Jump to content
IGNORED

iFi Launch - Houston. We have lift-off...iUSB3.0


Recommended Posts

  • 4 months later...
  • 1 month later...

Hi all,

 

Just wanted to share my recent experiences with the ifi iusb 3.0 and the ifi gemini/mercury cables.

 

I use my PC for playback sending the signal through a SOtM tX-USBexp > ifi Mercury cable > ifi iusb 3.0 > ifi Gemini cable > DAC. I really thought that this was the best sound I could get from my PC. I started thinking about replacing the mercury cable with the blue usb 3.0 that came packaged with the iusb 3.0 and doing some A/B testing to see if I could hear any differences with the signal traveling at USB 3 vs USB 2.

 

I have the SOtM tX-USBexp and the ifi iusb 3.0 powered by the ifi ipower in case you're wondering. I'm considering replacing the two ipower's with an LPS or a battery down the road.

 

For the testing, I kept everything else constant, only switching out the mercury cable and blue usb 3 cable back and forth.

 

I spent all day Sunday going back and forth between the two cables, and here's what I heard:

 

A) When I replaced the mercury with the blue usb 3.0 cable had more a more musical tone, the music sounded more relaxed and soft/delicate. I could hear about the same level of detail as I did with the mercury, but maybe just a tad more detail and transparency. I heard more background sounds in some recordings, and overall the music sounded more dynamic. I thought I heard a better low end as well with better detail.

 

B) When I tested the mercury cable for the last time before ending the testing, it seemed like the mercury added some digital harshness and removed some of warmth in the audio. I was really surprised, it added a tiny bit of sibilance and overall, tracks played at the same volume seemed louder with the mercury cable and lost some detail/dynamics at the same time.

 

I swapped out the mercury for the blue usb 3 cable and now here's my chain;

SOtM tX-USBexp > blue usb 3 cable > ifi iusb 3.0 > ifi Gemini cable > DAC

 

Maybe there was too much cleanup going on in the signal chain to use the 2 ifi usb cables together, but I thought someone might appreciate my experiences. I was really surprised that the short usb 3.0 cable sounded better than the mercury cable that was sold separately in my system.

 

I do think that the Mercury cable is a good cable and I will keep it for a separate chain I'm working on, I would just advise that you test one at a time in your system because you might be adding some harshness to your audio with both working at the same time. I guess the moral of the story is that too much cleanup is a bad thing too!

 

Does anyone have any similar experiences with their ifi products?

Hardware:

JCAT NET Card FEMTO -> SOtM tX-USBexp -> iFi iUSB 3.0 > iFi Gemini USB -> Schiit Yggdrasil -> Emotiva Stealth DC-1 (temporary preamp) -> Airmotiv 4s

Software:

Fidelizer Pro 7.3 -> Tidal -> Roon

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
Hi all,

 

Just wanted to share my recent experiences with the ifi iusb 3.0 and the ifi gemini/mercury cables.

 

I use my PC for playback sending the signal through a SOtM tX-USBexp > ifi Mercury cable > ifi iusb 3.0 > ifi Gemini cable > DAC. I really thought that this was the best sound I could get from my PC. I started thinking about replacing the mercury cable with the blue usb 3.0 that came packaged with the iusb 3.0 and doing some A/B testing to see if I could hear any differences with the signal traveling at USB 3 vs USB 2.

 

I have the SOtM tX-USBexp and the ifi iusb 3.0 powered by the ifi ipower in case you're wondering. I'm considering replacing the two ipower's with an LPS or a battery down the road.

 

For the testing, I kept everything else constant, only switching out the mercury cable and blue usb 3 cable back and forth.

 

I spent all day Sunday going back and forth between the two cables, and here's what I heard:

 

A) When I replaced the mercury with the blue usb 3.0 cable had more a more musical tone, the music sounded more relaxed and soft/delicate. I could hear about the same level of detail as I did with the mercury, but maybe just a tad more detail and transparency. I heard more background sounds in some recordings, and overall the music sounded more dynamic. I thought I heard a better low end as well with better detail.

 

B) When I tested the mercury cable for the last time before ending the testing, it seemed like the mercury added some digital harshness and removed some of warmth in the audio. I was really surprised, it added a tiny bit of sibilance and overall, tracks played at the same volume seemed louder with the mercury cable and lost some detail/dynamics at the same time.

 

I swapped out the mercury for the blue usb 3 cable and now here's my chain;

SOtM tX-USBexp > blue usb 3 cable > ifi iusb 3.0 > ifi Gemini cable > DAC

 

Maybe there was too much cleanup going on in the signal chain to use the 2 ifi usb cables together, but I thought someone might appreciate my experiences. I was really surprised that the short usb 3.0 cable sounded better than the mercury cable that was sold separately in my system.

