[Whitigir]

That is why I mentioned "with an averaged rating to be better than MAX". You may like the question or not, that still puts the MAX and iBasso at a very strange position, that as a platform it is considerably worse than a product that was released months after it. I cannot keep myself from asking "but then why didn't iBasso use the newer platform?"

I know iBasso lovers don't like questions much. It is love it or get the hell out of here! So I am not gonna drag it any longer.

Worse ? I don’t see it that way, the way David stated was that he didn’t like the tuning and signature of MAX, while the Dx300 is better for his preferences. Both Max and 300 use different DAC chips.

Clearly the MAX was to cater toward who is loving Sabres from Ibasso, and Dx300 for Cirrus Logic. Beside there are different form factors and so on. I don’t understand your point of view. But I will just leave it here

Not only Ibasso, but for all other products and brands, if you don’t like something, just move on. How do you feel that you are eating your favorite “dishes” and you have a friend sitting next to you to criticize every second and aspects of it ?

 

[Skullar]

I don’t see it that way, the way David stated was that he didn’t like the tuning and signature of MAX

I actually wish there was a portable Max version lol. Startin to realise sabre signature suits LX slightly better. Though as there are no current alternatives under 2k tuning wise. Dx300 is closest bet with excelent technicalities.

Actually interesting that all current flagships went with smoother, warmer tuning.

 

[davidmolliere]

That is why I mentioned "with an averaged rating to be better than MAX". You may like the question or not, that still puts the MAX and iBasso at a very strange position, that as a platform it is considerably worse than a product that was released months after it. I cannot keep myself from asking "but then why didn't iBasso use the newer platform?" I know iBasso lovers don't like questions much. It is love it or get the hell out of here! So I am not gonna drag it any longer.

Not sure I get your meaning, I am open to debate and it's valid to raise the question it's not my point.

I think it's not that convoluted really : Max was a project that started much earlier than DX300 with a very different target of transportable weight and size no object so stainless steel vs much lighter components and a more modern SoC but DX300 started development much later with a very different goal. Comparison are therefore a bit skewed... as I said I sold Max because it was too intense for me so I am not unconditionally positive.

Worse ? I don’t see it that way, the way David stated was that he didn’t like the tuning and signature of MAX, while the Dx300 is better for his preferences. Both Max and 300 use different DAC chips.

Yeah I loved Max except it went beyond my personal upper mids and treble tolerance on some pairing with IEMs I use weekly, like Dunu Luna. With more organic IEMs, things were much better but I can't justify a too specialized DAP that can only fit the smoothest IEMs. There are things that Max did so well I loved it but this was a deal breaker... from this standpoint Shanling M8 answered my expectations smoother yet insane resolution and dynamic range.

 

[DarginMahkum]

@Whitigir and @davidmolliere, it is fine. I am just still sour with MAX story (not about the sound) and the whole atmosphere around it.

 

[king73]

Where is the stage wider and larger? In MAX or 300? Or do they have parity in this?

 

[FooFighter]

One general question regarding DAP decoding specs.
Maybe some experts can help explaining.
It's with most vendors that they let their top tier models have the best decoding specs.
Here 512 vs 256.
What is the hardware component that is responsible for that?
Mid tier vs high tier dac chips or CPU running the underlying operating operating system on the actual motherboard?
Whereas Imho it's a religion story to hear the difference between dsd 256 and 512 I am wondering if this is a political or a technical reason.
Also why are the end tier DAPs not supporting the highest decoding rate 7xx which is state of the art in the mid tier dac product line up to 1k $?
Is that a limitation of Android?

 

[DarginMahkum]

One general question regarding DAP decoding specs.
Maybe some experts can help explaining.
It's with most vendors that they let their top tier models have the best decoding specs.
Here 512 vs 256.
What is the hardware component that is responsible for that?
Mid tier vs high tier dac chips or CPU running the underlying operating operating system on the actual motherboard?
Whereas Imho it's a religion story to hear the difference between dsd 256 and 512 I am wondering if this is a political or a technical reason.
Also why are the end tier DAPs not supporting the highest decoding rate 7xx which is state of the art in the mid tier dac product line up to 1k $?
Is that a limitation of Android?

