nakedtoes said:

  I mean abit warmer... not really warm sounding...

Click to expand...

Oooooo misunderstanding~~~ my bad 

headwhacker said:

  It looks like 2.1.0 really shines and show it's true color compared to previous FW at medium gain. My Roxanne improves a lot on med gain. Treble It looks like 2.1.0 really shines and show it's true color compared to previous FW at medium gain. My Roxanne improves a lot on med gain. Treble noticeably comes to life and details are more articulated. I can hear a much fuller and vivid and well balanced presentation.
The volume does not seem to go louder when quickly switching between low gain and medium gain without adjusting the volume level (205). Mids  sound at the same level switching to med gain. It just feel the treble and sub bass got lifted and the presentation just got balanced and improves detail articulation.
This is the best my Roxanne has sounded so far. I also have to balance the bass pot position using a DMM to make sure the resistance are closely equal on both channels. It appears there is a 10ohm difference when both pots are at the same position.

Click to expand...

Wow your description sound exactly like my se846~~ But your Roxanne is definitely better 

Sounds like this firmware will be just what the doctor ordered with the Ref.1... which has a very subtle U signature. So hopefully this will flesh out the mids/vocals better. Will run the update later on today, and post what I find...

You'll like it but more for qualitative reasons than tonal ones. It sound more open which mid forward usually impairs and like the floor has dropped a bit. Lower treble is a bit smoother and why I think some think it warmer or mid forward. Sounds the most neutral so far to me.

One man's opinion: I really dislike this update. Let me start by saying I've only had the unit for a couple weeks. It shipped with 2.0... That's what I've been using and I love the sound. But I updated, thinking it was the thing to do. When I first listened to 2.1 I literally felt sick. Gone was all the smoothness, the musicality, the almost tube-like quality I loved about 2.0. To my ears (with westone um-3x's with um56... and a friends w4s), what I heard was harsher (harsh may be too harsh a word, but it's the one that comes to mind)... A tad bass deficient (and I'm not by any means a bass-head).... In a word soul-less. More analytical. Perhaps a bit more open... Maybe a little wider...and "clean"... But it didn't matter for gone was the soothing sound I had been raving about. 

I'm a Mac user so I couldn't go back to 2.0, at least not easily. So, desperate for a fix, I tried 2.0.5. To my surprise, I was ok with it... To me, much closer to what made 2.0 special... And light years better than 2.1.

Again, these are my impressions...I know many others around here would disagree. But I know what I like and 2.1 isn't it. Just thought I'd share... I'm sure some will agree.

lhamp said:

  One man's opinion: I really dislike this update. Let me start by saying I've only had the unit for a couple weeks. It shipped with 2.0... That's what I've been using and I love the sound. But I updated, thinking it was the thing to do. When I first listened to 2.1 I literally felt sick. Gone was all the smoothness, the musicality, the almost tube-like quality I loved about 2.0. To my ears (with westone um-3x's with um56... and a friends w4s), what I heard was harsher (harsh may be too harsh a word, but it's the one that comes to mind)... A tad bass deficient (and I'm not by any means a bass-head).... In a word soul-less. More analytical. Perhaps a bit more open... Maybe a little wider...and "clean"... But it didn't matter for gone was the soothing sound I had been raving about. 

I'm a Mac user so I couldn't go back to 2.0, at least not easily. So, desperate for a fix, I tried 2.0.5. To my surprise, I was ok with it... To me, much closer to what made 2.0 special... And light years better than 2.1.

Again, these are my impressions...I know many others around here would disagree. But I know what I like and 2.1 isn't it. Just thought I'd share... I'm sure some will agree.

Click to expand...

 
As always one mans thrash is another man's treasure. 2.1.0 and in mid gain is the best I have heard Roxanne so far. My preference leans more on crystal clear well articulated and detailed presentation with tight, punchy and solid bass without an emphasis or hump  on the mid bass that can give a hint of boomy sound.

headwhacker said:

   
As always one mans thrash is another man's treasure. 2.1.0 and in mid gain is the best I have heard Roxanne so far. My preference leans more on crystal clear well articulated and detailed presentation with tight, punchy and solid bass without an emphasis or hump  on the mid bass that can give a hint of boomy sound.

