iBasso DX100:24 bit for bit, PG 1> Reviews & Impressions, Downloads, VIDEO, NEW Firmware 1.4.2.
May 17, 2012 at 9:09 AM Post #6,016 of 13,503
I leave the EQ off as it sounds the best this way IMO and ibasso says this is their intended "Flat" EQ. Enabling the EQ activates the android based EQ and alters the sound. Now if you have issues with clipping then I'd say the Flat EQ based on android is good. Otherwise it takes things too far away and makes the DX100 not so intimate and boring.
 
 
May 17, 2012 at 9:11 AM Post #6,017 of 13,503
Quote:
I leave the EQ off as it sounds the best this way IMO and ibasso says this is their intended "Flat" EQ. Enabling the EQ activates the android based EQ and alters the sound. Now if you have issues with clipping then I'd say the Flat EQ based on android is good. Otherwise it takes things too far away and makes the DX100 not so intimate and boring.
 

+1
 
May 17, 2012 at 9:13 AM Post #6,018 of 13,503
@AnakChan

Is there any benefit in SQ using the line out of the DX to the RX3 balanced? So using the DAP/DAC > RX3B as opposed to just the DX100 by itself?
 
May 17, 2012 at 10:12 AM Post #6,019 of 13,503
@AnakChan
Is there any benefit in SQ using the line out of the DX to the RX3 balanced? So using the DAP/DAC > RX3B as opposed to just the DX100 by itself?


Looks like someone's looking for an excuse to buy an RX3! :D
 
May 17, 2012 at 10:48 AM Post #6,020 of 13,503
Quote:
I leave the EQ off as it sounds the best this way IMO and ibasso says this is their intended "Flat" EQ. Enabling the EQ activates the android based EQ and alters the sound. Now if you have issues with clipping then I'd say the Flat EQ based on android is good. Otherwise it takes things too far away and makes the DX100 not so intimate and boring.
 

 
It is really a preference thing as well as the cans you are using and the genre you are listening to =)
 
Quote:
@AnakChan
Is there any benefit in SQ using the line out of the DX to the RX3 balanced? So using the DAP/DAC > RX3B as opposed to just the DX100 by itself?

 
DX100 lineout to O2 is already better than the DX100 itself so I guess that hooking the RX3 to the DX100 will only improve things..
 
AnakChan why don't you do a direct comparison between the DX100+RX3 and the iPad+CLAS+RX3?
 
May 17, 2012 at 11:01 AM Post #6,021 of 13,503
Quote:
Looks like someone's looking for an excuse to buy an RX3!
biggrin.gif

 
May 17, 2012 at 11:08 AM Post #6,022 of 13,503
Quote:
 
AnakChan why don't you do a direct comparison between the DX100+RX3 and the iPad+CLAS+RX3?

Currawong.. if you get AnakChan's RX3B could you do a comparison of
 
  • DX100>L3>Headphone A
  • DX100>RX3B>Headphone A 
  • DX100>Headphone A
 
May 17, 2012 at 11:34 AM Post #6,023 of 13,503
@GG: I know someone here who has an O2 and may give it a shot one day. I listened to it briefly on the Friday before the Headphone Show (when we were taking the overseas and out of town Head-fier's around) but didn't really give it a fair listening test.
 
@Room40, you mean DX100 single-ended into the RxMk3 then balanced to the headphones? I don't have balanced headphones but I can try single-ended. If you mean DX100 single-ended to balanced input RxMk3, I don't believe this is possible (or technically possible but not the proper way to use balanced input).

@uel, may give it a shot if I have time tomorrow. I gather this is merely a DAC ES9108 vs CLAS Wolfson's test
 
For now, I may give my ears a little bit of a rest from the past few days of testing. Somewhat OT, I don't know if you guys read the SR-71B vs RxMk3 test I did today, I put my Merlins back onto the RxMk3 and experienced a piercing pain which is unusual since I've historically been accustomed to bright earphones/headphones. But after using the FitEar TG!334 for the past few days, my ears find the Merlins too bright, esp off the RxMk3.
 