 

I do think that the Mercury cable is a good cable and I will keep it for a separate chain I'm working on, I would just advise that you test one at a time in your system because you might be adding some harshness to your audio with both working at the same time. I guess the moral of the story is that too much cleanup is a bad thing too!

 

Does anyone have any similar experiences with their ifi products?

 

Jean, very nice input, cheers!

 

That's the beauty of audio, not everything fits everywhere...

Our PowerStation is here: click me!

 

Check out our Tidal MQA Set-up Guides below. 
Android (Renderer) Mobile
Desktop (Decoder) via USB
Desktop (Decoder) via SPDIF

Link to comment
On 9/20/2016 at 8:28 PM, Jean said:

I guess the moral of the story is that too much cleanup is a bad thing too!

 

 

Is this regard I have to agree with you, because inserted a ifi iPurifier 2 before my ifi IUSB 3 and some degradation on the sound is noticeable, the iUSB 3 does not need the iPurifier but that in some way proved your findings. Too much cleaning and reclocking it's worst for sure than one simple and efective approach.

 

There will be more components and circuit boards in the middle, quality of connectors and a lot of variables that could lead to a degradation, so keeping simple and efective my approach.

 

For me the best cable should be the one that goes from the reclocker to the DAC.

 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, applesnowleo said:

 

Is this regard I have to agree with you, because inserted a ifi iPurifier 2 before my ifi IUSB 3 and some degradation on the sound is noticeable, the iUSB 3 does not need the iPurifier but that in some way proved your findings. Too much cleaning and reclocking it's worst for sure than one simple and efective approach.

 

There will be more components and circuit boards in the middle, quality of connectors and a lot of variables that could lead to a degradation, so keeping simple and efective my approach.

 

For me the best cable should be the one that goes from the reclocker to the DAC.

 

 

Too much USB cleaning is not recommended and can actually make things worse in some cases. Also it's good to know that iPurifier is essentially a smaller, more affordable and less effective (though great for the money!) iUSB3.0. We advise against stacking these as the latter is complex and multi-level USB treatment. What we'd suggest though is galvanic isolation before this product as these two provide the best USB service we currently have in our offer.

Our PowerStation is here: click me!

 

Check out our Tidal MQA Set-up Guides below. 
Android (Renderer) Mobile
Desktop (Decoder) via USB
Desktop (Decoder) via SPDIF

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, AMR/iFi audio said:

 

Too much USB cleaning is not recommended and can actually make things worse in some cases. Also it's good to know that iPurifier is essentially a smaller, more affordable and less effective (though great for the money!) iUSB3.0. We advise against stacking these as the latter is complex and multi-level USB treatment. What we'd suggest though is galvanic isolation before this product as these two provide the best USB service we currently have in our offer.

 

Hi, this is regarding iPurifier 2, the iPurifier 3 is something I have not tested, and I made the test with a ifi Pro iDSD that already has a fantastic isolation, with my iDSD Black Label this was not present and the iPurifier 2 was a fantastic addition that I recommend a lot.

 

In the ifi IDSD Pro was sort of a redundancy that in the context did not degrade but changed the sound in a way I did not find I liked, with the iDSD Black Label it was the opposite, so there it depends of the association made.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, applesnowleo said:

 

Hi, this is regarding iPurifier 2, the iPurifier 3 is something I have not tested, and I made the test with a ifi Pro iDSD that already has a fantastic isolation, with my iDSD Black Label this was not present and the iPurifier 2 was a fantastic addition that I recommend a lot.

 

In the ifi IDSD Pro was sort of a redundancy that in the context did not degrade but changed the sound in a way I did not find I liked, with the iDSD Black Label it was the opposite, so there it depends of the association made.

 

We resonate with what you just wrote. Our customers reported us recently that micro iDSD BL benefits from iPurifier3.0, iGalvanic3.0 or both of these at once (here on CA and on other forums too) so in case of this machine we can only say: "Try it!". But Pro iDSD stuffed to the roof with the best circuitry we currently have, thus we believe that anything else is excessive. If one would like to try some additional boxes before it still, by all means please do, we won't stop you ?

 

 

Our PowerStation is here: click me!

 

Check out our Tidal MQA Set-up Guides below. 
Android (Renderer) Mobile
Desktop (Decoder) via USB
Desktop (Decoder) via SPDIF

Link to comment
On 9/21/2016 at 5:28 AM, Jean said:

Hi all,

 

Just wanted to share my recent experiences with the ifi iusb 3.0 and the ifi gemini/mercury cables.

 

I use my PC for playback sending the signal through a SOtM tX-USBexp > ifi Mercury cable > ifi iusb 3.0 > ifi Gemini cable > DAC. I really thought that this was the best sound I could get from my PC. I started thinking about replacing the mercury cable with the blue usb 3.0 that came packaged with the iusb 3.0 and doing some A/B testing to see if I could hear any differences with the signal traveling at USB 3 vs USB 2.

