Snorry NM-1 planar-magnetic headphones

Opening​

As of today, Snorry is still not a well-known manufacturer, at least in the United States, which is confirmed by the google search. Nonetheless I’ve heard some good things about Snorry’s works from a few audio pals, and very fortunately, one of such great friends, @Failed Engineer , loaned me his pair for a long time (~10 weeks). I’ve shared my initial thoughts briefly somewhere else, but after more time spent with them. I thought it might be worth updating and working on a full review.

I will skip to discuss the technological background of meanderless drivers. The technology sounds interesting and makes sense to me if implemented ideally. But I am not confident to make technical judgments as I am nowhere close to a specialist in that area and there’s no robust way to verify the claims on my end. Also, for a broader population of hobbyists, focusing on what it sounds like would be more meaningful than what it is. There’s an informative discussion thread you may want to check out, too.

By the way, NM-1 was Snorry’s TOTL but is out of production and presumably replaced by the new model, TRION.

Do they sound uniquely and distinctly good? Let’s find out.

Setup / Associated Gears​

I did most of the in-depth evaluations with Gustard X18 as a primary dac. SMSL HO200 and Topping LA90 were tested to examine whether/what/how NM1 can benefit from different types of amplifiers (headphones amp vs 2ch integrated amp). I also hooked up with Benchmark AHB2, but only in local meets.

The NM-1 connected to amplifiers via XLR balanced outs (HO200) and XLR to Banana adapter (LA90). I didn’t use any digital processing/equalizer in evaluation except for 8x upsampling software on the digital domain.

Finally, Hifiman Susvara and Ollo S4R were used as reference headphones.

Appearance / Convenience / Comfort​

The loaner pair I evaluated was with blue stabilized birch wood housing. Build quality and aesthetics were pretty good. They’re a little heavy (~590g) but acceptably comfortable on my head because of thick/soft padding on top. The ear pads were thick, large/deep, airtight, and stiff, which remind me of classic Audeze ear pads (the ones they used prior to 2020).

Sound Impression​

Listening to test tones, the NM-1 reproduced the ⅓-octave warble tones (center frequency being ranged between 20hz and 1khz) on the Stereophile Test CD (1990) down to the 25hz band, with the 50 and 63hz warbles a bit higher in level than those on either side. 25 and 31.5hz tones were attenuated. 20hz tone was inaudible. For this price level orthos, I tend to prefer a more linear and deeper extension. Despite their somewhat restricted lower bass extension, NM-1’s bass reproduction circled many items on my checklist. Bass was fast, tight, and well-defined.

Aside: Please note that all my tone-hearing statements were DID (difference in difference) and made relative to my reference, Susvara -- so that I can avoid equal-loudness pitfalls.

Tracks like Hiroyuki Sawano’s bass-heavy track “1st movement, Banshee” in the symphonic suite UC2012 (2012) were illustrating what NM-1 could and couldn’t do. Busy passages among various groups of synthetic percussion instruments were well-separated, but bass drums were obviously not as present due to lacking fundamentals. Is this attributable to meanderless drivers? IDK. But I didn’t hear this way for other reference implementations of rectangular magnet-based planars. Please note that, because we’re talking about planars, I’m asking for far more difficult bars than when I evaluate electrodynamic products.

The NM-1’s bass lacks warmth a little and it caused some trade-offs in vocal reproduction. Male and female vocals lacked a bit of body, but hi-hat and cymbals had a good amount of body and meat. PRaT was mostly good but a bit too fast for my taste. I’m assuming the transients were tuned tightly on purpose. Whether it’s good or bad would highly depend on musical contexts. For example, I could hear the acoustic guitars decaying faster in Damien Rice’s “Cannonball” in the “0” (2022) than I would like. On the other hand, they were responsive enough to separately and accurately track up to 25 female voices in “Girl’s legend U” in the “Pretty Derby Winning Live” (2021).

NM-1’s treble is very well controlled to say the least. Tonality was nicely down-tilted, but slightly nuanced around ear gain and sparkle regions, which combinedly make them sound neither dull nor sibilant at all. Nothing was overly done. They’re one of the best sounding tonal balances I’ve heard from stock orthos. I initially heard a resonant peak around 4.5khz but eventually it didn’t bother me in any circumstances. No matter what I threw in -- such as the metallic sesion in the introduction part of “Moment Ring” by μ’s (2016) or harshly recorded vocals of “Tokonatsu Sunshine” by Liella (2021), I could always rock without any annoyance.

One minor downside of their highs is the timbre (largely affected by treble reproduction as most harmonics play around this frequency range). I say minor because I’m personally not too obsessive in timbral realism. But I could hear plastic-ish and artificial timbres which remind me of older HFM headphones such as HE1000. Edlinger’s rendition of Sammartini’s recorder concerto in F major (Naxos, 2012) demonstrated this problem explicitly. For example, the recorder solo part in this track sounded very plasticky, less deep, less prominent reverb, and somewhat lacking expressional power (all by comparison). It sounded as if the soloist used a much cheaper recorder. Bottomline, timbre-first audiophiles should be aware.

