iBasso DX260 Digital Audio Player

Preamble: Into the depth of Porta-Fi

For the past four years, I’ve been an avid audiophile chasing and collecting flagships one after another – tainted by a narrow-minded belief that one couldn’t possibly attain excellent audio gears without spending fortunes upward into the kilobucks range. This was more or less true back when I first started this journey as I was kicking around with my Btr5 afraid to venture into the flagship territory. Yet, times have changed now and amassing value-centric gears seems to have gotten as never before easier. I’ve been testing a lot of DAPs lately and couldn’t help but feel that the value of the sub-1k category space has exploded to mind-boggling value that it’d be an excellent time to start as an audiophile without needing to painstakingly meander through the kilobucks space.

This is my introduction to the Dx260 – a value-centric “porta-fi” gear that excels being a versatile audiophile equipment. One that’s pocketable in size and maneuverable in OS (Android 11 + Mango OS), while retaining formidable sound quality tuned to the mania of “reference-neutrality”.

It’s been several years since I’ve seriously dabbled in the sub-1k space and I write this both as a tribute to my younger self who first began his journey with a Btr5 and to prospective audiophiles interested in picking up their first ever DAP but overwhelmed by a sea of options.




Key Specifications

• Size : 123 x 74.5 x 17.5mm
• Weight : 229g
• DAC : 8x CS43198
• Operating System : Android 11 + Mangos OS
• System Chip : Snapdragon 660 (4g RAM + 64gb ROM)
• Battery : Allegedly ~14 hours (I get closer to 9 hours utilizing high gain on balanced output)

@Ichos already provided a very comprehensive dive into its niche specifications. Thus, my take would be a lot more personalized and simplified for the layman out there – diving deep into esoteric terminologies like “NDK femtosecond oscillator” doesn’t particularly ring a bell for many.

Dx260 is one of IBasso’s latest generation DAPs having come out right before the just released Dx180. It’s meant to replace the old Dx240 which came out in November of 2021 with a newer set of DAC chips while keeping the price unchanged (Msrp ~$950). Interestingly, the replaceable amp design is no longer as its amplification sector is now soldered in. Maybe this new design format allows Dx260 to harbor a beefier set of capacitors? Whatever the reason may be, I’m a fan of this decision as I’d much rather have one well implemented amp sector than be given a flood of modular options – all of which I must pay additional $$ for.



Asymmetrical “BAL” and “SE” outputs

Dx260’s form factor comes in a tiny rectangular shape at just 1.5x the size of a credit card (in length) with an identical weight as a Galaxy S22 Ultra at just 229g. It is incredibly comfortable to hold with an industrious design language reminiscent of the 1920s Bauhaus era. It is unironically one of the most meticulously designed devices in IBasso’s lineup given the amount of attention to details with its sleek curvature, serrated cutout, and diagonally extruded side-buttons. I’d be glazing over IBasso’s step-up in design if it wasn’t for the awkwardly placed asymmetrical balanced and single-ended outputs that are not parallel in line with each other. A miniscule mistake, dare I say, but noticeable in the eyes of a sensitive perfectionist and one that I hope will get addressed in the future.




Sleek lines and curvature

Dx260’s crown jewel lies under its hood with eight Cirrus Logic CS43198 chips, which is the first in the industry as most dongles and DAPs settle for either a set of two or four when utilizing this specific chip – e.g. Dx300. As one can logically deduce, utilizing more processing (DAC) chips will result in lower distortion when converting digital files to analog signals, thereby allowing us to enjoy higher rendition of music as all audiophiles seek.

Dx260 is also the first to come with a newly upgraded algorithm process termed the FPGA-Master 2.0. This algorithm enhances the utilization of the implemented DAC chips to more accurately construct FiR filters that are more faithful and audible to our ears than its predecessor. These filters are made available with two toggle-based options : 2x and 4x. Users are also given the option to turn off the filter by switching to NOR instead. These FiR filters in conjunction with five different digital filters (D1~5) give anybody the option to fine-tune their system to a personalized sonic profile.


Operating System

IBasso is one of the few companies to offer a dual operating system, providing both the versatility of Android and a dedicated music player named Mango OS. Mango is IBasso’s in-house OS built from the ground-up based off a Linux system. My first exposure to Mango OS was on the Dx300, which was plagued with lag and an endless jittery feel back then. But it’s come a far way since then, as its speed, responsiveness, and fluidity are miles better now on the Dx260. The feel of the scroll is much smoother and you no longer have to wait half a second before a button is registered. Navigation feels more quick and prompt and it’s no less slower than scrolling through your music library on Android mode.

