Showing 1 of 1136 conversations about:
KangTheMad
126
Feb 5, 2017
bookmark_border
This or the FiiO E10K? I'm thinking about picking one up as a present for my brother.
Feb 5, 2017
Mario.Paul
330
Feb 5, 2017
bookmark_border
I also want to know this, any audiophiles chime in? I want to use these with some HD598s
Feb 5, 2017
KongMing
11
Feb 5, 2017
bookmark_border
Proudly wearing HD598s with the CEntrance, and I've got to say that it sounds amazing (Of course, personal opinion). In terms of specs, the CEntrance Slim blows the Fiio E10K out of the water. (Sample rates are higher: up to 192 kHz - 24 bit on the CEntrance while a max of 96 kHZ - 24 bit on the E10K. The DAC chip on the CEntrance Slim is also of much higher tier.)
Buy the CEntrance, you and any of your family won't regret it.
(EDIT: If you have the funds, I would also recommend looking into the Slim's regular model: the CEntrance Dacport HD. It has even greater output specs if you're looking for something to keep for a long while into the future)
Feb 5, 2017
Mario.Paul
330
Feb 5, 2017
bookmark_border
Done. I'm getting this one then, the HD seems very tempting with its better specs but it's also double the price of the Slim. I'm an audiophile noob so posts like these help a lot, thanks Kong and Kang.
Feb 5, 2017
KongMing
11
Feb 6, 2017
bookmark_border
Glad to be of service ;) Yeah, the Slim will be more than you ever need. Best to save some money, and (you never know) maybe buy a second DacPort Slim later down the line for another machine.
Feb 6, 2017
neggles
8
Feb 21, 2017
bookmark_border
I object on principle to the idea that a higher sample rate is necessarily better; the vast majority of content isn't even available in 192khz to begin with, and a lot of the ultrasonic frequencies that it adds have an active negative effect on playback quality through most hardware. Even hardware like this that explicitly supports these higher sample rates isn't guaranteed to have no issues with reproduction of the ultrasonic content of 192KHz recordings, and in the absolute best-case scenario where everything works flawlessly and the ultrasonics are properly reproduced by your DAC/amp/drivers by definition they'll be completely inaudible on account of being ultrasonic. More info and a whole bunch of science here: https://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html
This dovetails with my own personal experience across a dozen different DAC/amp/headphone/driver setups, in and out of a studio; there's no improvement in quality going from 96KHz to 192KHz, and even 96KHz sometimes sounds worse than 48KHz when using amplifiers/DACs ill-equipped to handle the higher sample rate (a lot of cheaper stuff seems to be built assuming that using a DAC chip supporting 96/192KHz is the only thing you have to change from a 48KHz design)
anyway my point is that while you're going to notice a difference in sound quality between the E10K and the CEntrance Slim, the sample rate / bit depth isn't going to be the thing responsible for it.
Feb 21, 2017
KongMing
11
Feb 21, 2017
bookmark_border
I never said that it was a key point of it being better; of course, it's already hard enough or impossible to notice any quality difference beyond 48 kHz. I apologize if my comment made it look like so. My point was the quality of the actual chipsets and the DAC/AMP as a whole(generally, not to account for every available DAC, but - atleast in my experience - the higher the frequency range that the chip can support, the quality of the chipset and the overall DAC/AMP is better).
Thanks for pointing it out and going into the details for those who might be unaware.
Feb 21, 2017
neggles
8
Feb 21, 2017
bookmark_border
No worries; the sample rate was the main thing I saw mentioned & I wanted to make sure others didn't get the wrong idea; the CEntrance is definitely a massively better device than the E10K for a lot of reasons. Apologies if I came across overly aggressively, I've had a few too many people insist that they can hear the difference between 96/24 and 192/24 :P
Feb 21, 2017
KongMing
11
Feb 22, 2017
bookmark_border
No harm done; and I know what you mean ;)
Feb 22, 2017
Rekreated
11
Mar 6, 2017
bookmark_border
on amazon $125.00 now HD version
Mar 6, 2017
Dbkelly
0
Mar 6, 2017
bookmark_border
I agree with the notion that file size doesn't translate to "better performance". I rarely go above "Redbook" myself, so the Slim's capabilities are in line with my needs. I also don't need on-the-go portability. The strength of the Slim for me is the superior audio (as in sound) performance of the DAC and the superior topography of the amp. As an all-in-one unit, I haven't seen anything that can match it at this price. They drive my HD-650s with authority and even make the few mp3 files I have sound great.
Mar 6, 2017
aznguyen316
13
Mar 7, 2017
bookmark_border
I believe the HD is $125 on amazon prime. So very competitive.
Mar 7, 2017
View Full Discussion