[buzzlulu]

As someone who has had the Z1R's for lengthy multi week sessions (but sent them back) I concur with what many current owners have said in terms of their pro's and weaknesses. They remain a headphone which still has made quite an impression on me.

I am surprised that more have not experimented with third party cables in an effort to ameliorate some of their shortfalls. I have only really seen one person who has commented positively on the Wireworld Nano Platinum Silver cable which he said dramatically improved upon some of the weaknesses in these cans.

If I were to try them yet again (third time the charm?) I would definitely try them with a different cable.

Any further updates or impressions from those who have tried other cables with the Z1R's?

 

[gto88]

I have not watched Tyll's review yet, but as a reputable reviewer in this community, comparing
a TOTL headphone to a much less price one is kind of insult to the manufacture, don't you think.
Considering the time Sony R&D put in this headphone. A least respect to them is not overly asked.
I bought Z1R mostly based on impression of head-fi'ers on this thread, not any serious reviewers'.
if most people enjoy it, it is a good one.
It might be a faith leap, but I chose to trust majority instead of a few.

 

[sarinfuhrer]

Tyll takes on SQ of Z1R was absurd(and so with k812, which i disagree with his assessment). When he jumped into conclusion that m50x is better, then he failed miserably to tell reader what to look for sound. He might be right to recommend M50 over Z1R, in term of cost/performance. But for pure hi-fidelity sound reproduction, it's not. Z1R might share tonal similarity with cheaper headphone but that ends there. M50 for example, has grainy mids(lower resolution) and edgy treble compared to Z1R. Minutes detail matters.

 

[pitch_black]

Tyll can pull a mr speakers again and put it up suprisingly on the wall fame (on a second chance listen (remember that?)

Im suprised about some of his observstions it makes me wonder if he possibly recieved a defective unit.

Defective or a fake..... otherwise I can't explain his opinion.

 

[latestyle]

Well, in the not-too-distant past, Tyll was trampling on LCD4s to extol Utopias... then Bob Katz and his cadre of recording engineers unanimously favored LCD4 over Utopias. Then the measuring neuroses kicked in, with Tyll ultimately declaring his Utopia unit was an anomaly. Madcap fun! Proclamations, justifications and retractions, and audiophile sleuthing on the fly!

Two lessons from above (and Z1R review), at least for me: 1. listening (especially audiophiliac preferences) is subjective, which means: 2. type of "analysis" that Tyll or others indulge in isn't - or just cannot be - correlative to how we enjoy our gear and music in life.

 

[canali]

Okay, the only thing this review tells me is that my personal preferences are now vastly different from Tyl's. First it was the Elears, he loves those things but I just can't get into them. Now it's the Z1R, I love 'em but they are clearly not his cup of tea...ATH M50s, really!?

It's all good, just another data point to use for future reference...next!

agree...imo he lost some credibility preferring the mx50s. ...like seriously.
I mean he's on SABF (is he on here?) so am sure they're delighted at his opinion/review.

 

[jirams]

I have just deleted my desktop shortcut to Innerfidelity.

 

[Rowethren]

I have just deleted my desktop shortcut to Innerfidelity.

Might be a bit extreme lol... He is entitled to him opinion give him a break

 

[jirams]

Might be a bit extreme lol... He is entitled to him opinion give him a break

I don't muck about!

 

[beowulf]

I for one greatly enjoy the z1r I agree with beauwolf when it comes to closed cans these are really a solid pair. I think the price is its biggest con. When tyll said that sony should really listen to there headphones I lol'd I think the big picture here was that sony was trying to do something different and they did.

I think they're outstanding, actually. Price could be better, considering they are not total all-rounders (few headphones are, but the Z1R are not something you want to use with excessively bassy tracks).
Right now I'm listening to Doug MacLeod's "There's a time" and the sense of space, the overall clarity and sharpness you get on the guitar (without any excessive brightness) is just perfect... Truly well recorded album.

An Utopia wouldn't get you this nice meaty full roomy feeling, an HD800S wouldn't get you the fun, foot-tappin' bass, full, impacting without being woolly or killing lower mids and vocals. It's just good.

Is it good with every album I load? Nope. Is it bad as you'd deduct from Tyll's review? To my opinion, no, but I do respect him for being so blunt about a model he disliked - perhaps excessively, IMHO. But who knows. He loved the HD800 many years ago and later considered a sharp, thin ear-razor, so tastes change.