It takes exactly 25 seconds to toggle back and forth between the two systems and they can be accessed by either holding down the power button (~1.5 seconds) on Android or through the settings menu on Mango OS. If you prefer your device to be nothing more than a music player, Mango OS’ bareback system may do the job for you as it bypasses any undesired compression and resampling that’s inherent to how Android operates. But if you need the versatility of having access to music streaming service, Android sounds almost just as good, so feel free to utilize it without fear of losing out on meaningful sound quality.

With that being said, there is a difference in sound quality between the two, so keep in mind they are not identical for the most keen and sensitive listeners. I'll be diving more into this further down in the review.


Battery Life

IBasso claims a generous playtime of 14 hours in continuous usage, and this marketing statement isn’t too far off from my testing, albeit only applicable under a specific setting in a controlled testing environment –

[Minute:time] per 1% drained : screen ON, high-gain, balanced output, volume 27/100

02:40 - Android (played through UAPP), 4x FiR
05:18 - Android, NOR
02:07 - Mango OS, 4x FiR
02:15 - Mango OS, NOR

With the screen turned OFF :

~04:30 - Android, 4x FiR
~08:00 - Android, NOR
~04:00 - Mango OS, 4x FiR
~04:00 - Mango OS, NOR

I ran this test twice to confirm my result and I was surprised how much more efficient Android was in managing battery life as opposed to the linux based Mango OS. One might assume the barebone structure of Mango OS would afford a superior battery life, but the generational refinement of Android proves superior that there’s much more to be gained through consistent polishing of an operating system over one that is novel, yet rudimentary in comparison – not to take anything away from IBasso engineers.

There’s also a significant difference in playtime based on the FiR filter setting that is being used. In Android mode with the FiR filter maximized to its highest sampling rate, it drains the battery at almost twice the speed than with the filter turned off (NOR). Conversely, the filter seems to have little to no impact on the rate of battery consumed under Mango OS.

My everyday experience ranges somewhere around 8 hours on Android, 4x Fir filter, high-gain, and balanced output with little-to-moderate usage of screen-on time. I assume one can achieve the marketed 14 hours usage under Android with NOR, low-gain, and single-ended output. But I’d argue this isn’t exactly a desirable setting for most users, hence an unrealistic endeavor to achieve such battery life.



What you receive in the box

Packaging & Accessories

The overall packaging feels both luxurious and economical – not adhering to a grand theatrical performance that often ends up wasteful in today’s green-conscious society. The Dx260 is packaged inside a rainbow-blue holographic box encapsulated safely within its IBasso labeled foam container. Just underneath is an accessory box filled with :

• Instruction manual
• Warranty Card
• 4x screen protectors
• 3.5mm to RCA coaxial cable
• 4.4mm burn-in cable
• USB Type-C to A cable
• Silicone Case

The warranty card has a date-of-purchase written on it from which you’re eligible for one year of warranty service if ever needed. I recommend using the burn-in cable for a good two full days worth of time (48 hours) before moving onto the more organic method of listening to it with your iem. My experience of burn-in has been subtle, but audible with a slight overall refinement to its presentation.



Removable back cover. Unscrew the two Torx screws to access its internal battery

Sound Signature

IEMs used for testing : Rhapsodio Supreme V3 Ti, PMG APX, CCA Hydro
Cable : Wiredream Wide MK2

Setting: D3 filter, high gain, NOR FiR

Before I speak of its sound signature, we must reign back our expectation away from the flagship segment as it’s primarily meant to perform and compare with DAPs in its (and slightly higher) price category. It is not “the most transparent” or resolving device as some may suggest. Nor does it possess “phenomenal clarity” as if never before seen under the sun. But what it does excel in is how little it lacks while being one of the smallest and most compact android-based DAP I’ve ever tested – managing to be even smaller than Fiio M11s, which was designed with portability in mind.

