[Gerryhatrick]

Do you mean you hear some hissing with Katana from balanced port vs single ended? I haven't tested it yet with K10UA, these are typically a bit sensitive and as a result of higher power output of balanced port the hissing could be more noticeable. I will confirm with k10ua when test it tonight.

 
 

  That makes two..

I got HD650 and HD800 and it sound so underwhelming through the DX200 even the Hugo which I also own sound not great powering the 2 headphone.

I just don't get why anyone wants to use a portable player to drive full size headphone.

Just to repeat my earlier response 3462:

"Because I do most of my listening at home and don't really like sticking things in my ears.

I use AK702, 400s and BW7's all easy to drive and sound great with my dx100 and dp-x1. I'm guessing the DX200 will sound great through these cans also (others experiences welcome)."
 
Would also welcome a response from those who don't seem to understand why some people use cans rather that IEM's and that there are plenty of cans out there which are easlily
driven by portables, particularly those with the power of the dx200

 

[Sound Eq]

wonder which has a fuller more bodied presentation fiio x7 with am3 or dx200, especially mids and bass

 

[icefalkon]

   
 
Just to repeat my earlier response 3462:

"Because I do most of my listening at home and don't really like sticking things in my ears.

I use AK702, 400s and BW7's all easy to drive and sound great with my dx100 and dp-x1. I'm guessing the DX200 will sound great through these cans also (others experiences welcome)."
 
Would also welcome a response from those who don't seem to understand why some people use cans rather that IEM's and that there are plenty of cans out there which are easlily
driven by portables, particularly those with the power of the dx200

 
Gerry, my comment meant...that makes two who have posted similar thoughts within the last 24hrs. I find that the DX200 can power full size can's without a problem and sound fantastic. Especially the HD650. Example, it's commonly known that the pairing between the HD650 and the DX100 was incredible. I'm side by siding them every day. Now with the DX200...it's the iBasso sound and experience of the DX100...with a whole lot more detail, depth, and soundstage. 
 
So in short, I agree with you...I can't seem to understand these comments. However, they're few and far between...so it's not a big deal.

 

[WCDchee]

   
Gerry, my comment meant...that makes two who have posted similar thoughts within the last 24hrs. I find that the DX200 can power full size can's without a problem and sound fantastic. Especially the HD650. Example, it's commonly known that the pairing between the HD650 and the DX100 was incredible. I'm side by siding them every day. Now with the DX200...it's the iBasso sound and experience of the DX100...with a whole lot more detail, depth, and soundstage. 
 
So in short, I agree with you...I can't seem to understand these comments. However, they're few and far between...so it's not a big deal.

 
I think the problem is that power is a term that's often thrown around inappropriately when really, people actually refer to the quality of amplfication. Power is nothing more than volume, and yes, the HD650 is easily driven in that sense.
 
When it comes to the quality of amplification though it is a different story. The DX200, I'm certain sounds great, possibly amazing. I'm also certain that it can possibly drive headphones better than pretty much most DAPs on the market, except perhaps with the paw gold putting up a fight in that regard. That said, if we're going to compare the driving capabilites of the dx200's amp section to say, a kilobuck desktop amplifier, then really, it is no surprise that the desktop amplifier will perform better. In fact, it had better. However, that has nothing to do with power, but instead the quality of the amplification. Whatever improvement you find with headphones between a dap and a desktop amp, you probably would find with earphones too.
 
Just my opinion on this whole "driving power" debate. Feel free to disagree!

 

[icefalkon]

   
I think the problem is that power is a term that's often thrown around inappropriately when really, people actually refer to the quality of amplfication. Power is nothing more than volume, and yes, the HD650 is easily driven in that sense.
 
When it comes to the quality of amplification though it is a different story. The DX200, I'm certain sounds great, possibly amazing. I'm also certain that it can possibly drive headphones better than pretty much most DAPs on the market, except perhaps with the paw gold putting up a fight in that regard. That said, if we're going to compare the driving capabilites of the dx200's amp section to say, a kilobuck desktop amplifier, then really, it is no surprise that the desktop amplifier will perform better. In fact, it had better. However, that has nothing to do with power, but instead the quality of the amplification. Whatever improvement you find with headphones between a dap and a desktop amp, you probably would find with earphones too.
 
