[olddude]

Yes, I noticed too at Canjam NY, the WM1Z was present in quite few stands, while the SP1000 mostly absent.
I spent quite some time (hours) at the EA booth and tried both the Legend and the Phantom with my AK and the Sony, and especially the Legend sounded better with the SP1000.

Broke my heart but saved my wallet that EA wasn't at CanJam SoCal. I would have probably snapped up a Lionheart.

 

[colonelkernel8]

Alex is a great guy, and in his review touched several aspects and qualities of the SP1000 and WM1Z that I can guarantee you are true, like I wrote before.

Did you tried any of these players?

I have tried the WM1Z. It's pretty.

 

[olddude]

@twister6, thanks for the review!

Two questions for you:
1) do you know whether the SS and CU you compared were both adequately burned in? I know that the sound signature of my SS seemed to change significantly after 50-100 hours of burn-in, and when I see comparative reviews like yours, I always wonder whether some of the sound differences can be attributed to a different level of burn-in across units.
2) How significant are the differences between SS and CU that you heard? Are we talking super glaringly obvious (which is what @olddude seems to imply) or are we talking subtle, and only really apparent if you're doing A/B testing?

I really wish I'd been able to hear both prior to having to make my decision. But generally speaking I prefer detail over bass/warmth (used to use the white filters on my SE846 for example), so I think I made the right choice with the SS...

As a side note, I also want to commend AK on this amazing product. I've had mine for almost three months now, and it continues to wow me every time I listen to it. Coupled with my KSE1500, I feel like it's one of the most impressive pieces of technology that I own. Being able to hear such amazing sound from a source that fits into my pocket, when I go for a walk, is such a great experience.

I don't think I said super glaringly obvious. I said I could easily hear the difference. The AK person at the booth agreed, and said he preferred the SS. If you had never heard either, and you weren't used to this level of player, you might not notice it at all. Or barely. I listen to mine daily, critically, and the difference was easy to hear.

 

[kubig123]

Broke my heart but saved my wallet that EA wasn't at CanJam SoCal. I would have probably snapped up a Lionheart.

Oh no, you have to try the Janus D, it pairs beautifully with the EE Phantom

 

[olddude]

I'm sure the Maserati I want would pair with my Phantom nicely as well, but the odds of my getting that OR the Janus are about the same.

 

[twister6]

@twister6, thanks for the review!

Two questions for you:
1) do you know whether the SS and CU you compared were both adequately burned in? I know that the sound signature of my SS seemed to change significantly after 50-100 hours of burn-in, and when I see comparative reviews like yours, I always wonder whether some of the sound differences can be attributed to a different level of burn-in across units.
2) How significant are the differences between SS and CU that you heard? Are we talking super glaringly obvious (which is what @olddude seems to imply) or are we talking subtle, and only really apparent if you're doing A/B testing?

I really wish I'd been able to hear both prior to having to make my decision. But generally speaking I prefer detail over bass/warmth (used to use the white filters on my SE846 for example), so I think I made the right choice with the SS...

As a side note, I also want to commend AK on this amazing product. I've had mine for almost three months now, and it continues to wow me every time I listen to it. Coupled with my KSE1500, I feel like it's one of the most impressive pieces of technology that I own. Being able to hear such amazing sound from a source that fits into my pocket, when I go for a walk, is such a great experience.

Both of the units came straight from the battlefields of CanJam, NAMM, CES, and other shows. These loaners even came preloaded with all the flac and dsd samplers used by A&K at the shows. And on top of that, I put about 150hrs of SS burn in and about 75hrs of CU burn in.

As I'm hearing it and others commented, the difference in tonality between SS and CU is noticeable, especially with 1.06.

Btw, I also tried KSE-1500 with SP1000 SS at CanJam NYC, and was VERY impressed.

 

[theveterans]

Both of the units came straight from the battlefields of CanJam, NAMM, CES, and other shows. These loaners even came preloaded with all the flac and dsd samplers used by A&K at the shows. And on top of that, I put about 150hrs of SS burn in and about 75hrs of CU burn in.

As I'm hearing it and others commented, the difference in tonality between SS and CU is noticeable, especially with 1.06.

Btw, I also tried KSE-1500 with SP1000 SS at CanJam NYC, and was VERY impressed.

By any chance, anyone dropped by canjam and tried out Campfire’s comet with wm1a?