Dx260 is a reference-neutral sounding DAP where neither its tonal balance nor timbral hue strays anywhere away from strict linearity. I say this cautiously as this is an adjective that’s commonly misused by many in such carefree fashion. So I must emphasize that I mean it truly when I say Dx260 is tuned with reference-neutrality in mind. All three frequency ranges are kept linear to each other and there is no exoticism or flavor to juice up its timbre beyond what is exactly presented. It has a slight analog hue with subtle mellow tune while remaining faithful to its inherent DS (delta-sigma) character. It has a wide soundstage – surprisingly wide in fact, reaching further in horizontal longitude than what Shanling M9+ can provide. Its depth is sufficient, reaching moderately deep as opposed to keeping it flat. But I’d be far reaching to expect a deeper soundstage when its amp sector is limited to its tiny pocketable frame. There is a good sense of air within its stage and a pocket of vacancy located right at the intersection where our eyes and its opposite eyebrows diagonally cross. This captures a convincingly realistic imaging far from the claustrophobia present in compact lower-end DAP of this price-sector.

As many users have already expounded, I will agree and describe Dx260 as a transparent sounding DAP that abides to contemporary standards. It out-resolves the likes of Cayin N7 and N8ii in a side-by-side comparison (comparison review below) and only falls behind against the heavy-weight establishments like Rs8 and its peers. It is not a detail monster nor does it cater to an analytic style of presentation like how SP3K renders music. Instead, it operates with droplets of subtlety and air, encased by a gesture of analog and ethereal hue. It dedicates itself as a champion of neutrality with every cadence, tonality, and timbre in mind.



Mango OS – Settings menu

You can tweak the sound signature by switching back and forth with its OS, scroll through different sets of FiR filters, and experiment with five different digital filters provided in its setting.

Android vs Mango OS -

Android (Mango Player) : Slightly sharper and more digital sounding. A little leaner and faster in presentation.
Mango OS : Slightly more lush and analog. More airy and atmospheric. A touch wider soundstage. Notes are more filled. A more “full” presentation.

FiR filter -

NOR : More analog, smooth, and slightly wider soundstage. More air and reverb at the end of each note.
4x : Sharper and more etched note, slight enhancement in clarity with a more DS-like (delta-sigma) characteristic. Pushes forth the entire mid to upper frequency that vocals are more pronounced. Treble is more sparkly. A more focused presentation. Slightly darker background.
2x : In-between NOR and 4x. You can guess-timate with the given information.

Digital filter -

Primarily dictates the speed of note cutting off. Affects the sense of air and note extension.

D1 (Fast Roll Off) : End of each note cuts off fast. Quickest presentation of the five.
D2 (Short Delay Slow Roll Off) : The “short delay” may be a little difficult to comprehend and is best understood by listening and focusing on when the notes start playing. Simply put, there is a millisecond delay right before each note comes in. A slight reverb and extension at the end of each note.
D3 (Short Delay Fast Roll Off) : Millisecond delay right before notes start playing. End of each note is cut off quickly.
D4 (Slow Roll Off) : Slight reverb and extension at the end of each note. Slowest and most atmospheric presentation of the five.
D5 (NOS) : More analog. Slightly warmer. Its speed is somewhere in between D1 and D4. Vocals are a little less prominent. Slightly pushed back.



CCA Hydro → Wiredream Wide MK2 → Dx260 → Wiredream Vintage IC → MK 475

Scalability

I’ve been seeing an uprise of interest from audiophiles wanting to utilize Dx260 as a source to feed it off through an external amplifier. Admittedly, this was also the first thought that crossed my mind seeing the “Octa Dac Chip Matrix” in its front marketing page. Dx260 does not have a dedicated line output like the ones you see on IBasso’s Amp14. But it is confirmed by @Paul - iBasso that Dx260 is using a true balanced line output, so you should be able to maximize the performance of its chipset by connecting it to a more capable amplifier.

Keep in mind to turn up the volume close to (or at) a 100 after switching setting to LO. Forgetting to do so will result in a very weak output and you will find yourself disappointed.

I’ve tested Dx260 off three state-of-the-art amplifiers to see which it pairs best with for my subjective needs.



Dx260 → Wiredream Vintage IC → PB5 & Tsuranagi-V2

Dx260 + PB5 Odyssey -

PB5 injects a dose of liquidy warmth to Dx260’s neutral sound signature. It’s more analog and “musical” in that stereotypical fashion. Notes become more filled and dense, and they noticeably emerge from a deeper depth. The stage expands in every direction but is mostly central to its vertical depth. Its width expands by about half a notch, but nothing significant as Dx260 alone has great horizontal longitude. Imaging improves in relation to its expanded stage, but is not a significant improvement so I advise to keep your expectation controlled. There is more heft and punch to its presentation. Mid-bass gets a slight lift in tonal balance.

