It's time to evolve into new Flagship

[HighNRG]

Luckily, time enough

 

[Aquaman]

... When I did this test, even my wife in the next room could hear the difference. We're not talking about nuances, but a whole other class of difference.

aah, there it is.

 

[dominikz]

So you're telling me the Ultra sounds as good as an MSB or a DCS or a Burmester?

No, because I haven't seen data which confirm whether MSB, DCS or Burmester perform well. They might, in which case I'd say yes.
And again, this is assuming comparison under controlled conditions.

But that of course doesn't mean that there's no value to be had in choosing a more expensive device. For example they might have better support, a more extensive service chain, increase pride of ownership, nicer looks and feel, additional features.... you name it.

It's not possible to improve the audio quality of the Ultra

You can absolutely 'improve' audio quality of the Ultra - e.g. by applying EQ where appropriate.

it's a perfect machine?

It is not perfect for everyone, obviously, as it doesn't have every imaginable feature.
But if the feature set and form factor fits the user, I don't see why it wouldn't be suitable for high-quality sound reproduction.

So everyone who spends more than 320 euros on a streamer/DAC/Preamp is an idiot who's influenced by mood and placebo effects?

Sorry, but where did I suggest anyone to be an "idiot"? Why resort to this kind of language at all?
Every person in the world is subject to mood and biases - it is just a part of being human, as I mentioned already.
Why would that make anyone an idiot?
Also, as mentioned before - "sound quality" isn't the only factor at play when choosing a device.

I don't know how many of us here have high-end HiFi systems or how many of us have ever listened to high-end systems or even slightly less. If we really think the Ultra is the absolute best, I think there's a problem here. For me, the Wii Ultra is an exceptional machine in its price category in terms of SQ. But in absolute terms, it certainly isn't. I agree that WiiM is unlikely to change target and remain in the low-cost range, but I reiterate the concept: Don't we believe that the WiiM software is superior to the class of devices it represents? It really seems that for this manufacturing company, the limit of software development is precisely the hardware. I also maintain that if you can't hear the difference between a Wii U Ultra and a Gustard X30, there's a really big problem. When I did this test, even my wife in the next room could hear the difference. We're not talking about nuances, but a whole other class of difference.

You are of course entitled to your opinion.
I also don't see why would it be a problem if someone can't hear a difference between WiiM Ultra and a Gustard X30, or why would it be especially beneficial if one could hear it.

 

[Goodnews]

So you're telling me the Ultra sounds as good as an MSB or a DCS or a Burmester? It's not possible to improve the audio quality of the Ultra and it's a perfect machine? So everyone who spends more than 320 euros on a streamer/DAC/Preamp is an idiot who's influenced by mood and placebo effects? I don't know how many of us here have high-end HiFi systems or how many of us have ever listened to high-end systems or even slightly less. If we really think the Ultra is the absolute best, I think there's a problem here. For me, the Wii Ultra is an exceptional machine in its price category in terms of SQ. But in absolute terms, it certainly isn't. I agree that WiiM is unlikely to change target and remain in the low-cost range, but I reiterate the concept: Don't we believe that the WiiM software is superior to the class of devices it represents? It really seems that for this manufacturing company, the limit of software development is precisely the hardware. I also maintain that if you can't hear the difference between a Wii U Ultra and a Gustard X30, there's a really big problem. When I did this test, even my wife in the next room could hear the difference. We're not talking about nuances, but a whole other class of difference.

I find it somewhat problematic when people write about something they've never heard of and, without discrediting the WiiM product, are accustomed to using consumer-grade products.

Software:

It took me five days to import albums and get them reasonably organized in the WiiM.

One hour in the new Mac Mini, including Audirvana Studio.

Power:

Here, too, the WiiM reacts when filtered, just like any other streamer/DAC, and this really doesn't have to cost much money.

A friend of mine has the MSB setup, with the corresponding remaining hardware & listening room.

