FiiO X5s Digital Audio Player Discussions | Drop

Free Standard Shipping in the US on orders over $99

FiiO X5s Digital Audio Player

Audiophile

Showing 1 of 15 conversations about:

FiiO X5s Digital Audio Player

FISTDEYUMA

Sep 28, 2019

All thought of getting this ended with the USB micro. I had also read that it was not up to par sound wise. However, the price was such that I could overlook that. I was going to use it as a feeder for my headphone amp anyway, which has it's own DAC. However I have no desire to have to swap the USB B to USB C for a USB B to USB micro. It is one of the reason I'm disappointed with my Onkyo DP-X1 I got for cheap. Really, there is no excuse for not using a USB C these days.

Vote

Whitedragem

185

Sep 30, 2019

FISTDEYUMAWe don’t all jump ship to new formats as they come out, the only two devices in my house that have USB C is the Nintendo and the Sony 1000X headphones. Given the new spec for the next great USB format hasn’t found a way to differentiate itself, USB has once again proven a hassle product. There are so many flavours of USB charge protocols that sometimes I have to try three or four chargers to get an antiquated device to work. SO I agree- USB is a tricky one to get right and make all people happy (It will never happen, too much money in adopting ‘new’),.. whilstever we as consumers sell the ideal that we ALL NEED TO UPGRADE, the sales companies win. Given the controller chips limit the write speed/read speed of the MicroSD cards, USB of any flavour isn’t held back in terms of moving data, and these units can happily do fast charging. Having owned a few DAPs that require some adaptor, at some level, to be utilised,.. I don’t see this as a negative. This Fiio does have a fair reason for not using USB C, and that is it is a couple of years old. FiiO are attempting to master DAP design and sound output.. the effort I see their team deliver with regards to support and ongoing service, yes even with parts ‘a couple of years old’ is exceptional. I know they use old versions of Android as it is easily setup for the customer processors they use. Yes the processors are old/outdated, but a FiiO tech confirmed that ALL DAP sales don’t equate to one phone models sales, so chip makers are unwilling to go to the effort to build developer documentation to squeeze the last nuances out of these processors. They use this processor as it is highly customisable to output the sound they want. It comes down to DAC chips not just being an island, but a whole ecosystem. The parts in this DAP are used as the engineers can make the best audio output from this unique combination of parts. The only weakness of this unit is the lack of a heavy sleep mode. As a transport to an external DAC or AMP? It is perfect and beats out the best CD players in my house. for three times the money I could lower the jitter a bit more (ie with an A/K player), but that is because Astell&Kern put major effort into clock/timing=>low jitter. An A/K player with these same DAC chips would cost six times more, yes? At this price for this part, it is a bargain. There are better players, but the bang to buck ratio beyond this tier of kit gets a little silly. (price to performance doesn’t scale linearly) I would recommend anyone who can handle a slower clunky music player (because it was designed to put music first) to go ahead with this player. It will kill an LG VX0 phone for sound quality and that is what matters when buying a dedicated audio player. Can confirm as a transport it is ‘very good’. Brilliant buy, and very moddable. (overclock CPU etc)

Vote

FISTDEYUMA

Oct 4, 2019

WhitedragemYou are making me take a second look. I care about the sound and function. Because of fuction I find myself not using my KANN player much. The main advantage to it is massive storage and sound. The lack of google or any alt really harms it. My DX220 is outstanding in many ways but the no google and an alt to google being rather limited. Also the battery life could be better. The perfect DAP has not been made yet. I believe the higher priced units are no google or an alt to google but I could be wrong. Not being able at afford them makes them moot. Good sound is the most important and fuction is less so, but should not be neglected. The third is price but the parts would have to go way down for someone to make the perfect DAP.

Vote

FISTDEYUMA

Nov 9, 2019

FISTDEYUMAI have the same DAPs you have, the KANN and the DX220. The KANN is useless other than massive storage and good sound. The DX220 has APPs you can download. BubbleUP has been a winner for me as a transporter. The only complaint is I have does not have, or I cannot make work the wireless changer. The transporter used the USB C port so I need a way to charge it. For long listening I use my Samsung, which I can charge wirelessly and use as a transporter. I'm hoping something I have will let me use the KANN as a transporter but it is doubtful. The main problem with the phone is it is a phone, which interrupts my music.