NM-1’s soundstage was open and holographic. Probably due to the thick pads, I could hear a moderately wide stage with everything sounding with good distance and depth. In terms of accuracy, listening to the “Ultimate Headphones Test '' video clip (Abyss, 2020), I found NM-1 was mostly accurate in imaging location. Z-axis (depth) often seems a bit off but not too seriously.

Speaking of the pairing, I could enjoy several different pairings in driving NM-1 during my evaluation. While they’re not very amp picky, they’re inherently inefficient headphones. I found they benefit from 2ch integrated or power amplifiers than headphones amplifiers on average, possibly because of superior current capability (at the cost of increased noise floor). I really liked how NM-1 was driven by my reference integrated amplifier, Topping LA90. The amp pulls more than sufficient current (competitive advantage over headlamps) yet exhibits extremely low noise level in both subjective and objective aspects (advantages over other power amplifiers). I could hear similar or even greater benefits from Benchmark’s AHB2. NM-1’s dark sounding seems to match AHB2 slightly better. Unfortunately, AHB2 revealed NM-1’s timbre issues a bit more aggressively.

Measurements​

I am also attaching my own measurements of the loaner pair. All the measurements were done with MiniDSP EARS and my own compensation curve (HPN in lows + HEQ in highs + some adjustments) which I calibrated to make the flat horizontal line be close to perceived neutral balance. Results were averaged through multiple repositions and smoothed in the 1/24 octaves.

I’d emphasize that associating deviation from the target to one-dimensional quality (good vs bad) might be hugely misleading. There are various traps and pitfalls caused by individual HRTF variation (huge), different assumptions on artificial ears, and/or acoustic interactions between headphones and measurement devices. Thus, please do not over-interpret my results.

Below are comparative plots against HD650 and Susvara. Both wielded with the stock pads.

Conclusion​

Snorry has claimed the traditional (as opposed to meanderless) magnets might cause several acoustic disadvantages including diaphragm overdamping, more HF distortions, lack of openness. I’m still doubting if NM-1 successfully proved them all. What I found was they did sound different and unique in their own light. I’m rather under the impression that Snorry’s approach still has a long way to go.

But please don’t get me wrong. Although NM-1 did not perfectly satisfy my appetite, I am still confident to call them a solid-sounding pair of headphones. In most modern recordings where timbre is less important, NM-1’s fast, tight, and detail-oriented sounding made me keep listening for hours. If you can snag a used NM-1 for reasonable prices and like to hear a lot of electronic genres, they are very likely a great tool for you to seriously enjoy music. That being said, I’m now really curious what Snorry’s new TOTL Trion will bring to the table.

Addendum: Comparison to Susvara and HD650​

As requested, I’d like to make a brief comparison against my reference headphones.

Let me first compare them to Susvara. In terms of perceived tonality and balance, Susvara is closer to what I deem a reference. Susvara went deeper in lower bass, had smoother and more even treble, and a lot more extending top ends and air region. On the other hand, NM-1 was a bit recessed and forgiving in the middle treble where I found Susvara occasionally a little hot for me. I always found Susvara had a bit of unique coloration in the midrange which was never found in NM-1 -- but I really don’t think it's Susvara's shortcoming at all.

Moving on to technicalities, I don’t quite think they belong to the same league. Susvara is more solving and detail retrieving top to bottom. While NM-1 per se wasn’t bad in resolving pitches and tiny details by any means, Susvara just did everything more impressively. Fine gradation conveyed by multiple tympanys, subtle nuances of vocal techniques, and breathing details of soloists were not easy to be fully heard without the aid of Susvara. Plus, everything is done with great spatial location -- almost to the exaggerated extent. Indeed I haven’t heard any other headphones doing these better than Susvara at lower prices.

Compared to HD650, they’re both pretty well balanced in tonality. But NM-1 generally shows better performance in technicalities. NM-1 is obviously more slamming, comes with better dynamic and punchier sound, and doesn't exhibit any hint of veil in highs. Better sense of spatial location and layering, too. HD650 still holds its own in more realistic timbre and fuller-bodied human voices.

BACKGROUND

My first acquaintance with Snorry products happened a couple of years ago, that time it was SI-1 mk2.
I was quite skeptical on the performance of those not very expensive planar magnetic headphones.

That time I had HD800S in combination with Violectric amp and DAC. I also had closed planars from MrSpeakers in my home collection.

I could never imagine that these headphones could fully replace the top-end Sennheiser headphones.

I ordered them on my friend’s advice who highly praised Snorry for its natural sound. But I couldn't believe that I can get good sound for such money. I thought that it was not a big risk taking the price into account.

Some time later I came to the conclusion that Si-1 mk2 fully met my requirements. They did not give a huge soundstage and resolution of HD800S, they did not sparkle with highs but they sounded more natural in everything. They were producing excellent quality bass, which I could not get in the hd800s.

