d50+atom is not an alternative for dx3. No one here would care about dx3, and this thread would not be 204 pages long, if not for feature set of dx3 which is not present in d50+atom combo. And if you want reliability just get some jds labs dac instead, like ol dac. You won't be able to tell the difference between the two anyway.
You talk about the features of the DX3 that the d50 [sic] + atom don't have, but no mention of any, and there isn't any feature the DX3 has that the D50s doesn't have IIRC. And you say you should just get the jds labs dac like ol dac, but it doesn't even have bluetooth or a screen.
D50s costs USD 30 more than the DX3 but doesn’t have a headphone amp stage which means you need to spend USD 99 more for an Atom, at which you’re now looking at an overall USD 129 cost increase over the DX3. this is not an insignificant difference in price. plus the DX3 actually still performs quite well. for people looking for a budget desktop product and need both a DAC and an amp, the DX3 is still hard to beat. 0.001% THD+N and 125 mW into a 300 ohm load is actually really good.
Without an independent review and measurements which is what people are here for, we don't know if the currently available DX3 and DX3 LDAC perform the same as the the one that was reviewed. Perhaps someone could at least compare the PCBs of the one Amir reviewed, the newest 1904, and the 1905 LDAC. Then we'd have some idea, but still not sufficient evidence for me unless there is no change
It looks like something went awry on the new version. Headphone output is down, and impedance is way up. I'm happy that I have the original version.
The new impedance on the LDAC version is a deal breaker for me if I had to replace one.