[Vitaly2017]

Hi folks after good 4 days of burn in and around 100 hours mark atm is time to report some new changes and how the dap is maturing

Everything is improving in sound, it gets a tad more revealing and stabilize its fundamentals and now it starts to sound very boldly. Every goodness is the same what have really improved a lot is the sound stage and expansiveness of music. I now believe and can confirm that dx320 is a wm1z on steroid’s! They share the same sound type but where dx320 wins is detail and balanced sound, I would dare even say has wonderful vocals, yep better then 1z’s.
1z has to much bass bloom and sharper uper mids et treble.
With recent new fw update on 320 we have a signature that is quite edgy and sharp in the attacks as a result we get a bit uncomfortable sound. But it is done so to accommodate the new tube amp in my opinion.

Also 1z is more expansive and has longer extension’s. Sometimes I ask my self if thats really real and if its even present in the recording lol. To me dx320 sounds more life like and presents the music in a more reference way while at same time its organic and analog sounding. Dx320 is magical and never BORING!


I was fortunate thanks to my friend to test and directly compare both 300&320

To my biggest surprise the two main difference was only the signature, one more analytical and critical while 320 warmer thicker and super analog sounding maintained all the references performance and offers similar sound technicalities but with a warmer tilt.
Best analogy I can give is 300 is 1a and 320 is 1z.
If you ask me I highly prefer 320 it has x16 mqa and better volume and better case!


Oh and as a side note! Linux mango os sounds the best and significantly better and smoother even with new fw! Not as sharp and edgy like android mango os. Oh and streaming services sounds the worse and spotify the worst of streaming

 

[Vitaly2017]

Hi all, had a mini meet with Tiger Ears @Vitaly2017 over the weekend after a lot of demoing the good stuff, speakers and then flagship headphones - we finished off with a 45 mins dedicated to porta-fi DX300 vs DX320.

First off, I don't want to rain on anyone’s parade here but both sources albeit being phenomenal values for the money are not on the level of my past owned SP2000CU and even less so the Hugo2. That being said, Hugo2 is outstanding in sound but annoying in usability, and SP2000CU has sharp edges and poor user interface/ slow processing.

Another thing to note, unlike the above, DX320 is more of a side-grade than an upgrade, objectively speaking here. I do agree the 320 is generally better sounding than 300, but they trade blows more so than anything. Where a Hugo2 is perhaps 20% better than DX320, SP2000cu is perhaps 10-12% & then DX320 being about 5% better than DX300.

Iem’s tested on both DAP’s are:
VE Phonix, VE EXT, IE900, IER-M9

Also use my KSE1200, IER-Z1R, MEST Indigo, MEST, EX1000 & ER2XR commonly with DX300


DX320:
- This DAP is quite nuanced in dynamic contrast, has sharp enough leading edges and transients, but also not too much.
- Technicals are great but not top flight, but the voicing has a bit of forgiveness thanks to this.
- Bass thumps and has fast decay and snappy speed.
- Imaging is fantastic and precise in positioning well developed & rendered instruments cohesively
- Staging is quite intimate and focalized in center stage and not so much in width. This also allows for more engagement factor and sense of dynamic. It’s quite intimate, to my surprise.
- This is my first experience with a device using ROHM dac’s and I can say it’s neat. I would call this a neutral/ fun source with above average dynamics and great detail/ overall fidelity.

DX300:
- Detail is more “apparent” though this is mostly do to the more expansive presentation
- Staging from left to right and up to down (x & y) is much further reaching compared to the DX320, though it struggles to push out depth in the Z axis
- It’s a more holographic, large and surrounding experience, but at the same time there is less layering/ relief/ texture magic vs the DX320, which does a better job of portraying music more realistically
- DX300 has a hard time with transient speed and attack. It has a sense of deadness and bloom to it, and tends to add a sense of decay. This works absolutely fantastic with BA drivers and bringing them into realism, but the fact is, this player has a bit of a dead/ plastic timbre
- DX300 has more lingering midbass/ fullness which is very nice with some iem’s, but a bit bloomed relative to DX320. It’s a technical drawback, but in my case a musical plus side to my ears
- DX300 also has more sense of air, whereas as the DX320’s smoothed off top end brings music more into focus/ sharpness, at the expense of etherealness

While comparing, I found myself slightly preferring the DX320 overall in my critical analysis, yet every time I was switching songs to compare, felt more immersed with the DX300. This was maintained with all iem’s except perhaps IE900 which I liked on DX320 slightly more.

