After about 75 hours of burn in I could no longer resist comparing the DX260 with my FiiO M15s. They are in a similar price bracket, the M15s is about 10% more expensive.
My impressions are as follows: at 75 hours the DX260 is musical, detailed, wide and airy, excellent tight bass; the highs are a little too forward and can display sibilance; the mids are at this stage perhaps a little too refined (if that's the right word). The dX260's sound signature appears to be pushed a bit towards the higher end, and rock in particular can sound quite jangly to my ears. The M15s is equally musical, may lack an iota of the detail, but each note has much more weight and presence and the overall signature is more well-balanced, and this is true across a range of genres. The M15s just has more bite to it, making it a more engaging proposition. The M15s is, of course, quite a bit bigger and heavier than the iBasso. I'll give the DX260 another few days of burn in to see if it makes any difference, but as it is it's looking sadly unlikely to be a keeper.
For those who are interested, I tested using Sennheiser IE900 IEMs playing Qobuz high res tracks through the balanced output, mostly classical, jazz, rock and folk genres.
Edit - for anyone reading this for the first time, take a look at my comparison after 200+ later in this thread.
I ran my comparison between the dx260 and the M15s again after 200+ hours of burn in on the dx260. Allowing for the vagaries of amateur A/B-ing between two very similar DAPs, my conclusions were, I think, interesting. Reflecting back on my earlier experience at 75 hours, the sibilance on the 260 is tamed, the mids have settled back, losing any sense of jangle or over-brightness. As such, after an hour and a half of back and forth between the two, I would say the dx260 slightly edges it. The Ibasso has a touch more resolution throughout, the base is tighter and more realistic; the timbre is still bright, but this just adds to the detail rather than being sparkly - it makes the Fiio sound a bit dull by comparison. That said, the M15s does have one advantage SQ-wise: it's more resolving and that makes it more forgiving when the music gets very complex (e.g., big symphonic pieces) or isn't brilliantly well recorded (e.g., some vintage material). Further burn in on the 260 may even the score here. Obviously, the M15s has way more power, especially in desktop mode, and has a lot more funky options (e.g., all to DSD - which I didn't use). One disadvantage for the iBasso is its very sensitive buttons and volume wheel, which make putting into or taking it out of a pocket very likely to shift the track. The M15s has a switch on the side which locks the buttons and the touch screen.
There is very little in it, and could easily see someone taking a very different view. But it would be down to taste (and pocket size - the FiiO is big!) rather than technical competency.
Both DAPs were set to 'slow roll off'; the Fiio had the 'second harmonic regulation' set to level 1. The FIR on the dx260 was off.
Edit - after more sustained listening than simple a/b-ing, I began to find the brightness of the dx260 fatiguing and the lack of resolution disengaging and have happily gone back to the M15s - while the dx260 has gone back to the shop.
Last edited: