I owned Clairvoyance and B2 Dusk, two IEMs that are said to have the perfect tonality or something similar in many reviews. To my ears that's not even close to being true especially the Dusk ,so it's all very subjective. Nothing is for everybody.
Precog's IEM Reviews & Impressions
- Thread starter Precogvision
- Start date
redrol
Headphoneus Supremus
Probably wont crap up Precogs thread with my opinions.
Hi @Precogvision , may I urge you to have an audition of the AAW A3H+, and let us know what do you think of it with rating? If it is available near you, that is.
iBasso DX300 Impressions
Hey everyone, here's something different: source talk. I rarely talk about sources, due equal parts to my lack of experience and to generally not hearing major differences. Nonetheless, I’ve been pining for a new DAP - an upgrade to my trusty DX160 - for some time. Enter the iBasso DX300. It's been getting pretty positive impressions in the circles I hang in. It's also one of the few DAPs we (Headphones.com) carry that I liked the look of, and one of the few DAPs that Animus has not heard yet and therefore cannot tell me is bad and sabotage my enjoyment, heh.
Physical impressions: It’s a chonker. Just to illustrate, it’s my iPhone X stacked twice over and with a larger screen than most smartphones I’ve seen to boot. The weight isn't so bad though and, from memory, it’s not quite as heavy as the Sony WM1Z that I held a while back. I’ll mostly use the DX300 around the house or store it in my backpack if I’m on the go. Interface is snappy and responsive, a huge jump over any other DAP that I’ve played with. The case it comes with sucks. It brushes up against the wheel, slightly obscures the LED strip at the top, and makes the buttons on the side prone to accidental activation. At least it's a snug fit unlike some early runs, I guess.
Disclaimer: I do not hear major differences between sources even if I would definitely attest to differences existing. I do not care about burn-in. Your mileage might vary and all that. For reference, this DX300 has the Amp11 MK.II and listening was done off of the 3.5mm jack with my 64 Audio U12t.
Now for the sound impressions. The DX300, to my ears, presents a south of neutral sound that has a pronounced thickness to the bass and midrange regions. It is a more natural, smooth listen; perhaps not "lifelike" but with pleasing timbre and a good sense of authenticity. As a basis of comparison, I will point to its younger brother, the DX160. I hear the DX160 as being generally tilted more toward the treble region for a brighter, leaner presentation. I’ve grown increasingly critical of the quality of said treble; the timbre sounds overly plasticky. By contrast, the DX300 maintains good treble presence, but seems smoother, less scratchy. Bass on the DX300 is also rich and warm, yet maintains respectable nuance. By comparison, the DX160's bass sounds quite hollow and decays quicker. The juxtaposition between these two DAPs’ respective sound signatures is quite interesting; the DX300 is not what I would’ve wanted if I was hoping for a straight upgrade to the DX160. But I’m not complaining: It's a pretty big jump for my preferences.
Of course, you'll want to know about the intangibles. Interestingly, I do hear a slight blunting of transient attack to the DX300’s midrange not unlike my U12t. Decay is also smoother than I would’ve expected (using the default filter) and noticeably less “etched” than what I hear off of the DX160. Textural nuance - maybe transient weight? - has seen a jump accordingly. Again, there is a general sense of the DX300 not sounding much like an iBasso DAP, but certainly not for the worst in my opinion. Indeed, what stands out most to me are the DX300’s dynamics. Not necessarily in sheer dynamic contrast, mind you, but rather in intensity. The DX300 has excellent macrodynamic punch, although I’d hesitate to give a relative assessment as my experience with high-end DAPs is rather limited. Staging on the DX300 is also quite open with considerable depth and layering, easily besting the A&K SP1000M I have on-hand. I think the biggest bust here would be that I can still hear the Andro 2020 hissing slightly off of the DX300. Finicky little green bois, sigh.
Anyhoo, I'm in the honeymoon phase with this thing for now, so we'll see how long that lasts. At the very least, I can say the DX300's a pretty sweet DAP as long as you're okay with sacrificing a substantial amount of pocket real-estate.