PS. Anyone using the iDSD Black Label, try using the 3D analog circuit in albums that are too naturally bass and narrow. Might surprise you. I don't use it often, but when it works, it works great. (XBass+ is ON all the time with the 800/800S tho).

The truth is a lot of the music I listen to are modern j-pop songs which are FAR from being mastered nicely, or even good, and the issue with a lot of the TOTL which goes for ultra-sharp resolution is that they are simply TOO revealing for j-pop songs that it reveals the faults/aliasing due to loudness/whatever else mistakes the engineer made, and that makes me hate the music I listen to, which I don't think should be the goal of enjoying music.

I suspect J-Pop had quite some weight in the tuning of the Z1R. I don't listen to it, but there are equivalent masterings in other types sometimes.
I don't think the Z1R are lacking any resolution. They don't feel ultra-sharp, but the detail is there. When I first got them I kept feeling I was losing detail in a track, because they're just warmer, silkier and overall sound is fuller (not just bass), so I compared A:B with the HD800, HD800S and MDR-CD3000 (which is a biocell treble/brightness/detail monster).

In every time, I noticed I could hear the same resolution and detail with the Z1R. It was still there, just smoothed out, without the grain of the CD3000 or the occasional sibilance of the 800 (and even 800S). Play some ultra bassy, warm/muffled music with them, and they won't sound nice.

Play some Jordi Savall's "La Folia" (awesome recording in detail and soundstage) side by side with an unmodded HD800 and you'll see the Z1R is not losing any detail. (Although in this particular case I prefer the 800 due to the extra sense of space and that zing it adds to string instruments).

 

[kman1211]

Tyll takes on SQ of Z1R was absurd(and so with k812, which i disagree with his assessment). When he jumped into conclusion that m50x is better, then he failed miserably to tell reader what to look for sound. He might be right to recommend M50 over Z1R, in term of cost/performance. But for pure hi-fidelity sound reproduction, it's not. Z1R might share tonal similarity with cheaper headphone but that ends there. M50 for example, has grainy mids(lower resolution) and edgy treble compared to Z1R. Minutes detail matters.

I'll have to agree. Having heard the Z1R(at length and multiple times) and M50X, they aren't even comparable, the fidelity of the Z1R is far far greater, the M50X is so unpleasant and fatiguing to listen to, I threw them off with disgust, like you said the treble is unpleasant and the mids are grainy, the M40X(which I own) has the same problem but it's somewhat tolerable as it tones down the treble. Agree about the K812, he really damaged that headphones reputation with his review.

 

[rnros]

OK, I also admit to being confused. True, I don't always agree with IF/TH reviews, sometimes strongly disagree.
However, I have always believed he's 'telling it like he hears it'... although, perhaps, in conjunction with how he (tone-sweep) measures it.

This time, I'm not sure what's going on, unless he has a defective Z1R, that would explain the extreme perception gap, and the questionable comments.
In that case, his comments might actually be accurate.

I was put off by the 'diaphragm modal break-up' and 'small magnet/voicecoil' suggestions, and I was quick to agree that his comment might be "rather casual and possibly worthless." But, that would be because my Z1R is an incredible audio experience. So, maybe his techno-comments are actually an attempt to be helpful and explain why his Z1R sample is so awful.

Comparison is made with the AEON noting that it "provided a much better sense of an integrated whole; the Sony in comparison was disjointed and incoherent." I have the AEON, think it is a outstanding headphone, nothing but good things to say about it, but, I also think the Z1R surpasses the Aeon. That's not a negative assessment for the AEON, it is an incredible headphone (and especially for QPR). However, IMHO, for every performance aspect/category, the Z1R matches or exceeds the AEON. Sure, some may prefer the AEON, but not because they are dramatically different (and certainly not because the Z1R is "disjointed and incoherent" by comparison).

Point being, if Tyll has a positive impression of the AEON, I believe he would also have a very positive impression of my Z1R... But NO, I'm not sending my Z1R to Inner Fidelity. Anyway, why did it take so long for IF to get a review pair?

My 2 cents for the discussion.

 

[Whitigir]

Now let Bob has a positive review and see what happen next

 

[raulromanjr]

Not really, the real issue is that people don't understand that there is a giant wall which separates the objective measurements and the subjective sound preferences. There is only an objectively measurable criteria for *accurate sound reproduction*, but there is no objective standard for what is a *good sound*.

Agree totally!

 

[jirams]

Hertsen's mini lecture on the physics of diaphragm break-up was somewhat odd, even insulting.