Surely the question arises, a digital set ~ $120 000?

But there is also the realization that the WiiM Ultra is far from the end of the line in terms of sound quality. On the other hand, WU is truly unbeatable in LAN Accu mode when used purely as a streamer, but the rest is average.

 

[Flatron7]

I share a certain sympathy for @Flatron7 's view. Not in every way, but for a good part.
I don't think that better hardware will have much effect on the sound but certainly on the emotions transported.

They could even make a marketing strategy out of it saying that their top-tier gadget will sound the same as an Ultra but offer this and that more. By doing so they would further gain in credibility (not trying to sell voodoo) and could even stay on the budget side of things as the higher price would only pay for the build extras. It would not be milking-the-cow like others do it, but I'm sure they would attract a wider audience and further establish their market position and reputation.

This is where Eversolo is going wrong in my opition. It severely puts me off to see a new and supposedly better sounding model every six months. The advertised improvements are either BS in themselves or they are cheating on their customers by selling them the 'best' today, knowing that there is better to come in a few months time.

Personally I would love a nicely built full-size 'Ultra' to better fit my setup with a power amp with a classic footprint.

I'm glad you find my point appealing. I'll reiterate the question I asked above: if it's all marketing and the Ultra is the perfect machine, since you maintain that hardware doesn't matter or that no hardware is better than the current one, then anyone who buys anything over €320 with the aim of improving sound quality (not features, looks, or their ego) is an idiot? Does the Ultra really sound like a DCS or an MSB or like a MOLA MOLA, NAD, PASS, etc., etc.? Because if so, we've found nirvana. The only things that can change then are the features, inputs, and outputs.

 

[Burnside]

aah, there it is.

Yeah, it might have been a stronger case if one of the oldest tropes in hifi wasn’t dropped in to the argument, true or otherwise

 

[Wiimer]

Ultra is the perfect machine

I don't think anyone actually said that
It's more about cost-effectiveness, I suppose.

 

[Flatron7]

No, because I haven't seen data which confirm whether MSB, DCS or Burmester perform well. They might, in which case I'd say yes.
And again, this is assuming comparison under controlled conditions.

But that of course doesn't mean that there's no value to be had in choosing a more expensive device. For example they might have better support, a more extensive service chain, increase pride of ownership, nicer looks and feel, additional features.... you name it.

You can absolutely 'improve' audio quality of the Ultra - e.g. by applying EQ where appropriate.

It is not perfect for everyone, obviously, as it doesn't have every imaginable feature.
But if the feature set and form factor fits the user, I don't see why it wouldn't be suitable for high-quality sound reproduction.

Sorry, but where did I suggest anyone to be an "idiot"? Why resort to this kind of language at all?
Every person in the world is subject to mood and biases - it is just a part of being human, as I mentioned already.
Why would that make anyone an idiot?
Also, as mentioned before - "sound quality" isn't the only factor at play when choosing a device.

You are of course entitled to your opinion.
I also don't see why would it be a problem if someone can't hear a difference between WiiM Ultra and a Gustard X30, or why would it be especially beneficial if one could hear it.

Forgive me, but are we talking about HiFi, statistical analysis, or variable research? I'm an engineer and I know how to eliminate variables, but I don't think it's worth bothering with all this fuss, right? I'm speaking from personal experience in a more or less controlled environment, my home, where I've tried many brands, having been fortunate enough to have a friend who's a HiFi dealer. Even though I can't afford some brands, I've been lucky enough to be able to listen to them. You didn't call anyone an idiot; it was just a way of making you understand that thinking that €320 has already reached the pinnacle of HiFi sound quality seems excessive to me, and not because of the cost, but because, unfortunately, the reality is that to cost so little, you have to make choices and compromises. I'm talking about sound quality because I think it's the main aspect of a music machine, right? If a streamer does so many things well, has so many features, and then sounds like crap, it seems obvious to me that the objective has completely failed. I must add that, having tried other, much more renowned brands, I'm convinced that WiiM and its software can offer much more to hi-fi enthusiasts. Its support is exceptional, the features are excellent, and so I wonder what they could do with better hardware. When I talk about sonic differences, I'm not talking about small differences that can be easily dismissed as a result of mood, position, behavior, etc. Trust me, if you've never heard it, there are devices out there that sound damned better than the Ultra. And I say this as an Ultra lover. I bought it on day one and was shocked by how good it is for such a small price.