Both units were running stock amps.
Both units running filter D1 (though usually I run D3 on DX300, but DX320 only has 2 options)
Both units were on High gain
Both units running Tidal
Both units being less than 30 hours burnt in

I encourage @Vitaly2017 to chime in as well, as I think he also found it surprising how both units traded blows rather than one being a direct upgrade. I believe he enjoyed the more detail of the DX300 a lot, but overall still preferred the DX320 factoring all components of sound.

For me, I’m not sure I want to sell my DX300 just yet now, but will keep it listed on Head-Fi as I am hoping to get a Hugo2 again. If anyone is interested in a trade please say hello

Go figure what a coincidence we post exactly at same time

 

[aaf evo]

If anyone is after a DX320 I will be moving mine along, shoot me a PM

 

[dleblanc343]

Go figure what a coincidence we post exactly at same time

Too funny, totally a coincidence too.

Also to your point, indeed the new case on DX320 is tremendously better (fits snug and secure, and also more robust feeling) & yes the volume wheel also clicks much much better and also a nicer feedback when turning it.

I am really curious to hear the AMP13 once you get it

 

[Ben86]

M17 connected to DC gives huge voltage swing (+/-11.5V) and there comes big , dinamic sound with huge stage and low impact... ofc cheap DC adapter doesnt help but better solution like from IFI sorts this out, even though I have no problem with default one. Without proper power some headphones cant shine, even thought spec says 32ohm, 99db/mw still I feel sound step up when giving more juice.

Agree with you 100%. I'm still being impressed by the sound of M17 even when listening without DC. It is really hard for me to imagine another DAP playing better for the similar price. So I'll go to my local dealer store in couple days and check it by myself If the new DX320 will be sounding better, than I will think about selling M17, but as I said before it is really hard to imagine...

 

[jamato8]

Hi all, had a mini meet with Tiger Ears @Vitaly2017 over the weekend after a lot of demoing the good stuff, speakers and then flagship headphones - we finished off with a 45 mins dedicated to porta-fi DX300 vs DX320.

First off, I don't want to rain on anyone’s parade here but both sources albeit being phenomenal values for the money are not on the level of my past owned SP2000CU and even less so the Hugo2. That being said, Hugo2 is outstanding in sound but annoying in usability, and SP2000CU has sharp edges and poor user interface/ slow processing.

Another thing to note, unlike the above, DX320 is more of a side-grade than an upgrade, objectively speaking here. I do agree the 320 is generally better sounding than 300, but they trade blows more so than anything. Where a Hugo2 is perhaps 20% better than DX320, SP2000cu is perhaps 10-12% & then DX320 being about 5% better than DX300.

Iem’s tested on both DAP’s are:
VE Phonix, VE EXT, IE900, IER-M9

Also use my KSE1200, IER-Z1R, MEST Indigo, MEST, EX1000 & ER2XR commonly with DX300


DX320:
- This DAP is quite nuanced in dynamic contrast, has sharp enough leading edges and transients, but also not too much.
- Technicals are great but not top flight, but the voicing has a bit of forgiveness thanks to this.
- Bass thumps and has fast decay and snappy speed.
- Imaging is fantastic and precise in positioning well developed & rendered instruments cohesively
- Staging is quite intimate and focalized in center stage and not so much in width. This also allows for more engagement factor and sense of dynamic. It’s quite intimate, to my surprise.
- This is my first experience with a device using ROHM dac’s and I can say it’s neat. I would call this a neutral/ fun source with above average dynamics and great detail/ overall fidelity.