Score: 8/10
Hey everyone, here's something different: source talk. I rarely talk about sources, due equal parts to my lack of experience and to generally not hearing major differences. Nonetheless, I’ve been pining for a new DAP - an upgrade to my trusty DX160 - for some time. Enter the iBasso DX300. It's been getting pretty positive impressions in the circles I hang in. It's also one of the few DAPs we (Headphones.com) carry that I liked the look of, and one of the few DAPs that Animus has not heard yet and therefore cannot tell me is bad and sabotage my enjoyment, heh.
Physical impressions: It’s a chonker. Just to illustrate, it’s my iPhone X stacked twice over and with a larger screen than most smartphones I’ve seen to boot. The weight isn't so bad though and, from memory, it’s not quite as heavy as the Sony WM1Z that I held a while back. I’ll mostly use the DX300 around the house or store it in my backpack if I’m on the go. Interface is snappy and responsive, a huge jump over any other DAP that I’ve played with. The case it comes with sucks. It brushes up against the wheel, slightly obscures the LED strip at the top, and makes the buttons on the side prone to accidental activation. At least it's a snug fit unlike some early runs, I guess.
Disclaimer: I do not hear major differences between sources even if I would definitely attest to differences existing. I do not care about burn-in. Your mileage might vary and all that. For reference, this DX300 has the Amp11 MK.II and listening was done off of the 3.5mm jack with my 64 Audio U12t.
Now for the sound impressions. The DX300, to my ears, presents a south of neutral sound that has a pronounced thickness to the bass and midrange regions. It is a more natural, smooth listen; perhaps not "lifelike" but with pleasing timbre and a good sense of authenticity. As a basis of comparison, I will point to its younger brother, the DX160. I hear the DX160 as being generally tilted more toward the treble region for a brighter, leaner presentation. I’ve grown increasingly critical of the quality of said treble; the timbre sounds overly plasticky. By contrast, the DX300 maintains good treble presence, but seems smoother, less scratchy. Bass on the DX300 is also rich and warm, yet maintains respectable nuance. By comparison, the DX160's bass sounds quite hollow and decays quicker. The juxtaposition between these two DAPs’ respective sound signatures is quite interesting; the DX300 is not what I would’ve wanted if I was hoping for a straight upgrade to the DX160. But I’m not complaining: It's a pretty big jump for my preferences.
Of course, you'll want to know about the intangibles. Interestingly, I do hear a slight blunting of transient attack to the DX300’s midrange not unlike my U12t. Decay is also smoother than I would’ve expected (using the default filter) and noticeably less “etched” than what I hear off of the DX160. Textural nuance - maybe transient weight? - has seen a jump accordingly. Again, there is a general sense of the DX300 not sounding much like an iBasso DAP, but certainly not for the worst in my opinion. Indeed, what stands out most to me are the DX300’s dynamics. Not necessarily in sheer dynamic contrast, mind you, but rather in intensity. The DX300 has excellent macrodynamic punch, although I’d hesitate to give a relative assessment as my experience with high-end DAPs is rather limited. Staging on the DX300 is also quite open with considerable depth and layering, easily besting the A&K SP1000M I have on-hand. I think the biggest bust here would be that I can still hear the Andro 2020 hissing slightly off of the DX300. Finicky little green bois, sigh.
Anyhoo, I'm in the honeymoon phase with this thing for now, so we'll see how long that lasts. At the very least, I can say the DX300's a pretty sweet DAP as long as you're okay with sacrificing a substantial amount of pocket real-estate.
Score: 8/10
Last edited:
The DX300 is 
check out the NOS filter too, makes the sound a little more analogue and organic.
check out the NOS filter too, makes the sound a little more analogue and organic.this is quite helpful. how do you compare DX300 and iDSD BL purely sound quality wise?iBasso DX300 Impressions
Hey everyone, here's something different: source talk. I rarely talk about sources, due equal parts to my lack of experience and to generally not hearing major differences. Nonetheless, I’ve been pining for a new DAP - an upgrade to my trusty DX160 - for some time. Enter the iBasso DX300. It's been getting pretty positive impressions in the circles I hang in. It's also one of the few DAPs we (Headphones.com) carry that I liked the look of, and one of the few DAPs that Animus has not heard yet and therefore cannot tell me is bad and sabotage my enjoyment, heh.
