fenderman21
New Head-Fier
Have just installed the latest firmware, V1.07.250 Dec 22nd. Nice to see an updated Mango Player, but compared to the previous version, it is quite "laggy" Anyone else noticed this, or a solution?
iBasso DX160 - The listening experience only gets better and better. ******NEW FW 1.09 - link 1st page.******
- Thread starter Paul - iBasso
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ibasso ibasso dx160
jamato8
Headphoneus Supremus
The OS is laggy or Mango? I didn't notice any difference. Maybe do a factory reset?
staticdynamo
100+ Head-Fier
After installing new firmware, my DX160 was also laggy, for example, choosing a song.
But after using a while, it improved. At now Mango Player works as smoothly as before.
And about sound quality, it seems good.
But after using a while, it improved. At now Mango Player works as smoothly as before.
And about sound quality, it seems good.
Any news about the update of the Fidelizer rom ?
c3po
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2009
- Posts
- 86
- Likes
- 63
Is Fidelizer good? Would you recommend it over Lurker?
Last edited:
Yes I really recommend it. I have the advanced purist rom priority to sound and it makes a difference
1.07 = October 5, 2018 security patch - if you can call it any security level 3 years later
I knew that too, otherwise I would not have asked. You only need to google for "security patch android 8.1" and you can get an impression of the list of security holes that became known after October 2018. And the list is long.
ruthieandjohn
Stumbling towards enlightenment
(Formerly known as kayandjohn.)
I wonder if these new software updates fix the problem that the 160 has been running off of Wi-Fi? I returned mine because it would never maintain a connection to TIDAL long enough to play a song without hiccups.
Any news in that regard?
Any news in that regard?
Since I only use the WiFi connection on the DX160 via 5GHz, I can stream for hours. If the data rates are not collapsing with DSL, I rather suspect the problem with the streaming service providers or their access software. A month ago I had the problem with "Frontier Nuvola" because it could no longer meet the presumably strong increase in demand from the ever-increasing number of users. Some radio stations were nowhere to be called, although the same Internet radio stream via the DX160 or the PC without delay was played back.
Last edited:
As for sound quality, the way I found best to describe the differences was put best by @Whitigir "The DX300 is like the DX160 but on steroids". Since they both use the same DAC (albeit more in the DX300), they have a similar overall sound signature, but the DX300 just does everything much better (very noticeable to my ears). IMHO, if you like the signature of the 160, there is not a better DAP to get than the 300. But, I am not here to sell you on some expensive new toy. It would be best if you could audition all sorts of (upgrade worthy) DAPs...Does anybody tell me what are the differences in sound quality overall between dx160 and dx300 not counting higher output power?What are the difference in sound signature? I have sold my dx160 and looking for something to step up in sound quality
Also, all of the downfalls of the DX160 have been fixed with the DX300. If you are looking for something a bit different, you could try the DX240. It is about the same size as the DX160, but has a different DAC chip inside. Beyond that I don't know too much, except what is in their webpage.
The DX300 is SO snappy in performance, and has the best screen in a DAP in the market ATM... Also, if you don't like the signature, you can simply change the amp card for one of three. Well, the first one has been discontinued, but you can still find it around. I also am reading that they are coming out with a tube amp card next for the DX300. With the DX300 it is kind of like they took the DX160, and the DX220 and mixed them in a blender (not literally) and then added MORE, and MORE, and a new style of amp card (the old DX200 amp cards are not useable on the DX300).
Shortcomings aside, I am still in love with my DX160 (2019), and I don't update anything on it because: if it aint' broke, don't fix it....
Everything works a treat on mine at the moment, and I don't want to break it. I don't listen to Tidal. I use Amazon HD, and local files (getting up near 12k songs at this point), so I am satisfied for some time to come I suspect. I mainly use the DX160 when on the go (at work), and the DX300 when at home, or out but not working.
seanwee
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2015
- Posts
- 4,828
- Likes
- 3,403
Huh, I was under the impression that the DX300 is warm, the DX240 is neutral and the DX160 was somewhere in between but closer to the DX300.As for sound quality, the way I found best to describe the differences was put best by @Whitigir "The DX300 is like the DX160 but on steroids". Since they both use the same DAC (albeit more in the DX300), they have a similar overall sound signature, but the DX300 just does everything much better (very noticeable to my ears). IMHO, if you like the signature of the 160, there is not a better DAP to get than the 300. But, I am not here to sell you on some expensive new toy. It would be best if you could audition all sorts of (upgrade worthy) DAPs...
Also, all of the downfalls of the DX160 have been fixed with the DX300. If you are looking for something a bit different, you could try the DX240. It is about the same size as the DX160, but has a different DAC chip inside. Beyond that I don't know too much, except what is in their webpage.
The DX300 is SO snappy in performance, and has the best screen in a DAP in the market ATM... Also, if you don't like the signature, you can simply change the amp card for one of three. Well, the first one has been discontinued, but you can still find it around. I also am reading that they are coming out with a tube amp card next for the DX300. With the DX300 it is kind of like they took the DX160, and the DX220 and mixed them in a blender (not literally) and then added MORE, and MORE, and a new style of amp card (the old DX200 amp cards are not useable on the DX300).
Shortcomings aside, I am still in love with my DX160 (2019), and I don't update anything on it because: if it aint' broke, don't fix it....
The first amp card that came with the DX300 (Amp11Mk1) WAS warm. The Amp11Mk2 was its replacement (I think because of parts sourcing issues), and it is closer to neutral (Amp13 being more airy and a bit less warm with faster transients from what I have read). The Amp11Mk2 is what is sold as stock now.
Though you are correct in that it (stock Amp11Mk2) IS on the warmer side of neutral, but I don't know if I would call it warm. You are also right about the DX160 being close to the DX300. Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to listen to the DX240 yet to see what it is like so I can't really comment on it just yet. But with a different DAC chip in it, I would imagine it WOULD sound more different to the DX160 and DX300 than it would the same. I could be wrong on that point though..
seanwee
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2015
- Posts
- 4,828
- Likes
- 3,403
Makes sense. Size wise i find the DX300 too big to comfortably pocket though. The DX160/240 size is just rightThe first amp card that came with the DX300 (Amp11Mk1) WAS warm. The Amp11Mk2 was its replacement (I think because of parts sourcing issues), and it is closer to neutral (Amp13 being more airy and a bit less warm with faster transients from what I have read). The Amp11Mk2 is what is sold as stock now.
Though you are correct in that it (stock Amp11Mk2) IS on the warmer side of neutral, but I don't know if I would call it warm. You are also right about the DX160 being close to the DX300. Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to listen to the DX240 yet to see what it is like so I can't really comment on it just yet. But with a different DAC chip in it, I would imagine it WOULD sound more different to the DX160 and DX300 than it would the same. I could be wrong on that point though..
Users who are viewing this thread