 

[Flatron7]

I find it somewhat problematic when people write about something they've never heard of and, without discrediting the WiiM product, are accustomed to using consumer-grade products.

Software:

It took me five days to import albums and get them reasonably organized in the WiiM.

One hour in the new Mac Mini, including Audirvana Studio.

Power:

Here, too, the WiiM reacts when filtered, just like any other streamer/DAC, and this really doesn't have to cost much money.

A friend of mine has the MSB setup, with the corresponding remaining hardware & listening room.

Surely the question arises, a digital set ~ $120 000?

But there is also the realization that the WiiM Ultra is far from the end of the line in terms of sound quality. On the other hand, WU is truly unbeatable in LAN Accu mode when used purely as a streamer, but the rest is average.

Forgive me, I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or disagreeing. If you're referring to me as talking about things I've never tried, that's exactly the opposite. It's precisely because I've tried other products and am a HiFi enthusiast that I created this thread. I see potential in the WiiM, but it seems like most of its owners feel like they've arrived and see no need to upgrade. And from the WiiM's point of view, this is perfect because its target audience is reached and perfectly satisfied. My only thought is that with their ability to update the software and create new features, perhaps they could even enter a higher market segment. From the responses I'm seeing, I think they never will because the majority of its owners either think they have a Ferrari under their ass or are content with what they have with no desire to go beyond.

 

[Goodnews]

Forgive me, I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me or disagreeing. If you're referring to me as talking about things I've never tried, that's exactly the opposite. It's precisely because I've tried other products and am a HiFi enthusiast that I created this thread. I see potential in the WiiM, but it seems like most of its owners feel like they've arrived and see no need to upgrade. And from the WiiM's point of view, this is perfect because its target audience is reached and perfectly satisfied. My only thought is that with their ability to update the software and create new features, perhaps they could even enter a higher market segment. From the responses I'm seeing, I think they never will because the majority of its owners either think they have a Ferrari under their ass or are content with what they have with no desire to go beyond.

No, I agree.

I did mention that if the power supply is filtered using simple means and it is only used as a streamer, its performance is far, far beyond the financial investment.

 

[Flatron7]

I don't think anyone actually said that
It's more about cost-effectiveness, I suppose.

Oh no, if someone tells me that changing hardware doesn't bring anything in terms of SQ but only ego, placebo, or a few more features, it means you're telling me that, in terms of SQ—and I repeat, in terms of SQ—we've reached the limit and anything changed would just be snake oil. I don't think even WiiM itself would dare say such a thing, in my opinion. If we look at the quality/performance/price ratio, the Ultra is an exceptional machine. But that's not the point. The thread stems from what we've seen in recent years: the software, WiiM's support management, and assistance, in my opinion, are superior to its products and perhaps, I stress, perhaps, it could allow the company to enter a higher market segment. 99% of the time it won't, but allow me to say that in my opinion it's a great shame.

 

[canard]

Oh no, if someone tells me that changing hardware doesn't bring anything in terms of SQ but only ego, placebo, or a few more features, it means you're telling me that, in terms of SQ—and I repeat, in terms of SQ—we've reached the limit and anything changed would just be snake oil. I don't think even WiiM itself would dare say such a thing, in my opinion. If we look at the quality/performance/price ratio, the Ultra is an exceptional machine. But that's not the point. The thread stems from what we've seen in recent years: the software, WiiM's support management, and assistance, in my opinion, are superior to its products and perhaps, I stress, perhaps, it could allow the company to enter a higher market segment. 99% of the time it won't, but allow me to say that in my opinion it's a great shame.