Vote

Whitedragem

185

Nov 9, 2019

FISTDEYUMAI might be missinterpreting the word “transporter’. In the last two posts I am hearing it used to refer to the software that plays back the music files, and/or the hardware device that plays back the music files. Whilst I do agree that excellent playback software and, more so, drivers and ‘control’ software (eg the OS) can affect the sound quality output of given hardware... software cannot vastly fix bad clock/jitter and other aspects that are set at a hardware level. Sometimes, such as with APt X, which was initially sold to us as ‘hardware requirement’, was opened up as ‘software’, and has retroactivley been added to much playback equipment.. generally when we buy playback equipment we need to get equipment that gets it right in the first instance, as the hardware sound output can be tailored by software only so much, and certain aspects (eg jitter) cannot be reclaimed/made ‘better’. When I talk ‘transport’ I refer to the hardware aspect of the sound. Personally I have NO DESIRE for upgradable software/ apps, I came from an era of walkmans etc, where the physical controls might of, at best, been supplemented by some ‘remote controls’ on the headphone cable.. but generally what you bought out of the box initially/from the store, was what you had to use with that equipment for the life of the product. My nineties walkman and minidisc player still play and give excellent sound (both were flagship parts with attention being given to sound quality, although the walkman is pretty special, as on a single AA battery it can run for many hours...). When I buy a DAP; so long as it is functional and gives basic features like shuffle and ability to build a playlist ‘on device’, I am generally happy with THAT basic functionality. The transport aspect is simply how great it is at actually passing the digital bits, and might extend at a software level to ‘gapless playback’ support. I would never go ‘online’ with my DAP, so wireless might be useful to hook up some bluetooth speakers, or remote interface (eg my phone as a remote to control my DAP being digitally fed into the home HiFi), but I wouldn’t purchase a small personal audio device that HAS TO BE a ‘swiss army knife’. If so I am happy with the basic model with the blade and bottle opener, but can forgo the mini saw and tooth pick. If I need a saw, a dedicated saw would be better every time. That is my attitude to dedicated devices. (less is more). I understand many put up great arguments for why a specific player is ‘no good’ because it cannot run spotify etc.. I understand we all have different uses for our equipment, and , as the market trends in different directions it might be nice to have our middle tier (reasonable price point) audio equipment be ‘upgradeable’ to future trends and to continue to deliver excellent sound whatever we might choose to do with it... To be fair I wasn’t upset when my walkman couldn’t play minidiscs. Whilst both my units were made by Sony, the minidisc wasn’t even a gleam in their fathers eye when my walkman was designed or bought by me... The walkman still does its’ dedicated function perfectly. Thats what I seek in a consumer purchase. Specific tasks done well. I am yet to see a phone do any aspect of what a mid tier DAP actually does. By the spec sheet they both playback audio files etc, but I really wish consumers understood that the quality of the output far exceeds being ‘compatible’ with music playback. The difference of a well set up audio system is stunning. Well setup requires a certain system synergy, and an output sound that makes one ‘tap their foot’ (often somewhat involuntary).. music as it used to be sold (back in STEREO days) was truly HiFi. Majority of the ‘Hi Res’ products I see for sale are so far from being musical. They generally read very well at the spec sheet level.. Which takes me back to being a teenager and selling off my 100W surround receiver, which did video switching, had an equaliser, tonnes of inputs, ridiculous power output and lots of soundfields (echo) and cool gizmos and lights and all sorts of fruit. I traded it in for the most entry level 30watt stereo amp (with a source direct button). Nearly a decade later I then learned that real hifi components ofter read worse than my little 30Watt musical amp, at the spec sheet level,.. and that some aspects of musicality do not translate well to ‘numbers’ on a piece of paper. Very easy to manipulate those numbers to seem like one product can match another.. but oh so far from the truth... as most of what really matters is never discussed (or else the marketing companies would have nothing to sell). In TV terms it would be like buying QLED over OLED (Q is after O in the alphabet), and never even knowing about MOTION RESOLUTION. Lots of times an inferior looking spec sheet is the vastly better performing product. Sadly too many consumers want to educate why their more impressive sounding spec sheet parts are superior. PowerPC CPUS want to have a word with you!! (a 300mhz RISC chip(CPU) often outperformed a 700Mhz CISC chip,.. but hey lets not let facts get in the way of understanding that bigger numbers HAVE TO BE BETTER, right?) Anyhow, as a transport, if hardware can resolve all of the information correctly, with accurate positioning AND subtle nuances, developing real ‘texture’ in the sound etc.. then I say well done. I will buy a piece of equipment that performs the function (in the case of Digital Audio Players; playing back audio) it is intended for, and does so well. I like one box units that do one thing well. I will add more boxes if that is required. If one part breaks, one part goes to the repair shop and I continue using the remainder of the playback chain.. (home hifi).. if a DAP, I might use a DAC external, and an amp external.. but, that DAP better get lifting the sound files ‘right’. Most people like their phones as a player,.. they say how easy it is too use, how easy it is to get on the net, how easy it is to get the latest software, etc.. it ISNT so easy to (enjoy) listening too(if you’ve ever heard nice playback equipment), but hey - it gets ‘so much other stuff’ right. Many people= many usage scenarios. All products offer usage scenario for someone. I don’t write off phones as audio players; they are the most used audio players presently sold. Most used cameras as well... (I used to work retail in a dedicated camera/photography store).. lets just say I COULD offer ‘two cents’ with regards to “phone cameras”, but- they work for many and are always on hand. I don’t use one; and I appreciate my old camera which doesn’t hook up to the net and allow software downloads and bluetooth five etc. To each their own. I don’t measure cameras by megapixel either. My go to camera is a four megapixel (fovean) from the 2000’s. Or a Fuji X-Trans. Both give vastly more resolution than their ‘spec sheets’ would suggest. Both give beaut colour and contrast, arguably the two most important things to ‘get right’. Neither camera systems sound saleable vs spec sheet warrior competition.. DAPs are harder to qualify, mostly because majority of the planet haven’t heard really high fidelity sound. eg a system that renders compressed music files unlistenable. My young child can detect compressed music in a heartbeat. To us, it is ‘without soul’ and mostly unlistenable. I did have to source them a ‘true’ hifi system, as the playback music being hard to resolve (eg Nine Inch Nails) requires top tier equipment. Not wishing to invest crazy dollars into the parts as modern equipment would require, I simply spent a few hundred on the second hand market. Speakers from the seventies etc... That ‘toe tapping’ set of equipment resolves well and makes musical stuff that I haven’t heard sound ‘so good’ in a long time. Even though the same music files have been played through flagship (>$6500) receivers with attention given to every part of the system (cables/power isolation etc). You can only polish a turd so much.. DAPs have a hard time selling into a world where everybody can dismiss them, not based on sound quality, but rather on ‘future market standards adoption or some other ridiculous goal post’. Sound advice often isn’t. (Follow me and I will lead you BACK from the long lost garden path to nowhere...)