Just my opinion on this whole "driving power" debate. Feel free to disagree!

Well put. I don't disagree at all. Your'e right...the desktop amp had better sound better than a portable one. Considering the price, technology, and sheer space required for components. For me, it's these blanket statements that put me off. There are literally thousands looking at and participating in this community...and yet...these two have put the finality that their statements cannot be questioned. 
 
Yes...all two of them.
 
Whatever. 
 
On the lighter side, last night I tried putting this little amp I got maybe 5yrs ago on the DX200. It's the C&C BH portable amp from China. I lost it maybe 3yrs ago and just recently found it. I paired with the Alpha Primes and it literally made me say...holy crap. 
 
This small footprint/big balls amp that's barely been covered took these AP's to the next level. 

 

[davidmolliere]

Obviously desktop amps can do better but I for one am just amazed that the DX200 has an amp section that match of blow some portables amps I have had (including PHA-3 balanced) as it means that you don't need to stack to have a top notch sounding package in your hand! Also desktop amp will do better but the law of diminishing return applies, it will be costly and less convenient.
 
This being said, I never owned TOTL desktop amps (just portables) or very hard to drive headphones which is the main case where I feel a top notch desktop amp will make a difference. For IEMs, this might not be true given output impedance issues with sensitive gear unless you have an amp designed for them.
 
Anyways, I am stoked at what the DX200 delivers

 

[Olchon]

That makes two..

There are LOADS of possible reasons.... Having to buy only one unit for indoor and outdoor use, wanting to be able to move about the house, not wanting to use or not getting on well with IEMs etc. DAPS with good dacs with or without external amps make excellent sources for headphone listening, without having to use a computer, especially important if listening in bed is your thing. If the sq is up to it, there seems to be little reason NOT to use a dap for headphone listening (controversial...!)
So, bringing the relevance back to this thread, the question is the whether the DX200 is up to driving full size cans. For some it seems to be, for others not! For me personally, it makes my hd650s sound great, not as loud or full blown as when using my Valhalla 2, but certainly more detailed, possibly due to a shorter signal path and no valve colouration. And if you don't want to be investing in or tied to a desk top rig and want to listen on some full size cans, I think the dx200 is an admirable choice!

 

[Olchon]

Sorry Icefalkon, was half way through writing this when I got called away. Cam back and posted, now have just seen all the debate above! I think we're in the same camp!

 

[Gerryhatrick]

   
Gerry, my comment meant...that makes two who have posted similar thoughts within the last 24hrs. I find that the DX200 can power full size can's without a problem and sound fantastic. Especially the HD650. Example, it's commonly known that the pairing between the HD650 and the DX100 was incredible. I'm side by siding them every day. Now with the DX200...it's the iBasso sound and experience of the DX100...with a whole lot more detail, depth, and soundstage. 
 
So in short, I agree with you...I can't seem to understand these comments. However, they're few and far between...so it's not a big deal.

Apologies for the misunderstanding icefalcon - I couldn't believe 2 people were rubbishing the use of cans with portables!!
 
I'm still considering pulling the trigger but I still need persuading that the DX200 is a worthwhile upgrade to my dp-x1 (Google play store and 2 msd slots are very handy). I still love my dx100 so I'm very tempted nonetheless......

 

[obileye obiyemi]

Not quite, I was referring to some specific IEMs which I found to be weaker with the WM1Z. Sorry to muddy the water but the presentation of these units is too different for me to say better. As I usually say, personal preference, IEM/headphone synergy and music choices has such a heavy weighting on these things. I usually try to assess equipment more on its deficiencies in that respect and I don't find any glaring deficiencies with any of these DAPs.