A bit later there was an information that Sergey worked on a new flagship. Several pre-production units were made. One of them came to me.

For more than a year I have had these headphones. During that time they went to Snorry for upgrades several times.

As a result pre-production NM-1 became the main and the only headphones for my desktop application. I also keep Si-1 mk2, as they are more for portable use when I leave the NM-1 at home.

By the way, here is the official website https://snorryplanar.com/

Now about NM-1 serial version in detail.


BUILD. FIT. TECHNOLOGY BEHIND

Here is the spec from the official web site:

Type of transducers: non meander, planar (patent RU2717699)
Magnetic system: double-sided, high-power neodymium magnets
Acoustic enclosure: open
Impedance: 40 Ohm
Sensitivity: 95 dB
Frequency range: 5-35000 Hz
Weight: 500 grams

The key point here is a patent for a so called “non meander” technology.

I asked Sergey (aka Snorry) to explain to me the meaning of “non meander” technology in a simple way without going deep into scientific or engineering discussions. What is the difference with a regular planar-magnetic technology?

Here is his explanation - “Briefly - in this design the resolution is higher due to the reduction of mutual interference from closely spaced groups of tracks with the opposite direction”. Not sure if I correctly translated all what he said but my conclusion is that this is all about headphone resolution.

NM-1 come in a nice portable case with a 2 m “Snorry advanced” cable inside. It is 2x mini XLR to 6.3 mm in base, but it can be 2 x mini XLR to 4 pin XLR if you need a balanced connection to your system. You need to inform Snorry in advance.

I don’t have a detailed information about the cable structure but it is the cable that makes NM-1 sound like NM-1. I tried a couple of other cables with them and always went back to the original one – it just sounds right!

The headphones carry a certain “steampunk” design with ear cups made of carbon. I personally like it, but for those who are for a more classical view there is a wooden version available.

The mechanism over the head band looks a little bit odd but works just fine. These little cylinders create a good pressure (not too tight) to hold the headphones on your head steady and tight enough.
I feel comfortable using them for long listening sessions. It’s very individual after all.

SYSTEM REQUIRMENTS

The manufacturer speaks of a minimum 2 watts per channel but from my experience the more the better.

In fact, the selection of a decent and powerful source for these headphones is a never-ending process. The only limitation will be your budget and taste. That time I had Violectric hpa v181 which drove the HD800S perfectly but did not cope with the NM-1.

At the end I chose a combo from Burson Audio (as one of the best price/performance combination), with Composer 3XP as a DAC (in pre amp mode) and Soloist 3XP as an amplifier (in hp power amp mode). I love how this whole combination sounds together.

Burson Audio combo gives a close to neutral, slightly smooth in a good way, transparent, and detailed sound without being too analytical.
The combo gets the signal from my Roon Server (Intel NUC on ROCK) via Audioquest Cinnamon type C- type-C cable.
Oyaide Tunami TERZO V2 is used for interconnect XLR cables.
Additionally Burson Super Charger 3A is used for Soloist as an advanced external power supply unit.

I also had a chance to plug NM-1 into some other sources like Niimbus US 4 , Violectric DHA V590, SPL Phonitors, MS Audio Laboratory (by the way, FHA 1.3 is a decent amp for its money). NM-1 also sounded perfect with Niimbus but the amp is not the most cheapest on the market as you know

I had a chance to listen to one DIY tube amplifier of a local enthusiast, which also positively impressed me. If the budget allows, a good tube amp can be a nice addition to a SS amplifier to experience the NM-1 from all sides. They do play well with a good tube amp too.


SOUND IMPRESSIONS

To my ears the tonality is neutral, or let me call it naturally neutral. It is not “cold” sounding and emotionless. It keeps “life” in the sound and everything you hear sounds natural without any coloration at the same time.

The first thing you hear is resolution the headphones provide.

The sound comes out freely with no hint of any congestion, bringing a lot of air between instruments. Needless to say that instrument and channel separation is also great.

Detail retrieval is at a very high level. No complaints from my side. All nuances are very well defined, delivered and heard.

The second key point of NM-1 is a "full-bodied" sound, ie. the sound has weight, the notes have weight. No matter if it is a double bass or a guitar with distortion or cymbals, you get a complete picture of what the instruments deliver.

Bass is linear, clean, tight and fast. Basically, it is very well shown on the FR curve.

The images are large and very well 3-Dimensionally defined.

The sound stage is large enough, maybe not the largest on the market as with HD800S or 1266 but it is definitely above the average.


FINAL THOUGHTS

It was not my intention to compare NM-1 with some other TOTL planar magnetic headphones on the market, as to make a detailed comparison you need to have all these headphones at home at the same time. I had a chance to go through some TOTL Audeze and Abyss planars in parallel with NM-1 but that was not enough to draw any serious conclusion.

For me personally NM-1 can play in the Top Of The List league…