Vote

FISTDEYUMA

Nov 10, 2019

WhitedragemIn the current context a "transporter" is a device that feeds the music from another source to your music system. I have a server with a lot of music. I can used a phone or DAP via WiFI and the USB C port to feed the data from the server using wireless and into my DAC which feeds it to the AMP which feeds it to my headphones. Ideally it will give me pure data without changing a thing. Being it is zero and ones, it should be possible. The Phone or DAP should not effect the music at all. It is only to transport the music from one place to another. My hope is that the music is transported to my ears unmodified. We all know that this is unrealistic. I can tell the difference between a good DAC or Amp and a bad one. I have no idea if others can do that. Often it is a matter of tolerance of the distortion. Back in the 90's I was happy to have a 16mb mp3 player. It let me listen to my music in places I could not hear it before. It was small and held more than a CD, making it far better than a portable CD player. Today I would never use such a devise, even if my ears are nowhere as good now than then. Ten years ago I was very happy with my HD 600. Today I only listen with my HD 800s. The HD600 is still used with gaming. If something happened that we could not have high end headphones, then the HD600 would be king. However, those of us who listened to a HD800s will know they are not getting the best sound. Some people believe the best headphones are Beats, cans I would not pay 10 bucks for. They have marketed distortion and people are happy with it. In the HIFI world we are after pure music or music exactly the way the artist wanted it to sound. Some have taken it to the extreme, such as going back to vinyl. I was happy to leave vinyl as I hated changing music every half hour. Is vinyl better sounding? Of course it is, in a perfect setup. The average setup will have pops an clicks I find intolerable today. However I would only go back to vinyl if forced to. You used the example of a walkman. By today's standard they suck. By the standard of the day it was top of the line. I got my iBrass 220 for the best performance with Tidal. That might seem strange to someone who would never use a DAP online. The music I want is not away available to me off line. I can also find new talent that I could not have access to otherwise. Most of the time I'm listening to music off the server but I want the option to use it online. I love the sound of my KANN but its lack of flexibility is troublesome. It will not allow the software to use it as a transporter. If they did not include a way to access my server and Tidal, the KANN would see far less use. In fact the KANN would only be used when traveling do to its massive storage. The ibass 220 does not use goggle but it has a different app store that gives me access to the drivers I need. As good as the KANN is, my system DAC and Amp is better. I've heard from people on Facebook that disagree with my using a phone or DAP as a transporter. They want me to use Pi and Roon. I did not disagree. The main reason I use a Android is it works and is simple. I see no need to add more hardware when I have something that works. If it become inconvenient I would build one they think is better. As far as the music goes, there is no difference. However, I am thinking of Roon as from my reading it is a very good music controller software. My system is next to my chair, close enough that I can use it with the three foot wire. I tested and got to work a remote using two androids. However it was not really needed and sometimes loss connection, required me to play with to make it work. There may be other ideas of what a "transporter" does. This was how it was explained me. I'll use another word if they taught me wrong.

Vote

View Full Discussion

PRODUCTS YOU MAY LIKE