The LPG has a detailed presentation but more emphasis in the low frequeny response than the DX200. Out of all 3 it has the narrowest soundstage and the most aggresive presentation but nevertheless, for me has more in common with the WM1Z and a little less with the DX200.
I'll park it to one side as the difference in presentation between the DX200 & WM1Z is easier to describe:

The WM1Z has a very thick sound signiature, a really dense presentation.
As for the IEMs I am specifically referring to; both the Layla and Angie (and Lab 1) also have very thick signiatures.
Pair these together and for my preferences it's a bit too much with certain tracks. Details can get a little lost... or at least I can't discern them in the way I can with the DX200. Certainly for the Layla, it isn't my favourite earphone with the WM1Z anyway and this is irrispective of the tuning pot all the way down. Hands down, I prefer the DX200 as a source for the Layla and Angie... also with the Earsonics Velvet.
Where the Layla was an OK pairing for the WM1Z (with other IEMs being better) it's my favourite IEM with the DX200.

The Final Audio Lab 1 is a heavy sounding IEM which I could never describe as sounding natural. Can only use this in single-ended. It does, however, have one of the most liquid and sweet mid presentation I've heard. It has a particularly sweet mid presenation with the WM1Z but is a very heavy pairing, great for more intimately recorded tracks. The vocal presentation isn't as liquid sweet with the DX200 but the overall sound opens up considerably with this pairing. Depending on someone's music choices or preferences, I can see either having their strengths and weaknesses as a source for this. I'm not listening to the same music with these pairings.

Most of my other IEMs are great on both units; Rhapsodio Galaxy V1 and Solar. Nothing is really lacking and preference will come down to whether one likes the heavy analogue sound of the WM1Z or the more airy resolute presentation of the DX200. For me personally I am preferring both the Rhapsodios with the WM1Z because they have a more weighty presentation while maintaining excellent detail retrieval. They're a little punishing again for my preferences with the DX200.

All that said it is without a doubt the best value for money out of these DAPs considering what it delivers.

Hi    Thanks so much for all the info,  Awesomely helpful              Which one of these 3 DAPs  would you you say is more of an all rounder for all kinds music ?   from acoustic to EDM, 

Not quite, I was referring to some specific IEMs which I found to be weaker with the WM1Z. Sorry to muddy the water but the presentation of these units is too different for me to say better. As I usually say, personal preference, IEM/headphone synergy and music choices has such a heavy weighting on these things. I usually try to assess equipment more on its deficiencies in that respect and I don't find any glaring deficiencies with any of these DAPs.

The LPG has a detailed presentation but more emphasis in the low frequeny response than the DX200. Out of all 3 it has the narrowest soundstage and the most aggresive presentation but nevertheless, for me has more in common with the WM1Z and a little less with the DX200.
I'll park it to one side as the difference in presentation between the DX200 & WM1Z is easier to describe:

The WM1Z has a very thick sound signiature, a really dense presentation.
As for the IEMs I am specifically referring to; both the Layla and Angie (and Lab 1) also have very thick signiatures.
Pair these together and for my preferences it's a bit too much with certain tracks. Details can get a little lost... or at least I can't discern them in the way I can with the DX200. Certainly for the Layla, it isn't my favourite earphone with the WM1Z anyway and this is irrispective of the tuning pot all the way down. Hands down, I prefer the DX200 as a source for the Layla and Angie... also with the Earsonics Velvet.
Where the Layla was an OK pairing for the WM1Z (with other IEMs being better) it's my favourite IEM with the DX200.

The Final Audio Lab 1 is a heavy sounding IEM which I could never describe as sounding natural. Can only use this in single-ended. It does, however, have one of the most liquid and sweet mid presentation I've heard. It has a particularly sweet mid presenation with the WM1Z but is a very heavy pairing, great for more intimately recorded tracks. The vocal presentation isn't as liquid sweet with the DX200 but the overall sound opens up considerably with this pairing. Depending on someone's music choices or preferences, I can see either having their strengths and weaknesses as a source for this. I'm not listening to the same music with these pairings.

Most of my other IEMs are great on both units; Rhapsodio Galaxy V1 and Solar. Nothing is really lacking and preference will come down to whether one likes the heavy analogue sound of the WM1Z or the more airy resolute presentation of the DX200. For me personally I am preferring both the Rhapsodios with the WM1Z because they have a more weighty presentation while maintaining excellent detail retrieval. They're a little punishing again for my preferences with the DX200.