Physical impressions: It’s a chonker. Just to illustrate, it’s my iPhone X stacked twice over and with a larger screen than most smartphones I’ve seen to boot. The weight isn't so bad though and, from memory, it’s not quite as heavy as the Sony WM1Z that I held a while back. I’ll mostly use the DX300 around the house or store it in my backpack if I’m on the go. Interface is snappy and responsive, a huge jump over any other DAP that I’ve played with. The case it comes with sucks. It brushes up against the wheel, slightly obscures the LED strip at the top, and makes the buttons on the side prone to accidental activation. At least it's a snug fit unlike some early runs, I guess.
Disclaimer: I do not hear major differences between sources even if I would definitely attest to differences existing. I do not care about burn-in. Your mileage might vary and all that. For reference, this DX300 has the Amp11 MK.II and listening was done off of the 3.5mm jack with my 64 Audio U12t.
Now for the sound impressions. The DX300, to my ears, presents a south of neutral sound that has a pronounced thickness to the bass and midrange regions. It is a more natural, smooth listen; perhaps not "lifelike" but with pleasing timbre and a good sense of authenticity. As a basis of comparison, I will point to its younger brother, the DX160. I hear the DX160 as being generally tilted more toward the treble region for a brighter, leaner presentation. I’ve grown increasingly critical of the quality of said treble; the timbre sounds overly plasticky. By contrast, the DX300 maintains good treble presence, but seems smoother, less scratchy. Bass on the DX300 is also rich and warm, yet maintains respectable nuance. By comparison, the DX160's bass sounds quite hollow and decays quicker. The juxtaposition between these two DAPs’ respective sound signatures is quite interesting; the DX300 is not what I would’ve wanted if I was hoping for a straight upgrade to the DX160. But I’m not complaining: It's a pretty big jump for my preferences.
Of course, you'll want to know about the intangibles. Interestingly, I do hear a slight blunting of transient attack to the DX300’s midrange not unlike my U12t. Decay is also smoother than I would’ve expected (using the default filter) and noticeably less “etched” than what I hear off of the DX160. Textural nuance - maybe transient weight? - has seen a jump accordingly. Again, there is a general sense of the DX300 not sounding much like an iBasso DAP, but certainly not for the worst in my opinion. Indeed, what stands out most to me are the DX300’s dynamics. Not necessarily in sheer dynamic contrast, mind you, but rather in intensity. The DX300 has excellent macrodynamic punch, although I’d hesitate to give a relative assessment as my experience with high-end DAPs is rather limited. Staging on the DX300 is also quite open with considerable depth and layering, easily besting the A&K SP1000M I have on-hand. I think the biggest bust here would be that I can still hear the Andro 2020 hissing slightly off of the DX300. Finicky little green bois, sigh.
Anyhoo, I'm in the honeymoon phase with this thing for now, so we'll see how long that lasts. At the very least, I can say the DX300's a pretty sweet DAP as long as you're okay with sacrificing a substantial amount of pocket real-estate.
Hmm, I really only use the BL for listening to full-size headphones, but I gave it a quick A/B. I would say the BL has sharper attack transients and quicker decay. There's less texturing than the DX300 with leaner, more cut notes, but there's not necessarily a lack of "transient weight" like with the DX160. It feels like it pushes into dynamic swings quicker, more incisively, but some engagement factor is lost as a result. It obviously has a blacker background with more sensitive IEMs too, although I think the staging on the DX300 sounds more natural. The BL has some of that pinhole effect that I get with the SP1000M. Overall, it's a more sterile listen relative to the DX300; I've never found myself enjoying it very much. Handy to have on-hand for sure, though.
Last edited:
Is your dx300 mk1 or mk2?