It is about the DAC, SoC and the DAC interface, but as you said although you might hear a difference with DSD512, the overall technicalities of the DAP are more important. So a DAP that only support 44.1 kHz might still sound much better than a TOTL spec DAP. I have been a hardcore "no-EQ" person until a few months ago. Once I left that religion, I am happier with being able to tweak the sound to my liking. It is not "bit-perfect" but sounds better for my liking.

 

[Ojisan]

I agreed and I am with you in it. This is a Modern High End Media Device. You can watch movies with high quality audio.

Interesting to watch how the discussion has gone from “don’t need a phablet DAP” to “high end media device”

I personally use YT to enjoy unpublished live recordings, etc. I think there’s room for a DAP that is everything but a phone with beefy audio. Maybe it’s time someone came up with a 13.2ch helmet

Up until recently, I kept DX228EX for it’s sound in MangoOS but I was not happy with the Android side (and battery life) as a travel company to my phone. So I kept a second DAP N6ii which doubled as good sound and Android/battery performance for travel companion.

Now M8 and DX300 comes along and I’m thinking the time might have come to consolidate this to one.

This thread is certainly on fire but it hasn’t hit the expected 200 page yet! I should have bought direct... still waiting

 

[davidmolliere]

Where is the stage wider and larger? In MAX or 300? Or do they have parity in this?

I would say parity yes in terms of stage, maybe Max is wider but depth I wonder if DX300 is not deeper... layering is sooooo good

 

[HK_sends]

@Whitigir and @davidmolliere, it is fine. I am just still sour with MAX story (not about the sound) and the whole atmosphere around it.

About that...
I've been looking at a lot of the back and forth between the MAX and 300 "advocates" (can someone really advocate for something they don't have yet?). I think a lot of us are looking at this all wrong. As a former owner of the MAX (and soon-to-be owner of the 300), I have some nagging questions about the MAX and its position in iBasso's line-up:

1. Why is it the "220 Max" if it is a so-called flagship?
2. Why go for the middle ground of "Transportable" vs Portable or Desktop?
3. Why the odd power charging configuration?
4. Why the odd battery configuration (really? five batteries?)
5. Why such a limited number of units for a "Flagship"?

Bear with me here; I too thought it strange that the 300 was announced so shortly after the MAX and that it had some, but not all of the MAX's features (i.e. multiple batteries but not Dsd512). But then it hit me; (please understand this strictly IMHO...I have no confirmation), what if the 220Max is a "Technology Demonstrator"?

Think about it; for years (most) DAP companies slowly (ha!) evolve their products with better components and technology as it comes along. FiiO, HiBy, and even iBasso try to offer products that perform better than the previous ones, but it is usually incremental "evolving" improvements. That works mostly, but there are many users that are getting tired of the XXX -> XXX Pro -> XXX Limited -> XXY...ad infinitum! What if (and again, this is an observation and an opinion) iBasso said, lets take the best current platform we have (DX220) and add on every cutting edge or innovative audio technology feature we can come up with? It may have to break some molds, but we (iBasso engineers) want the best possible architecture we can design within a "affordable" price range. How do we do it and how do we get feedback from the Audiophile/Head-Fi community? Then we can take the best features and technology and adapt it into our line of DAPs, leaping the incremental evolution barrier.

So, take the basic DX220 architecture, add all the bells and whistles you can think of, and put it in as small a chassis as possible. Some compromises had to be made to accommodate the innovations (no swappable amps) and I think the power supply was a bit over-engineered on purpose, all to get the best sound possible out of what is a cutting-edge "transportable" music player. And 999 use-cases gives iBasso engineers plenty of feedback on what's working and what could be improved...