 

I have the SOtM tX-USBexp and the ifi iusb 3.0 powered by the ifi ipower in case you're wondering. I'm considering replacing the two ipower's with an LPS or a battery down the road.

 

For the testing, I kept everything else constant, only switching out the mercury cable and blue usb 3 cable back and forth.

 

I spent all day Sunday going back and forth between the two cables, and here's what I heard:

 

A) When I replaced the mercury with the blue usb 3.0 cable had more a more musical tone, the music sounded more relaxed and soft/delicate. I could hear about the same level of detail as I did with the mercury, but maybe just a tad more detail and transparency. I heard more background sounds in some recordings, and overall the music sounded more dynamic. I thought I heard a better low end as well with better detail.

 

B) When I tested the mercury cable for the last time before ending the testing, it seemed like the mercury added some digital harshness and removed some of warmth in the audio. I was really surprised, it added a tiny bit of sibilance and overall, tracks played at the same volume seemed louder with the mercury cable and lost some detail/dynamics at the same time.

 

I swapped out the mercury for the blue usb 3 cable and now here's my chain;

SOtM tX-USBexp > blue usb 3 cable > ifi iusb 3.0 > ifi Gemini cable > DAC

 

Maybe there was too much cleanup going on in the signal chain to use the 2 ifi usb cables together, but I thought someone might appreciate my experiences. I was really surprised that the short usb 3.0 cable sounded better than the mercury cable that was sold separately in my system.

 

I do think that the Mercury cable is a good cable and I will keep it for a separate chain I'm working on, I would just advise that you test one at a time in your system because you might be adding some harshness to your audio with both working at the same time. I guess the moral of the story is that too much cleanup is a bad thing too!

 

Does anyone have any similar experiences with their ifi products?

Yes, the harshness and sibilance were an issue with the Mercury cable and the iUSB3 in my system as well. The soundstage fell into a heap as well. 

 

Since then, the old standard of Nordost Blue Heaven or Acoustic Revive split cable are used, no perceived issues with them. The Mercury was returned to the supplier as a down payment on HD820, which arrived yesterday by chance.

AS Profile Equipment List        Say NO to MQA

Link to comment
48 minutes ago, One and a half said:

Yes, the harshness and sibilance were an issue with the Mercury cable and the iUSB3 in my system as well. The soundstage fell into a heap as well. 

 

Since then, the old standard of Nordost Blue Heaven or Acoustic Revive split cable are used, no perceived issues with them. The Mercury was returned to the supplier as a down payment on HD820, which arrived yesterday by chance.

 

Thanks.

Link to comment

The ifi gemini 3 is not bad, in some systems the result could be very good, it depends how you like the music presentation, there are many variables and synergies on a system, and also how a person could perceive the way the sound is presented to him.

 

My son for example likes the way the sound in his iMac is presented with the gemini 3 in the Harman Kardon GLA 55, he preferred the gemini 3 to the gemini 2 and AQ Diamond, e understands the qualities of the AQ Diamond but referes it as a thin presentation on his system. In my system results like a champ. 

 

The Gemini 3 has a more forwarding presentation, and requires a very long burn in, with micro iDSD Black paired with an iTube 2 the gemini works like a charm and the final result is very impressive.

 

So in the end is just a question if it results with your gear or not.

 

Link to comment
8 hours ago, applesnowleo said:

The ifi gemini 3 is not bad, in some systems the result could be very good, it depends how you like the music presentation, there are many variables and synergies on a system, and also how a person could perceive the way the sound is presented to him.

 

My son for example likes the way the sound in his iMac is presented with the gemini 3 in the Harman Kardon GLA 55, he preferred the gemini 3 to the gemini 2 and AQ Diamond, e understands the qualities of the AQ Diamond but referes it as a thin presentation on his system. In my system results like a champ. 

 

The Gemini 3 has a more forwarding presentation, and requires a very long burn in, with micro iDSD Black paired with an iTube 2 the gemini works like a charm and the final result is very impressive.

 

So in the end is just a question if it results with your gear or not.

 

 

Agreed, it's all about synergy.

Our PowerStation is here: click me!

 

Check out our Tidal MQA Set-up Guides below. 
Android (Renderer) Mobile
Desktop (Decoder) via USB
Desktop (Decoder) via SPDIF

Link to comment

Folks, awesome news!

 

EISA (the European Sound and Imaging Association) has awarded the xDSD as the Best Portable DAC/Headphone Amplifier for 2018-2019.

 

The official release is to be found here:

 

 

B| HAPPY!

Our PowerStation is here: click me!

 

Check out our Tidal MQA Set-up Guides below. 
Android (Renderer) Mobile
Desktop (Decoder) via USB
Desktop (Decoder) via SPDIF

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...