RikudouGoku
Member of the Trade: RikuBuds
How is the performance on it compared to the DX160? Thats the one point the DX160 is really pathetic at.iBasso DX300 Impressions
Hey everyone, here's something different: source talk. I rarely talk about sources, due equal parts to my lack of experience and to generally not hearing major differences. Nonetheless, I’ve been pining for a new DAP - an upgrade to my trusty DX160 - for some time. Enter the iBasso DX300. It's been getting pretty positive impressions in the circles I hang in. It's also one of the few DAPs we (Headphones.com) carry that I liked the look of, and one of the few DAPs that Animus has not heard yet and therefore cannot tell me is bad and sabotage my enjoyment, heh.
Physical impressions: It’s a chonker. Just to illustrate, it’s my iPhone X stacked twice over and with a larger screen than most smartphones I’ve seen to boot. The weight isn't so bad though and, from memory, it’s not quite as heavy as the Sony WM1Z that I held a while back. I’ll mostly use the DX300 around the house or store it in my backpack if I’m on the go. Interface is snappy and responsive, a huge jump over any other DAP that I’ve played with. The case it comes with sucks. It brushes up against the wheel, slightly obscures the LED strip at the top, and makes the buttons on the side prone to accidental activation. At least it's a snug fit unlike some early runs, I guess.
Disclaimer: I do not hear major differences between sources even if I would definitely attest to differences existing. I do not care about burn-in. Your mileage might vary and all that. For reference, this DX300 has the Amp11 MK.II and listening was done off of the 3.5mm jack with my 64 Audio U12t.
Now for the sound impressions. The DX300, to my ears, presents a south of neutral sound that has a pronounced thickness to the bass and midrange regions. It is a more natural, smooth listen; perhaps not "lifelike" but with pleasing timbre and a good sense of authenticity. As a basis of comparison, I will point to its younger brother, the DX160. I hear the DX160 as being generally tilted more toward the treble region for a brighter, leaner presentation. I’ve grown increasingly critical of the quality of said treble; the timbre sounds overly plasticky. By contrast, the DX300 maintains good treble presence, but seems smoother, less scratchy. Bass on the DX300 is also rich and warm, yet maintains respectable nuance. By comparison, the DX160's bass sounds quite hollow and decays quicker. The juxtaposition between these two DAPs’ respective sound signatures is quite interesting; the DX300 is not what I would’ve wanted if I was hoping for a straight upgrade to the DX160. But I’m not complaining: It's a pretty big jump for my preferences.
Of course, you'll want to know about the intangibles. Interestingly, I do hear a slight blunting of transient attack to the DX300’s midrange not unlike my U12t. Decay is also smoother than I would’ve expected (using the default filter) and noticeably less “etched” than what I hear off of the DX160. Textural nuance - maybe transient weight? - has seen a jump accordingly. Again, there is a general sense of the DX300 not sounding much like an iBasso DAP, but certainly not for the worst in my opinion. Indeed, what stands out most to me are the DX300’s dynamics. Not necessarily in sheer dynamic contrast, mind you, but rather in intensity. The DX300 has excellent macrodynamic punch, although I’d hesitate to give a relative assessment as my experience with high-end DAPs is rather limited. Staging on the DX300 is also quite open with considerable depth and layering, easily besting the A&K SP1000M I have on-hand. I think the biggest bust here would be that I can still hear the Andro 2020 hissing slightly off of the DX300. Finicky little green bois, sigh.
Anyhoo, I'm in the honeymoon phase with this thing for now, so we'll see how long that lasts. At the very least, I can say the DX300's a pretty sweet DAP as long as you're okay with sacrificing a substantial amount of pocket real-estate.
Also, if you dont have balanced cables, get some XINHS cables from aliexpress.
There's a MK2 already?
To clarify, it is the mk2 of the amp module XD. At least that's how people refer to it on the dx300 thread
CK Moustache
100+ Head-Fier
iBasso DX300 Impressions
Hey everyone, here's something different: source talk. I rarely talk about sources, due equal parts to my lack of experience and to generally not hearing major differences. Nonetheless, I’ve been pining for a new DAP - an upgrade to my trusty DX160 - for some time. Enter the iBasso DX300. It's been getting pretty positive impressions in the circles I hang in. It's also one of the few DAPs we (Headphones.com) carry that I liked the look of, and one of the few DAPs that Animus has not heard yet and therefore cannot tell me is bad and sabotage my enjoyment, heh.
