Ibasso DX160 (2020) vs Sony NW-ZX507 (V2)
To shake things up I decided to sit down, listen and get used to the sound of the ZX507 for an hour while doing all the optimisations suggested to me prior to doing a comparison. I also experimented with every sound setting to get the best sound possible on the ZX507.
I was also allowed to disable all apps and run all optimisations as detailed in
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/new-sony-nw-zx500.914486/page-299#post-15823504 as long as I did a factory reset after.
Comparisons were done with the DX160 in mango mode, High Gain with minimal phase fast roll off and the ZX507 with Direct sound Off, High-Res streaming mode On, DSEE-HX On, Battery Saving Off, low gain on the latest firmware at the time of writing.
Some size comparisons
Same thickness and length but the DX160 is about 20% wider. The Sony feels denser though as its only 14g lighter (178g vs 164g) despite the size difference. Both feel very good in the hand.
Starting with the bass the ZX507 still has an edge. While warmer, it's still tighter and better controlled with a real addictive quality to it.
Mids wise where the ZX507 is warmer and softer, the DX160 goes for a more detailed transparent and reference sound. They were more of a match with Direct sound On.
Comparing the highs was very interesting, I had to go back and forth to confirm what I was hearing. While the ZX507 was warmer and softer, the highs were somehow harsher. The DX160 was more effortless and refined. Better treble control on the DX160 perhaps. As a result detailing on the highs was superior on the DX160.
Soundstage wise the ZX507 is definitely wider than before albeit less transparent due to the tonality changes. Here I though the ZX507 would be on par with the DX160 this time around. But as I switched to the DX160 I realised the gulf was still there. Yes, the soundstage of the ZX507 is large in the traditional sense but the DX160 is in the class of holographic sounding daps. Soundstage is wider, deeper and has an all around transparency and clarity to it, ie holographic. Enough said.
Instrument separation and layering compare similarly but overall transparency has taken a step back compared to my v1
comparison due to the changes in tonality.
So how have my impressions changed? Not too much really.
The new firmware + optimisations resulted in a wider soundstage and a warmer and smoother sounding dap but transparency also suffered a bit.
I do get the appeal of the ZX507 however. As audiophile daps converge towards being more reference sounding, its good that Sony continues to make warmer sounding daps. Bonus points for being able to sound reference as well with Direct sound mode, albeit not to the same level as other daps in its price class.
Overall, if you're after a warm sounding DAP with lovely and addictive bass, get the ZX507. But if you're after a larger and more holographic soundstage and a more reference sounding dap as a whole, the DX160 will deliver what you're after and then some for half the price.
))))
I've only used to charge 30%.