Dx260 by itself sounds more mellow. Less warm. Easier to listen to and relax.

Dx260 + MK 475 (Fujitsu Red battery) -

MK 475 adds spark and dynamism to Dx260’s presentation. Its sound signature shifts in favor of a more speedy, rigorous, and muscular attack. Its tonal profile leans noticeably cooler, and this is even while paired with Fujitsu Red battery (notably known for its analog sound signature). Once again, the stage expands in every direction. Width is largely kept similar (about half a notch improvement), but its depth dives in a good two notches deeper. Midbass gets a slight lift. Overall, its character is closer to that of Diablo 2 than PB5 – albeit not as cold or digital sounding.

Dx260 + Tsuranagi V2 -

Tsuranagi V2 (not the same as Tsuranagi-SC) adds clarity and resolution to Dx260. There is a greater sense of finesse and refinement and everything sounds more clear, polished, and refined. Treble sparks with more precision and clarity. Imaging significantly improves and there is an even greater vacant space occupied near the center of my forehead – makes me feel as if the sound is always floating with lots of space between each instrument. Soundstage expands in every direction, but not to a grand level. PB5 is better in this regard.

I found Tsuranagi V2 to be best suited for my taste. It is noticeably cooler, leaner, and more refined than its first generation. Its output has gotten a lot weaker, which seems to have affected the stage as well. But the finesse and refinement is second to none and just an absolute pleasure to listen to paired together with Dx260.



Left to right – M9+, N7, Dx260, N8ii, MK 475, C9, PB5 Odyssey


Dx320 Max Ti, PB5 Odyssey, Dx260

Comparisons

As per usual, I’ve gathered myself a series of different DAP to do A/B comparison with and see how well Dx260 performs against its competition.

Before moving onto the bunch, I must highlight one of the most commonly requested comparison in regards to how Dx260 fairs against IBasso’s own flagship Dx320 Max Ti – and more importantly, how Dx260 + PB5 stack fairs against Dx320 Max Ti and whether this is a considerable option.

Dx260 vs Dx320 Max Ti :

Ironically, Dx260 is closer to Dx320 Max Ti than Dx320 (amp11mk2s) is. They are both tuned to reference neutrality but the Max Ti pouts more aggression and dynamic with a dosage of excitement to its presentation. Its speed is also noticeably faster with transients hitting harder and bass exploding deeper from a subterranean space. Interestingly, the Max Ti places a slight emphasis on the sub-bass, as its midbass comes across slightly leaner in tonality. The Dx260 on the other hand opts for a slight mid-bass hump to make up for its less impressive dynamics limited by the small chassis of its device. The Max Ti is the more holographic DAP between the two – there is a greater sense of space between each note and its instrument. Its stage also expands outward about a notch wider (impressively kept competitive by Dx260) and two notches deeper, giving a much more “full” and “filled” soundscape. Its resolution also improves, as the surface of each note vivifies and becomes more transparent – offering a higher fidelity listening experience as notes fly across.

Overall, the biggest difference between the two is the staging, imaging, and explosive dynamics, but Dx260 is able to perform on par with at least 90% of everything else the Max Ti is able to offer.

Dx260 + PB5 Odyssey (Wiredream Wide Vintage IC) vs. Dx320 Max Ti :

Dx260 with the PB5 stack no longer resembles the Max Ti in its tonal identity. The PB5 stack is considerably warmer and more analog. Everything sounds more smooth and liquid, while the density is kept as there’s more thickness to its presentation than the Max Ti. Resolution goes in favor of the latter as I did not find PB5 to enhance the clarity of Dx260 in a meaningful way. Staging goes in favor of the Max Ti – expanding about half a notch wider and deeper all around. Imaging is also noticeably more precise and holographic on the Max Ti. And there is a slight more finesse and refinement to its overall presentation. Bass is once again rendered differently with the Max Ti being more sub-bass oriented and the PB5 stack being more midbass centric. Max Ti also has a brighter and more ethereal quality to its treble, while the PB5 stack sounds more subdued in comparison.

The primary difference between Dx260 and its pairing with the PB5 is the injection of liquid warmth and analog tonality. The addition of the amplifier helps bring the stage closer to the Max Ti, but the latter still triumphs in all technical regard.