It's just a branch of Linkplay... (see a way to showcase test their software/streaming/network expertise...(?) ) so the possibility (the origin, it seems to me) of outsourcing for other brands (hdg audio?) this is something to consider...
And this aspect... very little risk...
;-)

 

[goodmore]

Better sounding? That's the never ending rabbit hole of being an audio geek. In a simple explanation our goal is to make our stereo sound like the performer is in our living room. The main problem I encounter trying to reach that goal is in the recorded music itself. I'm an old rocker. The albums of the 60s & 70s and early 80s are where my main music interests are. On my current WiiM systems.....three of them....I can think to myself that is the best that song has ever sounded to my ears and have the very next song sound terrible. The fact is many recordings of that era were just terrible. Get the product out the door to the fans was the goal of recording industry. Limitations in technology compared to today are evident. Remastering of that material is what perks my interest more than new hardware. Of course I did read an article yesterday that listed 30 remasterings that sound worse than the original. The best thing an audio geek can do for themselves is be satisfied with what they have, but we know that isn't happening.

 

[Aquaman]

Oh no, if someone tells me that changing hardware doesn't bring anything in terms of SQ but only ego, placebo, or a few more features, it means you're telling me that, in terms of SQ—and I repeat, in terms of SQ—we've reached the limit and anything changed would just be snake oil. I don't think even WiiM itself would dare say such a thing, in my opinion. If we look at the quality/performance/price ratio, the Ultra is an exceptional machine. But that's not the point. The thread stems from what we've seen in recent years: the software, WiiM's support management, and assistance, in my opinion, are superior to its products and perhaps, I stress, perhaps, it could allow the company to enter a higher market segment. 99% of the time it won't, but allow me to say that in my opinion it's a great shame.

If some one tells me that you need to spend 3000 or more Dollars or Euros (the amount is arbitrary) for a steamer and DAC to reach the pinnacle of sonic quality, I would say that he is flat out wrong.

Amps and speakers are a different story.

 

[taube Taube]

aah, there it is.

Don't underestimate the wife test! I use it too. It's quite accurate and unbiased. Because my wife doesn't care!

 

[HighNRG]

What surprises me each time new in discussions about prices is that adults today still believe that sales prices for higher fidelity products have something to do with manufacturing or other real costs. The selling price is made by the market. The manufacturer only has to pay attention to (at least) achieving a contribution margin, otherwise he will go bankrupt sooner or later. There is no boundary to the top. Why would you sell something for €1.000 when the market is also giving €10.000? This is not a guess but more than 30 years of personal professional experience.
Take the new Lumin Streamer/DAC X2: My dealer ordered ten (none for me, we decided to waste or money otherwise ). Eight are already sold before people had even touched it. This type of customers does not care about Darko, Cheapo or Amir & The Boys. They have the money, they spend it. From this guys you will never hear a bad word about a WiiM for example. But you will very, very often hearing budget guys naming them snobby or idiots. That is weak and far from sovereign. Accept other ways of life. And at least hide this income related social envy. You can measure whatever you want, the bad smell is there. It is undoubted you can have this famous 90% very cheap today. But do not blame people who want and can pay the extra mile.

 

[dominikz]

Forgive me, but are we talking about HiFi, statistical analysis, or variable research?

From my perspective I'd say all; these things are not mutually exclusive.

First, there's absolutely no need to do research to enjoy audio.

But if we want to make sure our findings can be replicated by other people then we need to use the scientific method. If we don't use the scientific method then our findings might or might not apply to others - we just won't know.

I'm an engineer and I know how to eliminate variables, but I don't think it's worth bothering with all this fuss, right?

