[buonassi]

At first listen, I'm very impressed. I've owned many DAPs and this one layers treble and presents stage very nicely. There's also a nice decay in the bass that reminds me of DX157. Compared to DX157 (DX150 w amp7), using Rai Penta in single ended, I hear the lower treble as being more restrained on the DX160 and not quite as sibilant. Very nice upper treble shimmer and dynamic bass with very very good attack/decay. I think amp7 imparts a bit of odd harmonic content, or perhaps its the 4490 with its lower treble bite. DX160 is smoother, not quite as 'crunchy' in the cymbals, but guitars have excellent bite.

I don't even have an hour logged on this yet, so stay tuned as I discern more pros/cons of this new ibasso DAP. One thing is for sure: "The listening experience only gets better and better"

 

[Vitaly2017]

DX160 is still on my list to review soon, and I will compare it to M11 in more details when I get there. But, for example, in my R5 review I mentioned that i found R5 and M11 to sound very close, the only giveaway was more hissing in M11. And from some limited on-and-off listening between DX160 and R5, I prefer a more dynamic sound of DX160. All this based on my personal preference, so take it as a subjective opinion.

Oh thats awsome I am awaiting your review !
I know it might be to much of weird demand but I'd love to know how it sounds vs 1z and if it hass less or equal hiss please

 

[buonassi]

@marcusd mentioned in his "first contact" mini-review that the noise floor on this DAP is very low, both in balanced and single ended. I have to agree, but can only confirm the single ended at this point.

https://headfonics.com/2019/10/ibasso-dx160-first-contact/

Fearless S8f is VERY sensitive. While I can hear some 'processor related' noise come through when scrolling, navigating, etc - it's remarkably silent when just playing a digital silence track. Since the SNR is even better balanced on the spec sheet, I'm GUESSING that balanced is just as quiet.

@twister6 always mentions noise levels with various earphones so stay tuned for that.

 

[twiceboss]

DX160 is still on my list to review soon, and I will compare it to M11 in more details when I get there. But, for example, in my R5 review I mentioned that i found R5 and M11 to sound very close, the only giveaway was more hissing in M11. And from some limited on-and-off listening between DX160 and R5, I prefer a more dynamic sound of DX160. All this based on my personal preference, so take it as a subjective opinion.

how is the soundstage in terms of width? M11 is somewhat congested. Really narrow sounding. Really hate that. Cayin N6ii t04 musical is good but i need an expansive width.

 

[superuser1]

Fearless S8f is VERY sensitive. While I can hear some 'processor related' noise come through when scrolling, navigating, etc -.

Seriously??!! Could you kindly elaborate please.

 

[Merkurio]

@Paul - iBasso At what load are the output voltage specifications in both single and balanced ends? 32 ohms?

 

[Whitigir]

I agree that the dx160 has very very low noise floor

 

[Kal El]

Amp3 sent me an e-mail explaining that my blue iBasso DX160 will be in late (Stock due 28 Oct instead of 18 Oct). This waiting is killing me... I sold my dap few days ago and now have just the smartphone and laptop...

I also considered to choose another DAP which is available in stock, but I can't find an alternative in the same price range that can beat the DX160 or be at least at the same level. I was tempted by Cowon Plenue D2 but... mmm... didn't buy it in the end.

 

[twiceboss]

Again, if anyone here knows about this; how is the soundstage in terms of width of dx160? M11 is somewhat congested to me. Really narrow sounding. Really hate that. Cayin N6ii t04 musical is good but i need an expansive width.

 

[twister6]

Again, if anyone here knows about this; how is the soundstage in terms of width of dx160? M11 is somewhat congested to me. Really narrow sounding. Really hate that. Cayin N6ii t04 musical is good but i need an expansive width.

Just played both, the same pair of iems, volume matched, the same track, using their native apps - DX160 soundstage is wider.

 

[twiceboss]

Just played both, the same pair of iems, volume matched, the same track, using their native apps - DX160 soundstage is wider.

the width of dx160 vs sp1000ss? Since sp1000ss is wide. So i just bring it for a benchmark. Thank you!

 

[jsmiller58]

It's not an opinion.
These are facts, and you could look them up too. But I'll assist you.
The current socs are as follows
Exynos 7872 (14 nm)
Snapdragon 425 (28 nm)
Snapdragon 430 (28 nm)
These old rockchip cpus that Ibasso and other companies use on the audiophile community because you aren't familiar with this stuff.

That's 4 socs. No name socs that say 8 cores are almost always the old crappy rockchip cpu. It's why they refuse to actually explicitly say the name of the SoC.

So the Exynos is the latest (14 nm process is far newer than 28 nm process and if you don't know what a node shrink is, then just understand that's a massive improvement.)
The dap using that Exynos is the fiio m11.

Snapdragon is used by hiby, Shanling(430), and cayin.

Also, please don't fall into the trap that a manufacturer optimizes their dap to better use the SoC. I know it sounds reasonable. But it's just not how this situation works. When they say they optimize the os, it's for removing android src. Not making it magically faster, and there isn't a way to overcome such large differences in chip performance through software.

Anyway, I listed all the socs, so you can confirm for yourself the release date of a few socs.

I think most people (should) evaluate and buy their DAPs (or any product) based on features, user experience, etc - that is the total product. The SOC is just a component of that. A faster SOC can make for a faster or more responsive DAP, but if it’s features (like sound, applications, or UI) fall short, the faster SOC is of little comfort.

 

[twister6]

Does it support hardware MQA decoding?

Nobody talks about DX160 MQA support I just tested a handful of MQA FLAC files, and confirmed that DX160 supports full MQA unfolding in hardware.

 

[superuser1]

Nobody talks about DX160 MQA support I just tested a handful of MQA FLAC files, and confirmed that DX160 supports full MQA unfolding in hardware.

Wow really appreciate that feedback. Thank you.

 

[buonassi]

Seriously??!! Could you kindly elaborate please.

It's very faint on sensitive IEMs. And completely unheard when actual music is playing.

It sounds a little like muffled scratching sounds. Maybe twitching noise is a better descriptor. It seems to correlate to processor activity and only when screen is on. Put it this way. I use neutron with 8 EQ filters active in 64 bit processing mode and send 32 but output to the dac. This requires processing. Even then, when the screen is off and a digital silence track is playing I can't hear anything. Only when screen on and navigation event (like scrolling) is taking place.

Note that I do have @Lurker0 Firmware installed (latest version) and I believe he alters cpu programming so it MIGHT be one explanation. Another could be that the shielding isn't the best internally between analog stage and soc board.

But guys, this is really a non issue. I'm a hiss hater and this dap suits me just fine. No hiss!!!!!