I wouldn’t recommend the PB5 stack if your sole purpose is to replicate the sound signature of Max Ti as they are more different than similar. But if you hope to taste the technical prowess of Max Ti at a significantly cheaper price, the PB5 stack is a valid option to consider – just make sure to supply yourself with a quality IC (interconnect) cable as well.



Left to right – SP3KT, SP3K, SE300, Sr35, Dx260, LPGT


M11s, ZX707, Dx260

The rest of the comparison review will take place in a more succinct note-style manner. This is to preserve the accuracy of my impressions without tainting it with superfluous adjectives. Unfortunately, I must rely here on the fallacy of my memory and limitations of my notes.

All written in comparison to Dx260 (D3 Filter, 4x FiR, High-gain)

AK SR35 :

Heavier note weight, fuller, more dense sound signature. Places more emphasis on the bass. Slightly pushes back the vocals. Tonally more engaging; a bit more vivid and sweet. Narrower in soundstage; depth is relatively similar. Has a slight delta-sigma sheen – trademark of all DS-based Astell & Kern DAPs. A little more artificial. Slightly less resolving. Slightly more holographic imaging.

AK SE300 :

Narrower and shallower soundstage. A little less resolving. Flatter two-dimensional imaging. Places more emphasis on the bass. Has a slight accent in each of the three frequency bands. Slightly colder. Faster and more tactile transient. Tinge flavored coloring. Heavier and denser note weight.

AK SP3000 :

Colder tonality. Sharper, pinpoint-accurate imaging. Much darker background. Half-a-notch wider soundstage. Much deeper depth. Neutral tonality, but with a more delta-sigma sheen. Slightly more resolving. Less musical and more analytic. Less “soul”. Arguably needs more “soul” to its presentation.

Cayin N8ii :

Solid-state Mode -

Colder tonality. More vivid. More dense. Faster and tighter transient. Narrower soundstage. Deeper depth; a cone-like presentation. More vicious and dynamic bass. Subbass reaches further lows. Less resolving. Slightly veiled in comparison.

Tube Mode -

Stage changes. Stage floor slightly rises, but width expands outwards. Imaging enhances with more accurate instrument positioning. Imaging is more holographic than Dx260. Stage is still wider on Dx260. Retains the inherent cold but now with a touch of tube-like warmth. Main difference is tonality and morphing of stage. Sounds like "V" shape with pushed back vocals and highlighted instruments. Accent to treble and the bass. Sounds more three-dimensional.

Cayin N7 :

Weaker amplification. Needs more volume. More vivid with a slight hint of coolness. More analog. Emphasis on analog. Narrower width. Much better depth. Dives a good amount deeper than what Dx260 provides. Tonally more neutral compared to N8ii, but still retains a slight “V” with pushed back vocals and highlighted instruments. Less resolving. Less transparent. Dx260 provides higher resolution.

Fiio M11s :

Very similar tonality. Darker background. A little less resolving. Narrower stage; a little shallower depth. Has a slight “smudge” at the end of each note – whereas Dx260 renders it clearer with more definition. Slightly pulled back vocals. Dx260 brings the vocals closer to you.

If you enjoy the M11s, you really can’t go wrong with the Dx260.

Lotoo Paw Gold Touch (LPGT) :

A more full and dense presentation. Highlight vocals with a sweeter timbre. Narrower soundstage; shallower depth. Falls behind in both resolution and imaging. Dx260 triumphs over every technical aspect.

Shanling M9+ :

Warmer tonality. More vivid. A very clear jump up in resolution. More “in-your-face” presentation. Slightly narrower soundstage; deeper depth. Less organic – caters closer to delta-sigma characteristic. More palpable dynamics and visceral bass.

Sony Zx707 (uncapped) :

Warmer tonality. More prominent delta-sigma sheen. Narrower stage; similar depth. Comparatively congested in imaging with less space between each instrument. Musically evocative. There's sweetness in its warmth. Similar note density. A little less resolving.



Fits perfectly in my 19x8cm hand

Finale

I think this is going to be a fan favorite alternative device for IBasso fans who hope to purchase Dx320 Max Ti but don’t have the funds to do so. They are very close in tonality – almost like siblings in fact – and compete highly against the upper-echelon category of DAPs offered by competing companies. It is incredibly light and portable at just 229 grams and is small enough to palm with any adult’s hands. Dx260 is a device for the masses – one that’s inoffensive, neutral in tonality, and generally hard to dislike. Given that it’s sold for less than $1k, it receives my high praise and one I’d be pleased to recommend to others

- Steve

The DX260 is iBasso’s new mid-range digital audio player (DAP), the successor of the much acclaimed and multi-awarded DX240. For the DX260, iBasso decided to abandon the modular amp-card system, so unlike the DX240 or DX320, you can't swap amplifier modules to tailor the sound signature to your liking. The DX260 might not be modular anymore but it is the first DAP to feature an easy removable back cover that allows for total battery access, making battery replacement by the user an easy task.