DX300:
- Detail is more “apparent” though this is mostly due to the more expansive presentation
- Staging from left to right and up to down (x & y) is much further reaching compared to the DX320, though it struggles to push out depth in the Z axis
- It’s a more holographic, large and surrounding experience, but at the same time there is less layering/ relief/ texture magic vs the DX320, which does a better job of portraying music more realistically
- DX300 has a hard time with transient speed and attack. It has a sense of deadness and bloom to it, and tends to add a sense of decay. This works absolutely fantastic with BA drivers and bringing them into realism, but the fact is, this player has a bit of a dead/ plastic timbre
- DX300 has more lingering midbass/ fullness which is very nice with some iem’s, but a bit bloomed relative to DX320. It’s a technical drawback, but in my case a musical plus side to my ears
- DX300 also has more sense of air, whereas as the DX320’s smoothed off top end brings music more into focus/ sharpness, at the expense of etherealness
- The DX300 sound is very blown out and extended. Things linger a little longer, there's a certain looseness, silkiness to the sound, kind of like tube amps.

While comparing, I found myself slightly preferring the DX320 overall in my critical analysis, yet every time I was switching songs to compare, felt more immersed with the DX300. This was maintained with all iem’s except perhaps IE900 which I liked on DX320 slightly more.

Both units were running stock amps.
Both units running filter D1 (though usually I run D3 on DX300, but DX320 only has 2 options)
Both units were on High gain
Both units running Tidal
Both units using stock amp cards
Both units being less than 30 hours burnt in

I encourage @Vitaly2017 to chime in as well, as I think he also found it surprising how both units traded blows rather than one being a direct upgrade. I believe he enjoyed the more detail of the DX300 a lot, but overall still preferred the DX320 factoring all components of sound.

For me, I’m not sure I want to sell my DX300 just yet now, but will keep it listed on Head-Fi as I am hoping to get a Hugo2 again. If anyone is interested in a trade please say hello

Less than 30 hours on the units? They go through a lot of changes, so basically not burnt in. I would have waited until they were settled and what firmware?

 

[Electrocrytic]

Hi all, had a mini meet with Tiger Ears @Vitaly2017 over the weekend after a lot of demoing the good stuff, speakers and then flagship headphones - we finished off with a 45 mins dedicated to porta-fi DX300 vs DX320.

First off, I don't want to rain on anyone’s parade here but both sources albeit being phenomenal values for the money are not on the level of my past owned SP2000CU and even less so the Hugo2. That being said, Hugo2 is outstanding in sound but annoying in usability, and SP2000CU has sharp edges and poor user interface/ slow processing.

Another thing to note, unlike the above, DX320 is more of a side-grade than an upgrade, objectively speaking here. I do agree the 320 is generally better sounding than 300, but they trade blows more so than anything. Where a Hugo2 is perhaps 20% better than DX320, SP2000cu is perhaps 10-12% & then DX320 being about 5% better than DX300.

Iem’s tested on both DAP’s are:
VE Phonix, VE EXT, IE900, IER-M9

Also use my KSE1200, IER-Z1R, MEST Indigo, MEST, EX1000 & ER2XR commonly with DX300


DX320:
- This DAP is quite nuanced in dynamic contrast, has sharp enough leading edges and transients, but also not too much.
- Technicals are great but not top flight, but the voicing has a bit of forgiveness thanks to this.
- Bass thumps and has fast decay and snappy speed.
- Imaging is fantastic and precise in positioning well developed & rendered instruments cohesively
- Staging is quite intimate and focalized in center stage and not so much in width. This also allows for more engagement factor and sense of dynamic. It’s quite intimate, to my surprise.
- This is my first experience with a device using ROHM dac’s and I can say it’s neat. I would call this a neutral/ fun source with above average dynamics and great detail/ overall fidelity.

