[Gus141]

Regarding ZX507 firmware versions with IER-Z1R/IER-M9/MDR-Z1R (balanced, high output):
On the previous firmware I preferred Direct:Off (with all effects off) because Direct:On had a slight muffled quality to it. On this firmware I prefer Direct:On. It is cleaner; less reverb in the mids. For me, that’s the biggest difference that I notice with Direct OFF, where there is a little reverb in the mids that brings the mids forward some, which may be desired if you have Sony headphones/earphones that have the classic V-shaped recessed mids (I have come to love that V Shape so I don’t like to mess with it and hence I like Direct:On better).

My impressions of new firmware:
—the Direct:On vs Direct:Off (and all Effects off) is like switching between a Linear Phase Fast (Sharp) filter and a Minimum Phase Fast (Short-Delay Sharp) filter on DACs that allow filter switching. It’s subtle. But the Direct:On is like a Linear Phase Fast (Sharp) filter and the Direct:Off/with all effects off is like a Minimum Phase Fast (Short Delay Sharp) filter. The sound is slightly “fuller” with Direct:Off but in my opinion a little less accurate. Select based on your preference. There really is no wrong answer since both settings sound great.
—DSEE HX:On (with Direct:OFF of course) is better than last firmware with less sibilance as @Sonywalkmanuser mentioned, but in my opinion is not great with high-res music and should only be used for music less than CD quality (44.1kHz/16).
—boot up and interface seems faster
—don’t see any reason not to upgrade

cheers,
Gus

Edit:
I’ve been listening to a lot of different music to try out the new firmware and I have noticed that some older recordings sound better with Direct:Off. Bad Company, Led Zep, Tracy Chapman, etc. all sound more ”opened up” with Direct:Off (no Effects on) vs Direct:ON. So, for me, looks like I can’t rely on one setting “to rule them all” and will have to change as necessary. As a general rule, older recordings with good dynamic range (ones you had to turn up the volume on always) sound best to me with Direct:Off (no effects on). Newer music with less dynamic range sounds best to me with Direct:On.

 

[jaker782]

Been doing A/B testing with my DX160 and they are very different sounding devices.

Care to elaborate a bit? I just picked up a DX160 and am tempted by the ZX507 as well, but haven't been able to find many direct comparisons. Thanks!

 

[Sonywalkmanuser]

It seems on this new firmware, even on low gain, the single ended output of the zx507 is able to drive my MDR-1AM2 with great authority. 90/120 Low provides comfortably loud listening level. Although High gain still sounded better in dynamics with more strength in cymbal clashes. I feel there is less harmonic distortion when you push the volume to max on Low gain.

I would say the single ended output of the zx507 has now reach an acceptable level of musicality that you can get away with using it instead of the 4.4mm. Do note 4.4mm is still much better in refinement and soundstaging, just that now the 3.5mm output sounds really nice too.

 

[Sonywalkmanuser]

What I find with this new firmware's DSEE HX, it's kinda like applying unsharp mask filter in photoshop.
It's either a hit or miss depending on the music's recording. If your music is already recorded with excellent clarity/resolution, then DSEE HX effect might just end up sounding over-processed and unnatural. With more fuzzy or low bit rate lossy recordings, DSEE HX seems to do better.




As for me, with this new firmware, I find that Direct Source ON sounded best to my ears, there's more resolution and soundstage width. Direct Sorce Off, DSP off sounded more closed in with narrower soundstage but has slightly fuller bass. DSEE HX On worked better with youtube or other lossy streaming sources.

 

[Pro-Jules]

Because it's an audio product and Sony is trying to improve it's sound quality through updates? Is that not possible?

Just like a PlayStation console, router, smartphone, Tesla or any other product out there. Companies change/improve/cost down their product formulation all the time. Some inform customers through change in packaging or change logs. some don't. There isn't a clear guideline or regulation on what they need to tell or explain.

there’s a logic loop somewhere in that argument.
Sony will have been pleased enough with the sonics to release the product. To publicly admit that it’s a product that requires continuous sonic improvements - is to admit that it wasn’t top quality on its release.

the battle with Android and processors that have difficulty running the device efficiently (giving decent battery life or running too hot) is a Sony engineering issue I CAN imagine that is dealt with via upgrades.

I think it’s fantasy to think that there is a person @ Sony tasked with continually bringing micro sonic improvement to this one device. Again, was it bad to start with?

Anyhow Sony can be secretive and it’s their right to be (some tech details on LDAC remain, mysterious and unexplained.) Perhaps the 507 IS an ongoing test bench beta project.

we would only know if Sony told us via product development blog posts.

but as a recording studio veteran I know the only way to test before and after would be to have an updated device and a not updated device side by side and to perform a/b tests with swapping between them at high speed (swapover in less than 3 seconds) because - unless the swapping is lightning fast - the brain simply cannot keep the the (comparative) old sound signature in memory.