Technical stuff

The iBasso DX260 is the first DAP on the planet to feature an octa-DAC chip matrix, a unique and novel implementation that uses eighth CS43198 flagship DAC chips, four per channel, to achieve class leading measurements.

After years of algorithm development, iBasso's FPGA-Master has entered generation 2.0. As the audio system controller, it directly requests audio data from the SoC and plays a major role in signal reproduction and maintaining signal integrity. It synchronizes and generates all audio clocks utilizing two NDK femtosecond oscillators to achieve a fully synchronized single clock source.

The DX260 also features a dedicated USB receiver for USB DAC mode with low latency and ASIO/WASAPI support. The device supports 768kHz/32bit PCM and native DSD256.



The FIR filter

Thanks to the FPGA-Master 2.0, the potential of the 8pcs CS43198 can be further explored and developed. The DX260 features a synchronous parallel output mode that reduces "discrete distortion" between DACs to improve overall performance. A picosecond-level precise control and adjustment of the DAC clock and data is achieved, making each DAC data stream independently adjustable. Through the "delay parallel" of 4 DACs, the DACs form a hardware analog FIR filter, which averages the differences between multiple DACs, reducing distortion and effectively improving sound details and realism. The user has the option to switch the FIR filter off or enable it in 2x or 4x sampling modes.

Non Audio stuff

Previous iBasso DAPs, like the DX240 and DX320, had a chassis with smooth, rounded corners and curved edges. The DX260 has a new, angular design with asymmetrical lines, sharper corners and harder edges that combine together to a more industrial and aggressive appearance. The DX260 is lightweight and compact enough to fit in your palm and can be easily operated with one hand but the sharp corners may feel a little piercing. Of course, you can always use the silicone case that is included as a standard accessory.

The layout is simple and minimalistic, the right side of the DX260 has the unique iBasso multifunctional wheel and three buttons for playback control. The wheel might seem fragile but it isn't, it has a sturdy shaft that goes deep inside the chassis so it is actually very durable. Rotation is not that smooth and it takes some use to break up.

At the top of the device you can spot the 3.5mm SPDIF jack, the USB 3.1 type-C port and a micro-SD card slot without a dust cover. At the bottom there are the 3.5mm single ended and 4.4mm balanced headphone outputs that can also be set as line level outputs with a fixed or variable level.

The chassis is made from a single block of machined aluminum-alloy, featuring class leading finish and assembly. The back cover is reinforced with hardened glass.

User experience

The device is powered by a Snapdragon 660 SoC with 4GB of RAM and 64 GB of ROM that ensure a seamless user experience. The DX260 is fast and responsive without exhibiting any lagging, no matter the application used. The 5” touch panel is large enough to allow for one handed operation while it has excellent visibility and vibrant colors. Streaming services, like Tidal and Qobuz, run fast and smoothly, you can browse the internet and do multitasking without any slowdown.

The DX260 also supports USB and Bluetooth DAC functionalit, plus it can output digital streams via USB or digital coaxial so you can use it as a transport to an external DAC.



Dual OS system

As per all iBasso players, the DX260 features a dual operating system where the user can choose between a customized Android 11 OS and iBasso's own developed Mango OS for a purer listening experience. The Android 11 OS comes with the official Google play store pre-installed so you can easily download all your favorite applications. You also get all the familiar Android features, like the drop down menu and all shorts of customization options.

The Mango OS is optimized for the best possible sound quality killing all unnecessary tasks. You can't use streaming services, only local playback from the SD card and USB DAC mode are allowed. The Mango OS also includes powerful graphic and parametric equalizers. Database access speed and build times are very fast even with large capacity SD cards.

Battery duration

The capacity of the battery is 4400mAh and supports quick charging so you can get a full charge in about 2.5 hours. iBasso claims 14 hours of average play time which is a little optimistic but still the actual duration was more than satisfying. The player gave me 10 hours of continuous use from its balanced output, in the low gain setting, steaming high resolution material. Additionally you can charge and use the device at the same time but there is no desktop mode that bypasses the battery.

