Comparison.

In this test, I was using Jewel and IT07.  Each of these DAPs, besides a difference in tonality and pair-up synergy, has its Pros/Cons when it comes to features, all of which should be taken into consideration depending on your priorities if you need streaming or not, which balanced termination you prefer, how much output power do you need, your battery requirements, etc.

DX180 vs DX170 – starting with my usual analysis of the soundstage and imaging, these two are quite similar in their spacious natural soundstage expansion and precise imaging, though 180 imaging has a bit more 3D placement.  But with a tonality, I do hear more differences.  While neither one has elevated bass, 180 has more sub-bass rumble and texture, while I didn’t hear the same with 170.  Then, with mids, I hear 170 being denser, with a slightly fuller body in lower mids, and a bit more coloring in upper mids.  On the opposite, 180 has more transparency with less coloring and noticeably better layering and separation of the sounds, less dense than 170.  With treble, 170 added extra sparkle and slightly more brightness while 180 is airy and revealing but with more control in tonality to give the treble a bit more naturalness.  Another noticeable difference was a blacker background in 180 which resulted in improvements in sound dynamics.  170 also has a good level of sound dynamics, but 180 was a step above it.

DX180 vs DX260 – unfortunately I didn’t have these two side by side because I sent 260 to another reviewer on Tw6.  I hate doing sound analysis by memory, but I can say with certainty that 260 has a warmer and more organic tonality.  180 is closer in tuning to 260 than 170 to 260, especially when it comes to the treble which is more natural and better controlled, something 180 and 260 share together.  Also, I recall the 260’s soundstage spreading wider left/right.

DX180 vs DX240 (w/amp8mk2) – both have a spherically shaped soundstage expansion with 3D-like imaging, but 240 with amp8mk2 stretches it a bit wider, with some of the sounds coming from behind you.  Their tonality also has a bit of a variation.  While both have a textured sub-bass rumble, I can hear 240 elevating the bass a bit higher in quantity, typical of amp8 architecture which iBasso implemented in their other DAPs.  Mids tonality is very similar, being more neutral and natural, but toward the upper mids, it starts to sound more revealing in 240 due to its brighter, crisper treble.  If you just focus on mids using the same pair of IEMs between these two daps, the tuning is very similar, but the perception changes up top due to a brighter treble in 240.  I also hear the 180 noise floor to be lower, evident in some of the instrumental tracks with simpler single-instrument at-a-time arrangements.  260 is a warmer dap in comparison to the more revealing 240.  Tonality-wise, 180 is somewhere in the “neutral” middle.

DX180 vs Hiby R6iii (Class A) – when it comes to the soundstage comparison, 180 is a bit wider while they both have a well-expanded 3D imaging, perhaps with R6iii just slightly scaled-down along with its soundstage width.  Also, once I switched the R6iii amp to Class A which added more natural tonality to mids, the overall tonality between these DAPs became quite similar.  I can’t even point a finger at any significant difference.  But where I find the difference is in the technical performance between these DAPs.  As expected, the noise floor of 180 is lower, creating a much blacker background in comparison to R6iii, especially when I switched R6iii to Class A.  Also, the dynamics of vertical peaks are flatter in R6iii, making its sound a bit compressed in comparison to more expanded dynamics and variation in sound peaks in 180.

DX180 vs Cayin N3Ultra (Classic tube) – both have a decent soundstage expansion (though N3U is a bit wider) and nearly holographic imaging, though 180 brings you closer to the performer while N3U takes you a few steps back to create more space in front of you.  The dual JAN6418 tubes of N3U also add more analog texture to the sound, as expected from vac tubes, but surprisingly the naturalness of the tonality between these DAPs is not too far off.  In a relative comparison, N3U mids are warmer and pulled more back, while 180 mids are more neutral and more detailed and upfront.  As a result of the mids presentation, N3U has slightly more elevated bass and a touch more forward treble in comparison to the perception of 180 bass being more neutral and treble being smoother.  Also, I do hear a blacker background with 180, especially in my test tracks like “The Curse”.

DX180 vs Lotoo PAW6k – the soundstage and imaging here do vary a bit, with 180 being wider in staging and more holographic in imaging, while 6k has a touch narrower width and a bit more center-focused imaging.  6k is a warmer tuned DAP with a more elevated bass punch, noticeable in the mid-bass of IEMs I tested these with.  In comparison, 180 bass is more balanced in quantity.  6k mids are smoother and warmer in comparison to the more neutral-revealing tonality of mids in 180.  The treble sparkle and the overall presentation are nearly identical.  Also, from a technical perspective, 180 does have a blacker background and improved layering and separation of the sounds.  Doesn’t mean 6k is bad, just that technically 180 has an edge over it.

DX180 vs iBasso DC-Elite (w/Galaxy S22) – why am I comparing a DAP to a dongle?  Because DC-Elite is not just another “dongle” and has a performance on par with other DAPs that cost 2-3x as much.  But their price is similar, and I had a few people asking me about this comparison, so why not?  They both do have a holographic level of imaging and how sounds are positioned in space, but the expansion of the soundstage itself is by far superior in DC Elite, placing you in the middle of big 3D space.  The tonality varies as well, with DC Elite having a stronger bass impact, more revealing and micro-detailed mids, and more sparkle in treble.  In comparison, 180 bass is more neutral, mids are more natural while still being quite detailed, and treble has a little more control when it comes to sparkle.  But here is something I didn’t expect.  When I compared DC Elite connected to my Galaxy S22 smartphone vs 180, the technical performance did scale up with 180/DC Elite, having a blacker background, improved dynamics, and overall better articulation of the sound with faster on/off note transient.  I preferred DC Elite with 180 over the connection with my smartphone.