DX300:
- Detail is more “apparent” though this is mostly due to the more expansive presentation
- Staging from left to right and up to down (x & y) is much further reaching compared to the DX320, though it struggles to push out depth in the Z axis
- It’s a more holographic, large and surrounding experience, but at the same time there is less layering/ relief/ texture magic vs the DX320, which does a better job of portraying music more realistically
- DX300 has a hard time with transient speed and attack. It has a sense of deadness and bloom to it, and tends to add a sense of decay. This works absolutely fantastic with BA drivers and bringing them into realism, but the fact is, this player has a bit of a dead/ plastic timbre
- DX300 has more lingering midbass/ fullness which is very nice with some iem’s, but a bit bloomed relative to DX320. It’s a technical drawback, but in my case a musical plus side to my ears
- DX300 also has more sense of air, whereas as the DX320’s smoothed off top end brings music more into focus/ sharpness, at the expense of etherealness
- The DX300 sound is very blown out and extended. Things linger a little longer, there's a certain looseness, silkiness to the sound, kind of like tube amps.

While comparing, I found myself slightly preferring the DX320 overall in my critical analysis, yet every time I was switching songs to compare, felt more immersed with the DX300. This was maintained with all iem’s except perhaps IE900 which I liked on DX320 slightly more.

Both units were running stock amps.
Both units running filter D1 (though usually I run D3 on DX300, but DX320 only has 2 options)
Both units were on High gain
Both units running Tidal
Both units using stock amp cards
Both units being less than 30 hours burnt in

I encourage @Vitaly2017 to chime in as well, as I think he also found it surprising how both units traded blows rather than one being a direct upgrade. I believe he enjoyed the more detail of the DX300 a lot, but overall still preferred the DX320 factoring all components of sound.

For me, I’m not sure I want to sell my DX300 just yet now, but will keep it listed on Head-Fi as I am hoping to get a Hugo2 again. If anyone is interested in a trade please say hello

Which amp was in the DX300? AMP11mk1 or mk2
Did you swap amps between DX300 and DX320?

 

[dleblanc343]

Which amp was in the DX300? AMP11mk1 or mk2
Did you swap amps between DX300 and DX320?

Sorry, I realized soon after posting I didn't specify so I edited and made mention - perhaps you read sooner than I edited.

Both running with AMP11mk2 - didn't swap any amp cards as neither of us had, however Tiger will be receiving the 13 soon.

 

[ginandbacon]

I never cried over any purchase but yes cables do make a difference
Actually I just bought this one
Maybe one day you should test drive it and experience yourself what difference is out there
.

I would love to test drive that and yes, cables matter. Different metals or mixtures do produce a slightly different sound. This was the absolute last thing I'm ordering for a while but I've always been found of silver or a mixture of copper and silver cables. I know some think silver are harsh or bright but when done right they sound great to my ears considering silver is the best conductor. The only thing I didn't like about the ADVARs is the cable. It felt cheap and was 3.5mm with Meze wanting you to spend like 150 for the same cable but 4.4mm or 2.5mm only. Any IRM that much should come with a modular cable IMO.

 

[RIGATIO]

Hi all, had a mini meet with Tiger Ears @Vitaly2017 over the weekend after a lot of demoing the good stuff, speakers and then flagship headphones - we finished off with a 45 mins dedicated to porta-fi DX300 vs DX320.

First off, I don't want to rain on anyone’s parade here but both sources albeit being phenomenal values for the money are not on the level of my past owned SP2000CU and even less so the Hugo2. That being said, Hugo2 is outstanding in sound but annoying in usability, and SP2000CU has sharp edges and poor user interface/ slow processing.

Another thing to note, unlike the above, DX320 is more of a side-grade than an upgrade, objectively speaking here. I do agree the 320 is generally better sounding than 300, but they trade blows more so than anything. Where a Hugo2 is perhaps 20% better than DX320, SP2000cu is perhaps 10-12% & then DX320 being about 5% better than DX300.