How to replace the battery

Battery replacement by the user is an easy task thanks for the removable back cover. The only thing you have to do is to use a torx screwdriver and unscrew the two screws that fasten the metallic part that secures the back cover. Then carefully remove the back cover, taking extra care not to break it, and you have total access to the battery which is very easy to replace without any soldering involved.



Accessories

The package includes a silicone protective case, a USB type-C cable, a 3.5mm to RCA coaxial (SPDIF) cable, the famous iBasso burn-in cable and some paperwork. A high quality leather case is sold separately for $59.

Power output and gear

The maximum power output of the DX260’s balanced output is 6Vrms or 1015mWpc/32Ω and 3Vrms, 280mWpc/32Ω from the 3.5mm jack. This is not the most powerful DAP of the category but still has enough juice to run a great variety of headphones, like the iBasso SR3, HIFIMAN Arya Organic, Sennheiser HD660S2 and Meze Liric 2 that I have mostly used for the review.

Background noise is literally inaudible, the device is dead silent and suitable for use with the most sensitive earphones, like the iBasso 3T-154, FiiO FX15 and Soundz Avant.

All headphone and earphone cables are made by Lavricables. As per usual practice, the iBasso DX260 was left playing music for more than 100 hours and was updated to the latest 2.02 firmware.



Audio stuff

Simply put, the iBasso DX260 is the most transparent and neutral player I have ever tested. All iBasso DAPs are famous for their linearity and neutrality but the DX260 has easily surpassed all of them and every other DAP in the market. Its not that there are no other neutrally tuned and transparent DAPs, I can think quite a few of them, but iBasso has managed to push neutrality, fidelity and transparency to their limits. Furthermore the DX260 has an ace under its sleeve as it is the first DAP that manages to stay so transparent and neutral without exhibiting digital glare or treble artificiality. The DX260 is really unique as it possess masterclass fidelity and precision but it doesn't sound sterile and clinical, a major achievement from iBasso that a lot of people are going to appreciate.

When using the iBasso DX260 it gets absolutely sure that you are actually listening to the sound signature of your headphones and the quality of the source material and not the player itself. Some of you might get a little disappointed for not being able to swap amp cards, like you did in other iBasso DAPs, the truth is that the DX260 is made for the purists. This is for people who need to be sure that they have the most transparent and linear sounding DAP that guarantees reference technicalities and don't care about any further sound manipulation.

At this point I must emphasize again and underline that the phenomenal clarity and transparency of the DX260 don't equal to a boring and monotonous listening experience. The DX260 is not like a scientific measuring tool or a monitoring instrument as it is actually very musical and engaging. The sound it produces is full with rich overtones, colorful harmonies and plenty of realistic timbre.

Technicalities are class leading of course and only comparable with much more expensive, flagship DAPs. The bass is deep and extended with excellent definition, amazing clarity and the most impressive layering you can possibly imagine. Throw your most demanding and stressing material and the iBasso DX260 will pass the test with flying colors. It has absolutely no problem at reproducing the finest nuances and the most silent notes while retaining astounding dynamic contrast and physical impact. The textures are not that full or visceral but you wouldn't call them lean or dry either, they are just balanced enough.

The mid-range is present and crystal clear with class leading (again) resolution, fine articulation and plenty of fluidity. The timbre is natural and realistic but the overall temperature is neutral, not warm nor cold. The treble is sparkling and energetic with excellent extension and plenty of shining light. The DX260 is fast and agile, it is not a smooth and relaxed player, it is marginally bright but rest assured that it doesn't sound sharp or piercing. This is not a very forgiving player and will not do much favors to poor quality recordings, especially if you pair it with bright or analytical headphones.

Another striking aspect of the DX260 is its exceptional refinement, the textures are silky smooth without any traces of grain or coarseness. Detail retrieval is absolutely stunning, you can hear the faintest notes emerging from a totally black background and every single sound that is captured inside the recording. But miraculously, the presentation is not analytical or mechanical, this is not the kind of player to present details for the sake of details but rather manages to combine every last bit to form the whole picture and make the music sound even more lifelike.