Other Wired/Wireless connections.

In this section of the review, I will go over various wired and wireless connections I tested and verified with DX180.

Streaming.

Not much to say here since DX180 has a solid WiFi connection, as fast as my Galaxy S22 phone.  Using apps is a pleasure, again, no different than with my smartphone; it’s a smooth experience considering Snapdragon 665, Android 13, and 4GB of RAM for multitasking.  I tested with different hi-res streaming services, and no compatibility issues were found.  Also, I found accurate max sampling rate support, like below in Amazon Music HD.

Coax out.

Tested with iBasso D16 using its coax cable to get the connection going; worked without a problem but you do have to remember to enable SPDIF “on” from pull down or audio settings menu in DX180.  As expected, I found the volume on DX180 to be fixed and, the output volume adjustable using D16.  While remembering my testing of D16 with DX260 using Coax vs USB-C, I did the same comparison here.

Coax (w/DX180) vs USB-C (w/DX180) – using Coax there is a noticeable improvement in a blacker background with a faster and cleaner transient change of notes on/off.  And I also hear some improvements in vertical dynamics.  The tonality had a bit more transparency and less coloring, and I also hear the soundstage and imaging to be more holographic.  I preferred Coax over USB-C in this connection since there is a noticeable improvement in sound quality and I can free up the USB-C port of DX180 to charge it during the playback.

Digital audio usb-c out.

This test was performed with an iBasso DC-Elite usb-dac dongle.  It works with DX180 without a problem, just connect usb-c cable and off you go.  The volume control on the DAP does not influence a digital usb-c output so you will have to control the volume from the dongle.  I already talked about the sound quality of DX180 w/DC-Elite in the Comparison section of the review.  The sound quality of DC-Elite with DX180 was better than when connected to my Galaxy S22 smartphone.  Also, you can install the DC-Elite app on DX180.

Line Out.

I tested the LO of DX180 with iBasso PB5 amp, using PB5’s balanced 4.4mm cable.  LO has to be switched in the output from PO, and you can control the volume from both the DX180 and PB5.  DX180 LO output is very clean and neutral, and pair-up with PB5 enhanced it with a warmer analog tonality without losing resolution.  Plus, you get a healthy boost of power thanks to PB5 output.

USB DAC.

USB DAC mode needs to be activated in the Advanced setting of the Mango app.  When activated, you have the option to change the digital filters and the gain.  Win10 recognized it right away, no drivers were necessary.  During the playback, the volume can be adjusted from both DX180 and laptop.  Also, when enabled, you have the option to enable/disable charging mode, so you don’t have to drain your source battery charging DX180 during the connection.  This is convenient when using a smartphone as a source to prevent DX180 from draining its battery.

It is worth mentioning that iBasso implemented a dedicated USB receiver for low-latency USB-DAC mode here.

Wireless Bluetooth Rx DAC.

This (Bluetooth DAC) mode gets activated from the Mango app in the Advanced setting, and the pair-up connection was fast and effortless with my Galaxy S22.  Volume could be either adjusted from S22 or DX180.  Also, I was able to confirm over 60ft of open-range operation.  But to my surprise, no option to enable LDAC was available, thus I’m not sure if it is supported in this mode.

Wireless Bluetooth Tx.

Tested it with Hiby WH2 tws.  I found the pair up with these earphones to be fast and effortless, was able to select LDAC codec in Bluetooth setting of DX180, and it worked up to 50ft across the open area, allowing full remote control of playback with WH2.  That is as good as a pair-up with my smartphone.  Also, confirmed remote playback operation from WH2.

Conclusion.

When it comes to iBasso DAP releases, I usually get as excited about their entry-level models as I do about their money-no-object flagships.  With these entry-level players, the expectations are usually lower, thus you get an even bigger wow factor surprise when you realize how much stuff was packed into their cheapest model without compromising the design or sound performance.  Though the same was true for both DX160 and DX170, DX180 took it to the next level.

While featuring a large hi-res 5” display from Sharp, it is still a very compact pocket-friendly DAP with a snappy Android 13 performance thanks to Snapdragon 665.  It has plenty of RAM and internal storage, fast WiFi connection, and offers both 4.4mm/3.5mm PO and LO, 3.5mm Coax, and other digital connections.  A truly great battery life with fast charging and a user-replaceable battery is just the icing on the cake, in addition to a quite powerful output.

Its audio performance was probably what surprised me the most.  Keeping it close to a neutral sound signature, iBasso still managed to tune it with plenty of detail retrieval, excellent dynamics, and realistic soundstage expansion without exaggeration.  Plus, its black background with a very low noise floor is what makes DX180 stand out not only from other entry-level models but also from some mid-fi and maybe even higher-end DAPs.  I’m impressed!