May 17, 2012 at 12:01 PM Post #6,024 of 13,503
Quote:
 
@Room40, you mean DX100 single-ended into the RxMk3 then balanced to the headphones? I don't have balanced headphones but I can try single-ended. If you mean DX100 single-ended to balanced input RxMk3, I don't believe this is possible (or technically possible but not the proper way to use balanced input).

 
What I am interested in is the comparison of the DX100 singled ended into the RxMk3 with a balanced output to a pair of balanced headphones and with the SR-71B being the only thing changing in this line up.
 
May 17, 2012 at 3:28 PM Post #6,025 of 13,503
I've had the DX100 for approximately a month now and believe I have reached a point where I can confidently share a few impressions. It seems to me headphones are better driven by the DX than iems. With the ES5, Miracles and UERM the sound is weighty, dynamic but at times minus the finesse, polish and focus I find, in varying degrees, with any of my three portable amps (Stepdance, SR71A, Pico Slim). I do, however, find that using the DX100 as a DAC is nearly worth the price of admission. Particularly into the Stepdance and out into the Miracles the synergy is mesmerizing. The Miracles are a languid, stubborn pair of customs, and are reluctant to overtax themselves, but this combination has awoken them and the chains removed (especially in treble shimmer and sparkle). Compared to the CLAS, which has been my go-to portable setup for some time now, I cannot say the DX100 is a blatant improvement with iems. The CLAS is more analog, with a wider and deeper soundstage, but not as full-sounding or dynamic. Detail retrieval is similar on first glance, but more back to back comparisons are needed. I sometimes find myself wondering whether driving iem's is optimal on the DX. The sound is, at times, too aggressive, too forward and uni-directional (as though everything were rushed forward). At other times, however, I experience that mysterious elation, that perfect cohesion of sound quality and mindset, and I cannot recall having such a quanity of those moments with the CLAS.
 
Today I plugged in my newly arrived ATH-AD2000 and quickly concluded the amp in the DX100 was more adept (more insistent, focused) than the Stepdance. It was a short session, but nonetheless revealing. The Stepdance (on low gain) seemed unsure of what to do with the load and produced a sound a bit soft and beclouded, as though it were perturbed by the task. I usually do not displace my headphones from the house (having invested a great deal of money in customs), but this experience has nudged me into thinking that maybe I should add a good closed can to my queue. Nonetheless, I will be spending more time comparing full-sized headphones on the DX.
 
This month of ownership has been a predominantly positive experience. Getting past the intermittent glitches and subpar battery life is not difficult when weighed against the sound quality; but that is not to say the DX100 is some kind of an end-all device. The DAC is tremendous and the amp above average (and a bit specialized) are my still-early ratings. Without having set my myself to the task of comparing, I will say the DX100 has wonderful potential as a portable device, but it cannot hold a candle to my home setup (which is several times the cost and to be expected).
 
May 17, 2012 at 4:06 PM Post #6,026 of 13,503
Quote:
I've had the DX100 for approximately a month now and believe I have reached a point where I can confidently share a few impressions. It seems to me headphones are better driven by the DX than iems. With the ES5, Miracles and UERM the sound is weighty, dynamic but at times minus the finesse, polish and focus I find, in varying degrees, with any of my three portable amps (Stepdance, SR71A, Pico Slim). I do, however, find that using the DX100 as a DAC is nearly worth the price of admission. Particularly into the Stepdance and out into the Miracles the synergy is mesmerizing. The Miracles are a languid, stubborn pair of customs, and are reluctant to overtax themselves, but this combination has awoken them and the chains removed (especially in treble shimmer and sparkle). Compared to the CLAS, which has been my go-to portable setup for some time now, I cannot say the DX100 is a blatant improvement with iems. The CLAS is more analog, with a wider and deeper soundstage, but not as full-sounding or dynamic. Detail retrieval is similar on first glance, but more back to back comparisons are needed. I sometimes find myself wondering whether driving iem's is optimal on the DX. The sound is, at times, too aggressive, too forward and uni-directional (as though everything were rushed forward). At other times, however, I experience that mysterious elation, that perfect cohesion of sound quality and mindset, and I cannot recall having such a quanity of those moments with the CLAS.
 