Click to expand...

 
Yep… to each his own. And I agree, 2.1 sounded best on mid gain.

headwhacker said:

As always one mans thrash is another man's treasure. 2.1.0 and in mid gain is the best I have heard Roxanne so far. My preference leans more on crystal clear well articulated and detailed presentation with tight, punchy and solid bass without an emphasis or hump  on the mid bass that can give a hint of boomy sound.

Click to expand...

lhamp said:

Yep… to each his own. And I agree, 2.1 sounded best on mid gain.

Click to expand...

For me 2.1 sounded better from the previous FW with se846, it's gives more details on the mid, more transparency, wider soundstage, IMO although the bass is lesser but still punchy & boomy from 846. Different people have different hearing experience choose what is best for you

If most everyone agreed that one FW was the best then that would be a very strong statement that yes, that FW is the best. We all hear a little differently, and have different preferences as to sound. I state the obvious. Also think about it, if a FW or anything else, gathers both positive and negative and neutral opinions, it would seem that it is neither total wrong and not totally right for all but must be doing some things right or there would be a greater consensus of magnitude. Nothing will satisfy all, just by our differences, that would be impossible. The best way to accomplish this on one dap, since a dap can be changed regarding sound and headphones to a lesser degree with modifications, is to use a FW that you like. As more become available, go with what you enjoy. For me that is easy as I am less demanding on all the bells and whistles. I just want good music. I don't care about play lists and making up preferred music folders, I just put in a card, which has what I like, (rock, different types, blues, jazz, classical), and I am good to go. 
 
So as to sound, debate is great as it drives each person, hopefully to be open minded enough, to think about what the other person is saying. We may not change our mind but we can consider and accept that our preferences may or may not be met and enjoy the prospect that something (this DAP or some other in combination with a monitor that suites your needs) is either here now or forthcoming, that will give us all the joy of listening to music. 

Not sure this or f880

My impressions after upgrade from 2.0.0 to 2.1.0. I don't like it at all... It sounds now like dx50 or more like dx50. Where is the "air" between instruments? Why the sound doesn't come that far from the left / right or even slightly from the back of the head like before? For me the player had lost something that distinguished it clearly from dx50 - fantastic and wide soundstage (almost 3D like). Now it's gone.

Tried 2.1.0 for couple of days, but I'm back on 2.0.5. Sound has definitely changed, my ears prefer less analytical
sound of older FW.
 
I'm bit puzzled with very short battery life though - I can hardly get 3 hours of play time (mix of OGG and FLAC), volume around 200. I think my battery is shot .

lad27 said:

  Tried 2.1.0 for couple of days, but I'm back on 2.0.5. Sound has definitely changed, my ears prefer less analytical
sound of older FW.
 
I'm bit puzzled with very short battery life though - I can hardly get 3 hours of play time (mix of OGG and FLAC), volume around 200. I think my battery is shot

.

Click to expand...

Definitely something wrong with your battery. I can squeeze at least 7 hours from mine.

athmospheric said:

  My impressions after upgrade from 2.0.0 to 2.1.0. I don't like it at all... It sounds now like dx50 or more like dx50. Where is the "air" between instruments? Why the sound doesn't come that far from the left / right or even slightly from the back of the head like before? For me the player had lost something that distinguished it clearly from dx50 - fantastic and wide soundstage (almost 3D like). Now it's gone.

Click to expand...

I guess, it depends what headphones you are using. The new FW sounds wonderful with my Roxanne's.

iBasso is a Chinese DAP manufacturer in Shenzhen. Base on my recent observation on the Chinese audio forums, it is very likely iBasso tunes the FW2.1 to the preference of the local Chinese mass: enclosed, in your face kind of mid presentation who uses multi drivers IEM. (BTW, multi BA drivers IEMs is the current hot trend in China)

I guess all the other "ordinary" people using dynamic driver headphones like us will have to stick with FW2.0.5.