This is just a very quick first impression of what i think of the fiio q1 after receiving it and teting it to make sure it''s not broken before it goes under the Christmas tree.
The package is a bit small and is decent but not great. This is definitely not giving me the feeling i just spent €90 on this thing. Unpacking shows the device is a bit smaller than i expected and very much lighter. It's soo light that it feels cheap, despite having a good touch to it. But the assembly is als a bit cheap looking. Again, not a great start.
I bought it because the sound from my dell 980sff is total crap. And my airbook isn't really giving the sound I'm hoping for either. I was using an Asus xonar u1 but my headphones are way too loud with it. I need to turn down the volume on the computer first through software down to the lowest level, and then also turn the u1 all the way down. This means I lose a lot of fidelity and it's still lightly too loud. It seems the fiio q1 doesn't do much better because I also need to keep the volume know all the way down (even in low gain mode), although the software volume on the machine can stay at the maximum (which is good for fidelity). So the q1 is an improvement for me over the u1, but whether it's enough is something i need to spend more time on. And I didn't yet really listen to the sound yet so I have no idea about sound quality either.
That will all be soon after Christmas i hope.
Update 2015-12-25
It's Christmas and I found myself with half an hour of time to do some comparison listening. I used flac's at 44.1Khz or 48KHz at 16bits, played with foobar2000 with WASAPI event setting to get data to the Fiio. I listened with a sennheiser hd558 and an akg k550. I'm comparing the sound to a realtek onboard audiochip: the ALC892 (http://www.realtek.com.tw/products/productsView.aspx?Langid=1&PFid=28&Level=5&Conn=4&ProdID=284) and the o2 dac-amp. Although I prefer to have a look at measurements when deciding on a new audio device, doing proper measurements is hard. And interpreting them is also difficult, if not more so. Have a read at http://nwavguy.blogspot.nl/2011/02/testing-methods.html to see what I mean.
Because I don't have expensive measurement gear at my disposal all I can go by is my ears. For me that's in the end the most important thing anyway, because that's what I'm using to listen and enjoy the music. If I happen to like a device with very bad measurements, so be it. But atleast I'll be honest about it :)
Anyway, back to the listening test. I don't like to use vague words to describe what I'm hearing but since there isn't a clear standard for describing differences in this area, I think I'll have to. I'll try to keep it 'real'. The Fiio Q1 has more air in the reproducted sound than the ALC892. It's slightly easier to discern the separate instruments from eachother, but the placement remains the same. There is just a bit more room between the instruments. It sounds less smudged or compacted. Because of this it sounds a bit more 'studio' or 'analytical'. I'm not hearing much more detail in the music, maybe a tiny little bit. There is also a little bit less depth and fun in the music. It's like the improved clarity has removed some of that.
In the end the most pronounced difference I heard with Michael Nyman's 'The heart asks pleasure first' where the fiio makes the music come more alive.
All of this is much less of a difference than I heard with the O2dac-amp, which gave me a real 'wow' effect compared to the ALC892. The Fiio Q1 doesn't do that, but it's an improvement above 'standard' audio, although not by much. The O2 dac-amp is a real winner here, and only slightly more expensive when you build your own. The Q1 however is much smaller, lighter and less finnicky (I had to repair my O2 twice already, that's DIY). And the Q1 is nicer to look at. If you go for sound though, get the O2. It gives the feeling of really being there when listening to the recording. The Q1 really sounds like a recording. That's great for listening on the go or as background music, but when actively listening, the O2 has better sound to my ears.
I was unable to find any 'real' measurements on the internet for the Q1 so far (I'm not talking about the data presented by Fiio, nor by any home using using RMAA). I'd be very interested to check whether what I think I'm hearing is backed up by data, or whether I'm simply affected by subjective bias (http://nwavguy.blogspot.nl/2011/03/dac-listening-challenge-results.html). Please let me know.
Update 2015-12-25
It's Christmas and I found myself with half an hour of time to do some comparison listening. I used flac's at 44.1Khz or 48KHz at 16bits, played with foobar2000 with WASAPI event setting to get data to the Fiio. I listened with a sennheiser hd558 and an akg k550. I'm comparing the sound to a realtek onboard audiochip: the ALC892 (http://www.realtek.com.tw/products/productsView.aspx?Langid=1&PFid=28&Level=5&Conn=4&ProdID=284) and the o2 dac-amp. Although I prefer to have a look at measurements when deciding on a new audio device, doing proper measurements is hard. And interpreting them is also difficult, if not more so. Have a read at http://nwavguy.blogspot.nl/2011/02/testing-methods.html to see what I mean.
Because I don't have expensive measurement gear at my disposal all I can go by is my ears. For me that's in the end the most important thing anyway, because that's what I'm using to listen and enjoy the music. If I happen to like a device with very bad measurements, so be it. But atleast I'll be honest about it :)
Anyway, back to the listening test. I don't like to use vague words to describe what I'm hearing but since there isn't a clear standard for describing differences in this area, I think I'll have to. I'll try to keep it 'real'. The Fiio Q1 has more air in the reproducted sound than the ALC892. It's slightly easier to discern the separate instruments from eachother, but the placement remains the same. There is just a bit more room between the instruments. It sounds less smudged or compacted. Because of this it sounds a bit more 'studio' or 'analytical'. I'm not hearing much more detail in the music, maybe a tiny little bit. There is also a little bit less depth and fun in the music. It's like the improved clarity has removed some of that.
In the end the most pronounced difference I heard with Michael Nyman's 'The heart asks pleasure first' where the fiio makes the music come more alive.
All of this is much less of a difference than I heard with the O2dac-amp, which gave me a real 'wow' effect compared to the ALC892. The Fiio Q1 doesn't do that, but it's an improvement above 'standard' audio, although not by much. The O2 dac-amp is a real winner here, and only slightly more expensive when you build your own. The Q1 however is much smaller, lighter and less finnicky (I had to repair my O2 twice already, that's DIY). And the Q1 is nicer to look at. If you go for sound though, get the O2. It gives the feeling of really being there when listening to the recording. The Q1 really sounds like a recording. That's great for listening on the go or as background music, but when actively listening, the O2 has better sound to my ears.
I was unable to find any 'real' measurements on the internet for the Q1 so far (I'm not talking about the data presented by Fiio, nor by any home using using RMAA). I'd be very interested to check whether what I think I'm hearing is backed up by data, or whether I'm simply affected by subjective bias (http://nwavguy.blogspot.nl/2011/03/dac-listening-challenge-results.html). Please let me know.