Iem’s tested on both DAP’s are:
VE Phonix, VE EXT, IE900, IER-M9

Also use my KSE1200, IER-Z1R, MEST Indigo, MEST, EX1000 & ER2XR commonly with DX300


DX320:
- This DAP is quite nuanced in dynamic contrast, has sharp enough leading edges and transients, but also not too much.
- Technicals are great but not top flight, but the voicing has a bit of forgiveness thanks to this.
- Bass thumps and has fast decay and snappy speed.
- Imaging is fantastic and precise in positioning well developed & rendered instruments cohesively
- Staging is quite intimate and focalized in center stage and not so much in width. This also allows for more engagement factor and sense of dynamic. It’s quite intimate, to my surprise.
- This is my first experience with a device using ROHM dac’s and I can say it’s neat. I would call this a neutral/ fun source with above average dynamics and great detail/ overall fidelity.

DX300:
- Detail is more “apparent” though this is mostly due to the more expansive presentation
- Staging from left to right and up to down (x & y) is much further reaching compared to the DX320, though it struggles to push out depth in the Z axis
- It’s a more holographic, large and surrounding experience, but at the same time there is less layering/ relief/ texture magic vs the DX320, which does a better job of portraying music more realistically
- DX300 has a hard time with transient speed and attack. It has a sense of deadness and bloom to it, and tends to add a sense of decay. This works absolutely fantastic with BA drivers and bringing them into realism, but the fact is, this player has a bit of a dead/ plastic timbre
- DX300 has more lingering midbass/ fullness which is very nice with some iem’s, but a bit bloomed relative to DX320. It’s a technical drawback, but in my case a musical plus side to my ears
- DX300 also has more sense of air, whereas as the DX320’s smoothed off top end brings music more into focus/ sharpness, at the expense of etherealness
- The DX300 sound is very blown out and extended. Things linger a little longer, there's a certain looseness, silkiness to the sound, kind of like tube amps.

While comparing, I found myself slightly preferring the DX320 overall in my critical analysis, yet every time I was switching songs to compare, felt more immersed with the DX300. This was maintained with all iem’s except perhaps IE900 which I liked on DX320 slightly more.

Both units were running stock amps.
Both units running filter D1 (though usually I run D3 on DX300, but DX320 only has 2 options)
Both units were on High gain
Both units running Tidal
Both units using stock amp cards
Both units being less than 30 hours burnt in

I encourage @Vitaly2017 to chime in as well, as I think he also found it surprising how both units traded blows rather than one being a direct upgrade. I believe he enjoyed the more detail of the DX300 a lot, but overall still preferred the DX320 factoring all components of sound.

For me, I’m not sure I want to sell my DX300 just yet now, but will keep it listed on Head-Fi as I am hoping to get a Hugo2 again. If anyone is interested in a trade please say hello

The dx320 is not a side grade. Its a noticeable level up in everything, even when paired with the stock 11.2s vs dx300 paired with the amp12EXN.
When the dx320 is pared with the amp12EXN, there is nothing left to compare.
The dx320 smashes the ak sp1000, is better than the ak sp2kT, so i dont think the sp2k is even 3% better, considering that there wasnt any groundbreaking upgrade over its predecessor.
Cant comment on the Hugo2 as i havent heard it.
I remember that even dx300 with amp11.2 had better staging, dynamics and detail than the sp1k. It lost in staging depth, a bit in layering and mainly in timbre, which was more natural on the sp1k.
The dx320 is more realistic in timbre than anything ive heard from dap world (sp1k, sp1kM, sp2kT, Shanling M9, all the Fiios).
Firstly, you need to have amp11.2s burned in, secondly you need to go level up in amps- 12EX/EXN or 13.
Amp 11.2s is just stock, raw output showing the abilities of the ROHM dacs but it lacks refinement.
I honestly have never experienced such realistic timbre in any dap, otherwise i could send it back, still have 1,5 weeks to do that. Its a keeper which will only get better with new amps releases.

 

[Doug2507]

Sorry, I realized soon after posting I didn't specify so I edited and made mention - perhaps you read sooner than I edited.