Physical impressions: It’s a chonker. Just to illustrate, it’s my iPhone X stacked twice over and with a larger screen than most smartphones I’ve seen to boot. The weight isn't so bad though and, from memory, it’s not quite as heavy as the Sony WM1Z that I held a while back. I’ll mostly use the DX300 around the house or store it in my backpack if I’m on the go. Interface is snappy and responsive, a huge jump over any other DAP that I’ve played with. The case it comes with sucks. It brushes up against the wheel, slightly obscures the LED strip at the top, and makes the buttons on the side prone to accidental activation. At least it's a snug fit unlike some early runs, I guess.
Disclaimer: I do not hear major differences between sources even if I would definitely attest to differences existing. I do not care about burn-in. Your mileage might vary and all that. For reference, this DX300 has the Amp11 MK.II and listening was done off of the 3.5mm jack with my 64 Audio U12t.
Now for the sound impressions. The DX300, to my ears, presents a south of neutral sound that has a pronounced thickness to the bass and midrange regions. It is a more natural, smooth listen; perhaps not "lifelike" but with pleasing timbre and a good sense of authenticity. As a basis of comparison, I will point to its younger brother, the DX160. I hear the DX160 as being generally tilted more toward the treble region for a brighter, leaner presentation. I’ve grown increasingly critical of the quality of said treble; the timbre sounds overly plasticky. By contrast, the DX300 maintains good treble presence, but seems smoother, less scratchy. Bass on the DX300 is also rich and warm, yet maintains respectable nuance. By comparison, the DX160's bass sounds quite hollow and decays quicker. The juxtaposition between these two DAPs’ respective sound signatures is quite interesting; the DX300 is not what I would’ve wanted if I was hoping for a straight upgrade to the DX160. But I’m not complaining: It's a pretty big jump for my preferences.
Of course, you'll want to know about the intangibles. Interestingly, I do hear a slight blunting of transient attack to the DX300’s midrange not unlike my U12t. Decay is also smoother than I would’ve expected (using the default filter) and noticeably less “etched” than what I hear off of the DX160. Textural nuance - maybe transient weight? - has seen a jump accordingly. Again, there is a general sense of the DX300 not sounding much like an iBasso DAP, but certainly not for the worst in my opinion. Indeed, what stands out most to me are the DX300’s dynamics. Not necessarily in sheer dynamic contrast, mind you, but rather in intensity. The DX300 has excellent macrodynamic punch, although I’d hesitate to give a relative assessment as my experience with high-end DAPs is rather limited. Staging on the DX300 is also quite open with considerable depth and layering, easily besting the A&K SP1000M I have on-hand. I think the biggest bust here would be that I can still hear the Andro 2020 hissing slightly off of the DX300. Finicky little green bois, sigh.
Anyhoo, I'm in the honeymoon phase with this thing for now, so we'll see how long that lasts. At the very least, I can say the DX300's a pretty sweet DAP as long as you're okay with sacrificing a substantial amount of pocket real-estate.
More hiss than the Apple USB-C DAC (with the Andromeda) or about comparable?
Is the quiet listening range (just a little above the audible threshold) on the DX300 quieter than on the DX160?
Andro should come with a warning label: do not amplify 
Another great review. I own a DX160 and Hiby R6 2020. This week I did an A/B test of these 2 DAPs and what I heard is similar to what you heard in comparing and contrasting the DX160 and the DX300. The treble with the DX160 is better giving it better transparency, but the bass is thicker and more pleasant with the R6 2020 and I would also use the word plasticky to describe the sound of the DX160. The only reason I am considering a DX300 is that in pairing my DAPs with a Cayin C9, I found that the sound improvement scales with the quality of the DAP and its line out implementation. DX300 + C9 might end up being significantly better sounding than R6 2020 + C9. Now I want to hear it to find out.iBasso DX300 Impressions
Hey everyone, here's something different: source talk. I rarely talk about sources, due equal parts to my lack of experience and to generally not hearing major differences. Nonetheless, I’ve been pining for a new DAP - an upgrade to my trusty DX160 - for some time. Enter the iBasso DX300. It's been getting pretty positive impressions in the circles I hang in. It's also one of the few DAPs we (Headphones.com) carry that I liked the look of, and one of the few DAPs that Animus has not heard yet and therefore cannot tell me is bad and sabotage my enjoyment, heh.