EDIT read this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic_memory

So waking up, performing an update and ‘referencing’ the new sound to the sound you were listening to 12 hours ago - is totally nonsense and just scientifically not going to be accurate. Most likely, wishfull thinking, your minds alterness and your ears earwax status are more significant factors at play.

The above paragraph damms about 1/3rd of the cable and device evaluation arguments here so I understand it’s provocative. I bought fancy cable but the the time it took to swap my iems on and off the old cable took too long for me to make any meaningful comparisons. So.... I just got on with using the new cable.i didn't write a load of gibberish about mids more forward or soundstage.

Lets hope Sony blog about it.

 

[Sonywalkmanuser]

I think the Walkman team is pretty small division inside of Sony as compare to their Xperia or Playstation line. The sound quality/software engineering is probably only handled by a handful of staffs. Maybe @nanaholic would know more about them.

I guess ZX507 began as its conception as a litmus tester project for the streaming market, it has since changed. Sony did not place the zx507 in its signature series back in 2019. It was only recently that the zx507 was added to it's signature series website. Maybe given the poor global economic outlook, I speculate Sony decided that the zx507 price point now fits a higher tier market and is trying to sell more units of this Walkman as oppose to releasing the next flagship. Thus there is a renewed development for this zx500/A100 series.


Sony has previously added new DSP(Vinyl Processor) to it's WM1 series post launch, so we can't deny that Sony won't do things to improve it's product's functionality(including sound quality).

Maybe Sony Engineers found new ways to reduce running power consumption of the zx507 System on Chip which inturn frees up more available battery current for the S-Master HX amplifer to draw upon. That could possibly be an area which sound quality can improve post design.

I am guessing the reason why Sony(and most audio companies) never communicates about sound changes in it's update log is to avoid generating extra customer support request where the users who don't hear the difference starts emailing to question about not hear anything new and also there's will be another grumpy group who didn't like the sound change, starts sending emails to demand sound change rollback and etc.

 

[psikey]

I bought fancy cable but the the time it took to swap my iems on and off the old cable took too long for me to make any meaningful comparisons. So.... I just got on with using the new cable.i didn't write a load of gibberish about mids more forward or soundstage.

Lets hope Sony blog about it.

I agree with much of what you posted but did actually have a proper appreciation of the cable improvement or not.

I actually had two pair of SE846's until recently so was able to do direct comparrison of different cables between the two.

Without going into detail I had a few low & mid level cables plus Sony Kimber premium cable and a pure silver cable.

All the copper or copper/silver cables sounded the same or as near that I couldn't notice a difference with any certainty. The only one I could notice a significant difference was the Pure Silver one.

I tested the resistivity of the cables (with meter) and the silver was obviously different to the copper.

My conclussion was that already low 8ohm SE846's were impacted by the lower/higher resistivity of the cable.

The Kimber cable also sound slightly different to the other copper cables but again its resistivity was different to the others. For me, with exception of pure silver, the cable is more about style/fit/comfort.

 

[Pro-Jules]

I agree with much of what you posted but did actually have a proper appreciation of the cable improvement or not.

I actually had two pair of SE846's until recently so was able to do direct comparrison of different cables between the two.

Without going into detail I had a few low & mid level cables plus Sony Kimber premium cable and a pure silver cable.

All the copper or copper/silver cables sounded the same or as near that I couldn't notice a difference with any certainty. The only one I could notice a significant difference was the Pure Silver one.

I tested the resistivity of the cables (with meter) and the silver was obviously different to the copper.

My conclussion was that already low 8ohm SE846's were impacted by the lower/higher resistivity of the cable.

The Kimber cable also sound slightly different to the other copper cables but again its resistivity was different to the others. For me, with exception of pure silver, the cable is more about style/fit/comfort.

see - I trust your ability to judge as you described how you had the right configuration of equipment to be able to swap the test subjects within 3 seconds.

Someone doing an iem / cable swap would take far more than 10 seconds to do

you would have to do all that and remember exactly how it all sounded 15 / 20 seconds ago.(It’s not really possible. )

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic_memory

Play test track to asses original cable sound
take out of ear 1
Take out of ear 2
Detach iem 1
Detach iem 2
Unplug from dap.
Attach new cable to iem 1
Attach new cable to iem 2
Plug into dap
Put iem in ear 1
Put iem in ear 2
Play test track to asses new cable sound

that’s too long for a good a/b test

 

[Ryokan]

there’s a logic loop somewhere in that argument.
Sony will have been pleased enough with the sonics to release the product. To publicly admit that it’s a product that requires continuous sonic improvements - is to admit that it wasn’t top quality on its release.

the battle with Android and processors that have difficulty running the device efficiently (giving decent battery life or running too hot) is a Sony engineering issue I CAN imagine that is dealt with via upgrades.