All that said it is without a doubt the best value for money out of these DAPs considering what it delivers.

I m really appreciating all this info and finding very helpful indeed!   thank you!      which one of these 3 DAPs would you say is more of an all rounder for all kinds of music?   from heavy bass stuff to sparse acoustic stuff  vocal stuff?    Can you please describe how well the DX200 does with female vocals?        Thanks 

 

[WindowsX]

Thank you Paul for releasing firmware image version. I love how you answer passionate customer's request with understanding mind. That's one big step beyond other companies and I'm sure many DX200 fans are happy with your decision.
 
Regards,
Keetakawee

 

[aLcHieZ]

My beloved three musketeers

 

[SabreToothBunny]

I m really appreciating all this info and finding very helpful indeed!   thank you!      which one of these 3 DAPs would you say is more of an all rounder for all kinds of music?   from heavy bass stuff to sparse acoustic stuff  vocal stuff?    Can you please describe how well the DX200 does with female vocals?        Thanks 

You picked 3 very different aspects to compare there: heavy bass, sparse acoustics and vocals.:

OK, so I've switched to the Rhapsodio Galaxy (as it's my flatest sounding IEM) and used single-ended for this comparison as I don't have both types of balanced connectors to compare the WM1Z and DX200 with one IEM/headphone. I'm at 30hrs on the single ended compared to the 50hours on balanced but what I've immediately noticed is the depth and layering capabities are far more pronounced out of the balanced output with the presentation being much fuller.

For my personal tastes, in terms of purely vocal music the WM1Z is undoubtedly my favourite due to its sweet, warm, emotional presentation. The DX200, in comparison is far less weighted and sweet here. Overall, though, it is well balanced and doesn't exhibit the aggressive presentation the Lotoo Paw Gold does either.
For acoustic work I prefer the slightly airy instrumental accuracy of the DX200 or the heavy intimate presentation of the WM1Z but the two sound very different. The LPG sometimes lacks subtlety for acoustic work.
For bass driven music it's not quite so simple. In terms of pure bass, I like the sheer mass of the WM1Z or the palpable texture of the LPG but the DX200 has a high quality response with a wider soundstage (than the LPG) and less thickness (than the WM1Z) making it's airy presentation very easy to discern other details which have to be considered important to the overall picture.

Now take into consideration that in prose, these described differences come across more starkly than they might in person and the fact I haven't burnt single ended in properly.
As I said earlier, while there are certain types of music I'm naturally listening more to on one unit than another this is more because I'm choosing music which plays to a pairing's strengths (my tastes) not because of glaring weaknesses. In terms of being all-rounders I can't say I'd flat out pick one over the others as I find them all quite strong but it would likely come down to overall presentation preference and pairings for most others:

• The WM1Z is the warmest most analogue, smooth and liquid sounding unit. Superb soundstage width, layering and depth. If I had to say it was weaker in an area, it would be that it can occaisionally sound a touch soft sometimes and lack bite
• The LPG is the most revealing, has a massive foundation of bass, great layering, depth and a very upfront/visceral presentation but its one weakness would be its soundstage width and it can be slightly fatiguing
• The DX200 is probably the strongest unit of the three in terms of balance and instrumental accuracy without the fatiguing aspects of the LPG or the softness of the WM1Z. It has a wide, airy presentation but without overstating things as a weakness, it hasn't quite got the depth of the other two and sounds more analytical in its presentation

To reiterate though, I'm only 30hrs on single-ended, the depth is noticeably deeper via balanced output and the sound is also more full... I just can't do a direct comparison due to the DX200 using a 2.5mm connector and the WM1Z using a 4.4mm pentaconn.

 

[ExpatinJapan]

Discharge, Dead Kennedys and Slayer testing.

 

[HiFlight]

I discovered what appears to be an annoying little settings bug on my DX200, latest firmware:

It is not possible to disable the lockscreen. It still requires a swipe even though "None" is selected in settings.security.lockscreen.

This only happens when Mango Player ls active. Other apps apps do not generate an uncommanded lockscreen.

Hopefully, this can be promptly addressed.