But for just a bit more money, wouldn't you rather have a MiniDSP Flex and a $120 headphone amp (say, the Magni) that performs better?…But I honestly think the MiniDSP Flex is a game changer. It should completley change the workflow for how Amir tests speakers.

I agree in principal but you have the wrong component. The headphone game changer was Quedlix 5k, which offers PEQ and crossfeed with iOS control (along with USB or Bluetooth audio input) for less than the cost of a nice dinner. It basically exposed the whole >100 USD headphone DAC and DAC/amp markets as pointless me-too wastes of time with no real thought to improved fidelity. Including the one measured here.

If you want a fixed desktop setup that can drive any good wired headphones to their optimal performance at any volume level, use one as a DAC to a big bore analog desktop amp. Like this:

 

[remlemasi]

Got it ! (From Germany)

Nice! I looked this morning and was surprised to still see it. Would’ve been 2-day shipping for me…. But I’m leaning towards the JDS Element III as it fits my needs better (clean office/desktop setup for small bookshelf speakers w/ A07 + headphones).

 

[magicscreen]

I see more expensive devices have better SINAD. So audiophiles are right after all.

 

[_thelaughingman]

I see more expensive devices have better SINAD. So audiophiles are right after all.

I think you misunderstand the current pricing situation of electronics. Supply chain constraints specifically with Chip shortage is the leading reason for many products currently on the market being priced higher than usual. In this product' case, the options and features included warrant a higher price than a typical DAC on market.

 

[PeteL]

I agree in principal but you have the wrong component. The headphone game changer was Quedlix 5k, which offers PEQ and crossfeed with iOS control (along with USB or Bluetooth audio input) for less than the cost of a nice dinner. It basically exposed the whole >100 USD headphone DAC and DAC/amp markets as pointless me-too wastes of time with no real thought to improved fidelity. Including the one measured here.

If you want a fixed desktop setup that can drive any good wired headphones to their optimal performance at any volume level, use one as a DAC to a big bore analog desktop amp. Like this:

View attachment 187808

Yeah it's a great product, still a different class of device tough, Why do you say the Flex is the "wrong" component. It's only an opinion, the Flex is a more higher end product, a much more complex architecture, perform better and should be more expensive. Qudelix uses the PEQ option included with Qualcomm Bluetooth chip. They didn't do anything revolutionary here, Headphone makers use the same DSP engine for their Bluetooth headphbones. This Chip has, as a bonus feature, a USB input, It's cool but it's the rudimentary USB audio class 1, processing is at 48K, not compatible with other interfaces like SPDIF, there is no real Jitter Immunity, so audibly it may be OK but it is what it is, It is limited to what the chip offer and performance will never be on par. The thing is, it can't expand to more complex system. UAC1 and Bluetooth will always be the only thing this platform can do. Yes, in the end, the end result is better, EQing headphone is more audible than anything else so of course a correct tonal balance add a stronger benefit than anything else. But does it mean we should stop caring about everything else? Then it would almost make ASR irrelevent, because ASR DO care about every little improvments even if they are not has obvious as EQing the sound, obviously.

 

[amirm]

Wow! That also needs an extended scale for linearity? How far can the AP measure linearity correctly?

We can go to 24 bits or -144 dB.

 

[Ralf Stocker]

Does this thing now have the best price/performance ratio of all the DACs tested?

 

[laudio]

It's a nice case but if you going for a larger form factor, why 14 inches instead of standard consumer gear size that would matchup with a lot of other gear?