Both running with AMP11mk2 - didn't swap any amp cards as neither of us had, however Tiger will be receiving the 13 soon.

11Mk2 and 11MK2s...?

 

[jamato8]

The dx320 is not a side grade. Its a noticeable level up in everything, even when paired with the stock 11.2s vs dx300 paired with the amp12EXN.
When the dx320 is pared with the amp12EXN, there is nothing left to compare.
The dx320 smashes the ak sp1000, is better than the ak sp2kT, so i dont think the sp2k is even 3% better, considering that there wasnt any groundbreaking upgrade over its predecessor.
Cant comment on the Hugo2 as i havent heard it.
I remember that even dx300 with amp11.2 had better staging, dynamics and detail than the sp1k. It lost in staging depth, a bit in layering and mainly in timbre, which was more natural on the sp1k.
The dx320 is more realistic in timbre than anything ive heard from dap world (sp1k, sp1kM, sp2kT, Shanling M9, all the Fiios).
Firstly, you need to have amp11.2s burned in, secondly you need to go level up in amps- 12EX/EXN or 13.
Amp 11.2s is just stock, raw output showing the abilities of the ROHM dacs but it lacks refinement.
I honestly have never experienced such realistic timbre in any dap, otherwise i could send it back, still have 1,5 weeks to do that. Its a keeper which will only get better with new amps releases.

I have been using the DX300 or the DX320 as the source to my electrostatic setups and the difference is very noticeable. I don't want to stop listening to the 320. Has to be heard to be totally understood but the dynamics and speeds can be startling.

 

[AnalogandDigital]

The dx320 is not a side grade. Its a noticeable level up in everything, even when paired with the stock 11.2s vs dx300 paired with the amp12EXN.
When the dx320 is pared with the amp12EXN, there is nothing left to compare.
The dx320 smashes the ak sp1000, is better than the ak sp2kT, so i dont think the sp2k is even 3% better, considering that there wasnt any groundbreaking upgrade over its predecessor.
Cant comment on the Hugo2 as i havent heard it.
I remember that even dx300 with amp11.2 had better staging, dynamics and detail than the sp1k. It lost in staging depth, a bit in layering and mainly in timbre, which was more natural on the sp1k.
The dx320 is more realistic in timbre than anything ive heard from dap world (sp1k, sp1kM, sp2kT, Shanling M9, all the Fiios).
Firstly, you need to have amp11.2s burned in, secondly you need to go level up in amps- 12EX/EXN or 13.
Amp 11.2s is just stock, raw output showing the abilities of the ROHM dacs but it lacks refinement.
I honestly have never experienced such realistic timbre in any dap, otherwise i could send it back, still have 1,5 weeks to do that. Its a keeper which will only get better with new amps releases.

Suppose that's each vision on our toys
As you see 5% of a difference for some and a huge leap forward for others
Side grade for one
Upgrade for others
Even I've seen not on par with ... posted
Also AK is not your favorite sound but many happy owners out there
But as long as we have fun exploring audio ...

 

[dleblanc343]

I have been using the DX300 or the DX320 as the source to my electrostatic setups and the difference is very noticeable. I don't want to stop listening to the 320. Has to be heard to be totally understood but the dynamics and speeds can be startling.

Makes total sense. The tactility of the DX320 helps with e-stat timbre.

DX300 is very much ethereal and a bit textureless, like many Stax, so you need to bring out some dynamics and grit to your chain.

I’d describe the DX300 like an SR-007mk2.9 and the DX320 like an Audeze CRBN

 

[jamato8]

Makes total sense. The tactility of the DX320 helps with e-stat timbre.

DX300 is very much ethereal and a bit textureless, like many Stax, so you need to bring out some dynamics and grit to your chain.

I’d describe the DX300 like an SR-007mk2.9 and the DX320 like an Audeze CRBN

I understand what you are saying.

I am also using it with the Quicksilver headphone amp and getting wonderful results. Good stuff!