I think it’s fantasy to think that there is a person @ Sony tasked with continually bringing micro sonic improvement to this one device. Again, was it bad to start with?

Anyhow Sony can be secretive and it’s their right to be (some tech details on LDAC remain, mysterious and unexplained.) Perhaps the 507 IS an ongoing test bench beta project.

we would only know if Sony told us via product development blog posts.

but as a recording studio veteran I know the only way to test before and after would be to have an updated device and a not updated device side by side and to perform a/b tests with swapping between them at high speed (swapover in less than 3 seconds) because - unless the swapping is lightning fast - the brain simply cannot keep the the (comparative) old sound signature in memory.

EDIT read this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic_memory

So waking up, performing an update and ‘referencing’ the new sound to the sound you were listening to 12 hours ago - is totally nonsense and just scientifically not going to be accurate. Most likely, wishfull thinking, your minds alterness and your ears earwax status are more significant factors at play.

The above paragraph damms about 1/3rd of the cable and device evaluation arguments here so I understand it’s provocative. I bought fancy cable but the the time it took to swap my iems on and off the old cable took too long for me to make any meaningful comparisons. So.... I just got on with using the new cable.i didn't write a load of gibberish about mids more forward or soundstage.

Lets hope Sony blog about it.

I hear a difference in cables, especially comparing with stock, and use copper with certain devices/iem's and a silver cable with others.

 

[bland125]

Care to elaborate a bit? I just picked up a DX160 and am tempted by the ZX507 as well, but haven't been able to find many direct comparisons. Thanks!

I certainly can. While I think it sounds fine by itself, it is a dry sound in comparison to the ZX507. It's doesn't have the bass extension, overall lushness and tamed highs of the ZX507. The DX160 strikes me as much more neutral device. They are both good but different sounding.

The user experience is similar but the DX160 screen is something to behold by itself, wow! I find the rest similar with the ZX507 leading in fit and finish, it feels more expensive and since it is, it had to be. The battery seems similar but the DX160 seems to have quite some more power.

Note that I have hundreds of hours on the ZX507 and maybe 5 to 10 with the DX160. Using both the 4.4mm out and CA Polaris V2 mostly. I tried the 3.5mm with a few budget hyped IEMs and didn't notice anything particular.

 

[equalspeace]

don’t sleep on the neutron app on this player. sounds fantastic

 

[jaker782]

I certainly can. While I think it sounds fine by itself, it is a dry sound in comparison to the ZX507. It's doesn't have the bass extension, overall lushness and tamed highs of the ZX507. The DX160 strikes me as much more neutral device. They are both good but different sounding.

The user experience is similar but the DX160 screen is something to behold by itself, wow! I find the rest similar with the ZX507 leading in fit and finish, it feels more expensive and since it is, it had to be. The battery seems similar but the DX160 seems to have quite some more power.

Note that I have hundreds of hours on the ZX507 and maybe 5 to 10 with the DX160. Using both the 4.4mm out and CA Polaris V2 mostly. I tried the 3.5mm with a few budget hyped IEMs and didn't notice anything particular.

Thanks so much! The tonality of the DX160 is definitely growing on me. The screen is gorgeous and It is so open and spacious sounding compared to the ZX300. The DX160 doesn't seem to highlight any particular frequency, it is very balanced and neutral, but not too dry or clinical as I still find the sound very engaging with a bit of warmth. Even though I am quite happy thus far with the 160, I am tempted to pick up a ZX507 just for a different flavor as I am rather fond of the Sony house sound!

 

[jaker782]

Does the ZX507 exhibit the issue with artwork images not displaying on the DAP unless they are progressive jpegs? This drove me crazy on the ZX300 and WM1 series.

 

[Sonywalkmanuser]

don’t sleep on the neutron app on this player. sounds fantastic

Sounds like even the upsampling android driver layer has improved after this update. Now I dont find the Walkman app to sound much better than Neutron. It's probably a tie on initial listening.

 

[equalspeace]

Sounds like even the upsampling android driver layer has improved after this update. Now I dont find the Walkman app to sound much better than Neutron. It's probably a tie on initial listening.

yeah i think the walkman app sounds clearer and is a bit better at resolving micro details, while still having the right amount of warmth. the walkman house sound is just about perfect in terms tonality on direct mode. neutron has this v analogue sound that’s satisfying too. overall i prefer the walkman app in terms of sound quality, but i like neutron for its dsp capability. i think neutron runs down the battery a bit more quickly too for what that’s worth