The separation and the imaging of the DX260 are phenomenal, absolutely class leading, I don't know of another player to outperform it in these departments. You can't only pinpoint the sound of each instrument, no matter how many they are, but you can also clearly understand the exact positioning of the performers during the recording. Headphones don't sound like speakers but with the DX260 you can fool yourself that you are listening to a 2-channel system. Furthermore, the soundstage is expanded and holographic, it sounds immersive and grandiose with stunning ambient sensation. The DX260 can make the Sennheiser HD660S2 and other soundstage shy headphones, to sound more open and spacious than you could possibly imagine.



Fine tuning

Selecting the 2x and 4x sampling modes of the FIR filter will mainly result in enhancing the overall sense of clarity, separation and imaging but you might find that the sound becomes a little more sterile and dry than it is with the filter switched off. The DX260 performs at its best under the Mango OS which further enhances transparency and fidelity by a tiny margin when compared to the Android OS. These are nice options to have that together with the five digital filters can help fine tune the sound signature of the player and offer better matching flexibility with various headphones and music genres.

Comparison with the FiiO M15S

The FiiO M15S ($999) has a larger 5.5” display and a higher capacity, 6200mAh battery but it is slightly bigger and heavier, not that pocket friendly as the iBasso DX260. The screen is also of a lower resolution and less vibrant and colorful than the one on the DX260. The M15S is a bit more powerful (1200mW/32Ω) and has a desktop mode that bypasses the battery which is not user replaceable as it is in the DX260. Both units use the same SoC and 4GB of RAM but the iBasso DX260 runs an Android 11 version instead of Android 10.



When it comes to their sound signature, the FiiO M15S has a slightly fuller, bigger and more impactful bass but it doesn't feel as defined and layered as in the DX260. The M15S is a little warmer and more colorful than the DX260 but it can't match its transparency and neutrality. The textures are thicker and fuller on the M15S while the soundstage is a bit bigger but it can't touch the separation and the imaging properties of the DX260. The M15S is the least digital sounding FiiO DAP, with a surpassingly natural timbre, but the DX260 has a more refined and resolving treble which is devoid from any digital glare, unlike that of the M15S that can show some tiny bits of artificiality.

Comparison with the iBasso DX240

The iBasso DX260 is powered by the same SoC and memory configuration as its predecessor but the Android version is upgraded from 9 to 11 and the overall user experience feels snappier and faster. The screen of the DX260 is greatly improved as it is more luminous, vibrant and colorful. Obviously, their most notable difference is the lack of the interchangeable amp-card system but in exchange you get the user replaceable battery.



When it comes to sound performance, the DX240 with the stock AMP1 MK3 shares a lot of common similarities with the DX260 regarding overall neutrality, fidelity and transparency but the latter feels much improved in every single department. It has better clarity and definition, it is more transparent and precise as long as it is also more refined and resolving. The DX240 can't compete with the DX260 in terms of separation and imaging, nor can it sound as immersive and holographic. The most notable difference though is that the timbre of the DX240 is more clinical and sterile when compared to the DX260 and is also not devoid of some digital glare and artificiality. The treble of the DX240 is sharper and brighter, not as natural and realistic sounding as in the DX260.

Swapping the stock amp card to the AMP8 MK2 will make the DX240 to sound warmer and more organic, the timbre becomes more natural and analog-like while digital glare is effectively minimized. Still the DX260 is the more neutral and transparent player with better technicalities and much improved resolution but I can see some people preferring the DX240/AMP8 MK2 for its warmer and more relaxed sound signature or the versatility of swapping amp cards.

Conclusion

The iBasso DX260 is a phenomenal player with a class leading transparency and neutrality that are not found elsewhere, even when comparing it with flagship models from iBasso or other brands. The DX260 offers masterclass fidelity and precision while it stays musical and engaging enough without sounding artificial and sterile. The price to performance ratio is really astounding, iBasso has managed to make a flagship-level DAP with a price lower than $1K. The DX260 hides plenty of innovation under its compact body and is the first player of its class to come with a user-friendly, replaceable battery.

The DX260 has become my reference DAP, a tool for evaluating headphones but it is also one of my favorites for music enjoyment. This is the perfect choice for everyone who seeks the best possible transparency and fidelity without sacrificing musicality and engagement. The DX260 stands as a major achievement for iBasso but also poses a great challenge as they will now have to surpass its sonic performance in their future products, something not that easy as it sounds. But I still have faith that iBasso is going to surprise us and come with even something better in the near future.

The review sample was kindly provided free of charge in exchange for an honest review.

The price of the iBasso DX260 is $949 and you can buy it from here.