This is of course your choice, but also a matter of perspective.
For example, I'd say I personally don't bother with the "fuss" because e.g. I don't feel the need to spend time to listen for differences in all sorts of different DACs (anymore); but on the other hand I do spend a lot of my time learning and experimenting with audio in other ways.

Who's to say which of these two is more "fuss"?

People who are not into audio would probably call everything that we audio enthusiasts do "unnecessary fuss".

I'm speaking from personal experience in a more or less controlled environment, my home, where I've tried many brands

Whether or not your home is a "controlled environment" depends on whether or not you introduced controls in your experiments like (but not limited to) accurate level-matching and blinded testing.

You didn't call anyone an idiot; it was just a way of making you understand that thinking that €320 has already reached the pinnacle of HiFi sound quality seems excessive to me

To be clear - I understood you were using a form of rhetoric for dramatic effect.
But the way you used it implied that I meant to ridicule people spending more money on audio gear, which is absolutely not the case.

People should absolutely buy and use whatever gear makes them happy - there's nothing wrong with that.

unfortunately, the reality is that to cost so little, you have to make choices and compromises.

And compromises were most definitely made, but I'd argue they weren't made in the way you assume.

I'm talking about sound quality because I think it's the main aspect of a music machine, right? If a streamer does so many things well, has so many features, and then sounds like crap, it seems obvious to me that the objective has completely failed.

This is true, yes. An audio device that e.g. has a huge amount of hiss is broken, and no features can save it.

But note that human auditory system has evolved to extract the useful signal, and to suppress the distortion and noise; not the other way around.
I.e. human hearing is simply not focused on the imperfections in reproduction, it is focused on the content/information.
This is why we can still enjoy music even on objectively poorly-performing audio device, as well as why we can lead a constructive conversation in a noisy restaurant.

This 'resistance' to noise and distortion is a feature of human hearing, not its fault!

It is also why we don't need super-high-performing audio electronics to reach transparent audio reproduction.

When I talk about sonic differences, I'm not talking about small differences that can be easily dismissed as a result of mood, position, behavior, etc.

As someone with some audio research background, I can only say you'd be surprised at what kind of subjective perceptual differences can be attributed to all of these subjective factors you dismiss.

Like most audio enthusiasts, prior to starting with my research I had a view similar to yours so I can absolutely understand where you are coming from.

Again, simply allowing that cheaper devices can have similar (or even equivalent) sound quality to more expensive ones does not make people wanting more expensive devices fools. After all, if that was the case I'd be a fool too, and we all know I can't have that.

 

[Flatron7]

If some one tells me that you need to spend 3000 or more Dollars or Euros (the amount is arbitrary) for a steamer and DAC to reach the pinnacle of sonic quality, I would say that he is flat out wrong.

Amps and speakers are a different story.

No one has ever said this, no one has ever talked about the apex, especially since I don't even think €3,000 is enough, hehe. But WiiM, with a €3,000 price tag (even less is fine, but let's stick to your example), can certainly afford even better hardware and software design. We're talking better channel isolation, galvanically separated digital and analog sections, reduced noise, interference, distortion, etc. Improved thermal and clock stability—in short, many small improvements that make the sound better, even to the untrained ear. I think what they've already developed with the Ultra is truly amazing, but I think there's potential for more, given how they've evolved their products. I repeat, this isn't WiiM focus today, and I'm probably wasting time and resources trying to get t my point of view , which remains a faint hope.

 

[taube Taube]

From this guys you will never hear a bad word about a WiiM for example.

Of course, why bother with a subset when you have the whole? You could just consider everyone with less money idiots and not bother. Why did you even write this? What kind of guy are you?

 

[QuarryHunslet]

Perhaps the first part of this thread title should be changed from “It’s” to “Is it”.

The current title is making a statement of the opinion of the OP, yet he goes on to ask questions which suggests that a change to “Is it” would be more appropriate.