Max owners have a right to be proud. The MAX is an awesome and rare (only 999) piece of technology. Although it is Flagship-Level, I wouldn't consider it iBasso's flagship DAP. However, take heart in knowing that the DAPs coming down the line from iBasso (including whatever they deem a Flagship), will contain the DNA of the 220Max. I truly don't believe that, in some way or another, the 300 or its follow-ons would be possible without the MAX.

So, the 300 doesn't have all the top-end features of the MAX (no 512, smaller, but still separate batteries), but it will be the start of an even better line of iBasso DAPs, and in more obtainable quantities. So the 300 owners can feel fortunate, and the MAX owners can be proud!

All the above is strictly IMHO and a personal observation. Ground Truth may be different.

Cheers and All the Best to All of You!
-HK sends

 

[davidmolliere]

Interesting and yes DX300 inherits some aspect of DX220 Max with better portability and dropping a desktop DAC for a mobile one that consumes way less and the elephant in the room as well : DX300 is the best battery life of any iBasso DAPs which is something everyone complained about so far. I think quad cirrus DAC was a smart move in terms of retaining top performances at a fraction of the power consumption. It's probably not as great as dual 9028 Pro in pure DAC performances in pure technicalities but as any product it's a compromise and a choice. For most people the 5/10% better performance is irrelevant. Cirrus DAC are interesting because we're so used to AKM and ESS that this different brand of sound is quite appealing in itself because it doesn't sound like 95% of the market... DX160 was such a hit and still is insane value for money for its performance but also being a distinctive offering. I feel DX300 is the same. It doesn't sound like anything else because of its quad cirrus, dual batteries and all those unique features like 6.5 inches screen. Purely from a product design point of view, SQ not withstanding, a distinctive product.

 

[FooFighter]

It is about the DAC, SoC and the DAC interface...

Don't want to stress it too much but are these chips so expensive or what is the limiting factor that prevents many DAPs above 1k $ to not support DSD 7xx plus being recognized e.g in standard PC/Mac OS software like Audirvana with their full decoding specs?

I have owned DACs like IFI idsd micro and RME Adi DAC 2 before, all below 1k $ and they could all do DSD 7xx plus no compatibility issues with Audirvana (guess Roon is similar).
Is that due to the special Android driver architecture?

 

[HK_sends]

Finally! The DX300 has a 64 page User's Guide! What does the HiBy R8 "STILL" have..? A one-page quick start guide...
Ridiculous! At least when my DX300 arrives, I can RTFM!
Cheers!
-HK sends

 

[sorrick]

Has anyone compared the DX300 to the new Hiby R6 2020? We’ve had many R8 comparisons, which is clearly the appropriate one in terms of the R8 and DX300 being the top-tier offerings from both companies (DX220 Max being a limited edition), but the R6 2020 and DX300 share the same DAC (albeit the DX300 has twice as many of them), both aim to isolate the power supplies on the digital and analog sides (in Different ways), and price wise DX300 sits between the two hiby offerings. I believe @davidmolliere said he was expecting the R6 2020 soon. Anyone else had a chance to listen to both?

 

[davidmolliere]

Has anyone compared the DX300 to the new Hiby R6 2020? We’ve had many R8 comparisons, which is clearly the appropriate one in terms of the R8 and DX300 being the top-tier offerings from both companies (DX220 Max being a limited edition), but the R6 2020 and DX300 share the same DAC (albeit the DX300 has twice as many of them), both aim to isolate the power supplies on the digital and analog sides (in Different ways), and price wise DX300 sits between the two hiby offerings. I believe @davidmolliere said he was expecting the R6 2020 soon. Anyone else had a chance to listen to both?

Hmmm R6 2020 has dual 9038Q2M not CS43198

Yeah I am considering R6 2020 as a mid tier DAP for my reviews and so that I have an ESS DAC powered DAP