Today I plugged in my newly arrived ATH-AD2000 and quickly concluded the amp in the DX100 was more adept (more insistent, focused) than the Stepdance. It was a short session, but nonetheless revealing. The Stepdance (on low gain) seemed unsure of what to do with the load and produced a sound a bit soft and beclouded, as though it were perturbed by the task. I usually do not displace my headphones from the house (having invested a great deal of money in customs), but this experience has nudged me into thinking that maybe I should add a good closed can to my queue. Nonetheless, I will be spending more time comparing full-sized headphones on the DX.
 
This month of ownership has been a predominantly positive experience. Getting past the intermittent glitches and subpar battery life is not difficult when weighed against the sound quality; but that is not to say the DX100 is some kind of an end-all device. The DAC is tremendous and the amp above average (and a bit specialized) are my still-early ratings. Without having set my myself to the task of comparing, I will say the DX100 has wonderful potential as a portable device, but it cannot hold a candle to my home setup (which is several times the cost and to be expected).

 
Thank you for the review, I myself more often find myself enjoying my Sony-Z amped with TTVJslim with the JH16 than the DX100. As you said its too aggressive sometimes and fatiguing, where the Sony rig is lush and comfy.
 
May 17, 2012 at 5:12 PM Post #6,027 of 13,503
Currawong.. if you get AnakChan's RX3B could you do a comparison of

  1. DX100>L3>Headphone A
  2. DX100>RX3B>Headphone A 
  3. DX100>Headphone A


I would be very interested in reading the outcomes of this test. To confirm though, any amp capable of balanced amplification must be tested with iems/ cans which are wired balanced. Otherwise it ignores one of their biggest advantages IMO.
 
May 17, 2012 at 6:10 PM Post #6,028 of 13,503
Having recently used the DX100 with my JH13 Pros, for an extended time, I have found them to be every bit as enjoyable and as compatible as any phones that I use. I can not stand aggressive sound, nor laid back and have found that the DX100 powers the JH13's as well as I have used. They seem to open up more and have the transparency I have longed for but thought they, the JH13's, might not have totally possessed.
 
Also my ATH-ESW10 JPN, which I thought of selling, sound dynamic, detailed and transparent in solo with the DX or when the DX is in tandem with an amp, which goes to the dac section of the DX. 
 
These impressions are either directly powered from the DX100 or using the fi.Q in the chain. The 71b also sound exquisite with the line out of the DX100 while running the phones balanced. 
 
No EQ used, set to off. 
 
May 17, 2012 at 6:27 PM Post #6,029 of 13,503
Quote:
@uel, may give it a shot if I have time tomorrow. I gather this is merely a DAC ES9108 vs CLAS Wolfson's test.

 
Nope. It is to give Room40 a reason to buy the RX3.
evil_smiley.gif

 
Quote:
The CLAS is more analog, with a wider and deeper soundstage, but not as full-sounding or dynamic. Detail retrieval is similar on first glance, but more back to back comparisons are needed. I sometimes find myself wondering whether driving iem's is optimal on the DX. The sound is, at times, too aggressive, too forward and uni-directional (as though everything were rushed forward).

 
Have you tried either the old firmware or the new firmware with EQ on and set as flat?
 
The old firmware sounds much more analog to me while the new one sounds more digital. With EQ turned on and set as flat at 0, the sound is neither aggressive and forward. Some people like the forward kind of sound, but I don't. I have had the CLAS before and I feel that the DX100 is much more competent in almost every area save for the tweaks required.
 
I believe that a lot of issues with the sound on the DX100 is due to the firmware (and software) rather than the hardware. iBasso really need to tweak it and make it right. If not, many will just walk away believing that it is the hardware's fault and go about looking for other gears.
 
May 17, 2012 at 6:37 PM Post #6,030 of 13,503
Quote:
Currawong.. if you get AnakChan's RX3B could you do a comparison of
 
  • DX100>L3>Headphone A
  • DX100>RX3B>Headphone A 
  • DX100>Headphone A

Yes yes of course.. got ahead of myself here
 
 
  • DX100>L3>Balanced Headphone A
  • DX100>RX3B>Balanced Headphone A 
  • DX100>Headphone A
 
I suppose 1 & 2 v Overall is it worth it going the path of 1 & 2 or staying on the SE route with the DX100.. in another words is there any real significant gain? Is it night and day in comparison
 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top