Physical impressions: It’s a chonker. Just to illustrate, it’s my iPhone X stacked twice over and with a larger screen than most smartphones I’ve seen to boot. The weight isn't so bad though and, from memory, it’s not quite as heavy as the Sony WM1Z that I held a while back. I’ll mostly use the DX300 around the house or store it in my backpack if I’m on the go. Interface is snappy and responsive, a huge jump over any other DAP that I’ve played with. The case it comes with sucks. It brushes up against the wheel, slightly obscures the LED strip at the top, and makes the buttons on the side prone to accidental activation. At least it's a snug fit unlike some early runs, I guess.
Disclaimer: I do not hear major differences between sources even if I would definitely attest to differences existing. I do not care about burn-in. Your mileage might vary and all that. For reference, this DX300 has the Amp11 MK.II and listening was done off of the 3.5mm jack with my 64 Audio U12t.
Now for the sound impressions. The DX300, to my ears, presents a south of neutral sound that has a pronounced thickness to the bass and midrange regions. It is a more natural, smooth listen; perhaps not "lifelike" but with pleasing timbre and a good sense of authenticity. As a basis of comparison, I will point to its younger brother, the DX160. I hear the DX160 as being generally tilted more toward the treble region for a brighter, leaner presentation. I’ve grown increasingly critical of the quality of said treble; the timbre sounds overly plasticky. By contrast, the DX300 maintains good treble presence, but seems smoother, less scratchy. Bass on the DX300 is also rich and warm, yet maintains respectable nuance. By comparison, the DX160's bass sounds quite hollow and decays quicker. The juxtaposition between these two DAPs’ respective sound signatures is quite interesting; the DX300 is not what I would’ve wanted if I was hoping for a straight upgrade to the DX160. But I’m not complaining: It's a pretty big jump for my preferences.
Of course, you'll want to know about the intangibles. Interestingly, I do hear a slight blunting of transient attack to the DX300’s midrange not unlike my U12t. Decay is also smoother than I would’ve expected (using the default filter) and noticeably less “etched” than what I hear off of the DX160. Textural nuance - maybe transient weight? - has seen a jump accordingly. Again, there is a general sense of the DX300 not sounding much like an iBasso DAP, but certainly not for the worst in my opinion. Indeed, what stands out most to me are the DX300’s dynamics. Not necessarily in sheer dynamic contrast, mind you, but rather in intensity. The DX300 has excellent macrodynamic punch, although I’d hesitate to give a relative assessment as my experience with high-end DAPs is rather limited. Staging on the DX300 is also quite open with considerable depth and layering, easily besting the A&K SP1000M I have on-hand. I think the biggest bust here would be that I can still hear the Andro 2020 hissing slightly off of the DX300. Finicky little green bois, sigh.
Anyhoo, I'm in the honeymoon phase with this thing for now, so we'll see how long that lasts. At the very least, I can say the DX300's a pretty sweet DAP as long as you're okay with sacrificing a substantial amount of pocket real-estate.
Last edited:
It's the MK2. I think the MK1 was supposed to be even warmer?
Very good, easily the snappiest DAP that I've ever played with. No crappy Wi-Fi issues or crazy lag haha.How is the performance on it compared to the DX160? Thats the one point the DX160 is really pathetic at.
Also, if you dont have balanced cables, get some XINHS cables from aliexpress.
It's definitely more hissy off of the 3.5mm port than the Apple USB-C dongle. 2.5mm port is even more hissy, and the Andro's so sensitive that it makes static noise when the jack is rotated in the 4.4mm port. The quiet listening range goes lower than on the DX160, but I probably wouldn't buy this if you're looking for a main source for your Andros. It's kinda vexing, honestly, as I thought one of the selling points of the separate batteries was a lower noise floor which clearly isn't the case.
Users who are viewing this thread
