Does this suggest that both HM-901 and DX100 are on the same level of performance, despite a case of 2 Sabre ESS9018 for HM-901 versus 1 Sabre chip for DX100?
Able to share which firmware of DX100 was used for comparison?
Because it has been shown that a change in firmware resulted in significant changes in the DX100 sound as well.
This suggest that with further updates, iBasso may be able to tune the DX100 to sound like HM-901 without needing the extra Sabre chip.
Personally, i like that the DX100 has that little more air as it gives each live concerts recording a unique atmosphere.
Not like it sounds like any other concerts but you can hear it is unique to that concert.
However, this can only be heard with a very neutral sounding custom such as JH13pro. Didn't get this with the Heir 8.A (warmth masking the air).
I use the 1.2.7 firmware. The later ones I do not like and the sound, IMO, degrades. The UI for me is just fine and I have zero issues.
The DX100 has a little more air/openness to the sound. The 901 slightly warmer, which bodes well for classical and thankfully it is not too warm, just a touch. Too much and the sound would not be for me. Even when I built tube gear I always went for neutral and never the "warm" tube sound, as I can't stand it. The 901 will have other amp modules and hearing those will give me more of a overall opinion on the DX and 901 comparison since the personality of the 901 is bound to change. I doubt iBasso will tune the DX to sound like the 901. They will go for how they feel they want it to sound. I still need to try the JH13's with both in a comparison. The AK100 with the JH13's is a match made in musical heaven. I have no 22ohm resistor in the signal path of the AK100. The 901 and the DX100 are both better than the AK100. I think besides the Tera Player, which I never heard, we are looking at the top of the heap here.