I tried it too there and thought the KSE-1500 is better than the U18t and Fourte after hearing all three

 

[Imusicman]

Just posted my detailed analysis/comparison (focus on sound performance only) of SP1000 SS vs SP1000 CU, including my impressions of the lastest fw 1.07 update, and as a bonus - a comparison to WM1Z. Full review of SP1000 to follow soon, but for now enjoy SS vs CU write up HERE.

Thank you for a very interesting comparison review. I for one will definitely look forward to your full review of the SP1000. Ive owned the WM1Z (fw1.2 & fw2.0) and since Sunday now own the SP1000SS (running fw1.07) so the timing was spot on for me!

I haven't had the opportunity to try the CU but will do at this years London CanJam if it's there.

Btw I think both the WM1Z and SP1000SS (can't comment on the CU but assume it will be the same) are the world class DAPS

P.s. Im probably going to get shot down for this but im also really enjoying the AK7011. I think it's brilliant and offers fantastic bang for your buck. Well worth a review if you get the chance

 

[twister6]

I tried it too there and thought the KSE-1500 is better than the U18t and Fourte after hearing all three

"Better" is very subjective Since it will depend on a personal preference and bias. To my ears, Fourte is bright and can get a bit overwhelming after extended listening, while I prefer U18t in this comparison, especially since you have flexibility of going between M15 and M20 apex modules to fine tune the sound. Another one I really enjoying lately is Mason V3, very unique design with that dual cable and bass port tuning. I only auditioned KSE-1500 for 10min, but it left a lasting impression with me as probably top 3 I heard to dare. The only thing, I personally prefer a simple dap/iem mobile setup and the dac/amp pack makes it more transportable rather than fully portable.

 

[twister6]

Thank you for a very interesting comparison review. I for one will definitely look forward to your full review of the SP1000. Ive owned the WM1Z (fw1.2 & fw2.0) and since Sunday now own the SP1000SS (running fw1.07) so the timing was spot on for me!

I haven't had the opportunity to try the CU but will do at this years London CanJam if it's there.

Btw I think both the WM1Z and SP1000SS (can't comment on the CU but assume it will be the same) are the world class DAPS

P.s. Im probably going to get shot down for this but im also really enjoying the AK7011. I think it's brilliant and offers fantastic bang for your buck. Well worth a review if you get the chance

No need to worry about being shot down. Head-fi is the place where you can exercise your rights of audiophile speech freedom It's part of the ammendments written by Jude, somewhere in the forum The final sound is a combination of both the source and the headphones, and often it's a journey to find the best synergy. So, if you enjoying it, that's all that matters, bro!

Curious, what made you switch from wm1z to sp1000? I'm sure there are others who might be in the same boat, and can benefit from your experience.

 

[lenkiatleong]

Technically, i'm with colonelkernel8 but many insisted that there are actual sound quality diff betwen cu and ss models. Not sure if it's placebo effect or did anyone actually done A/B test? I can only conclude that there may indeed have some different in the box componently!! Components? For example, Sony had been very upfront with their NW-WM1Z vs NW-WM1A where they gold plated the former cu case and declared some component differences between them. And Sony declared that the gold plate or cu vs ss does not enhance the sound. It's the components that matter.
I long suspect that AK cu MAY use slightly different component than ss model and the price diff is negligible. Hence same price with slightly diff sound signatures

Just my theory.

 

[twister6]

Technically, i'm with colonelkernel8 but many insisted that there are actual sound quality diff betwen cu and ss models. Not sure if it's placebo effect or did anyone actually done A/B test? I can only conclude that there may indeed have some different in the box componently!! Components? For example, Sony had been very upfront with their NW-WM1Z vs NW-WM1A where they gold plated the former cu case and declared some component differences between them. And Sony declared that the gold plate or cu vs ss does not enhance the sound. It's the components that matter.
I long suspect that AK cu MAY use slightly different component than ss model and the price diff is negligible. Hence same price with slightly diff sound signatures

Just my theory.

and I applaud your theory! Indeed, Sony, in addition to changing chassis, also changed the components. But, I have my own conspiracy theory, and it has something to do with that Pro EQ setting which can't be edited I just have a feeling it's tweaked between SS and CU, if everything else remains the same (pwb and all the compoments between SS and CU versions). Again, I have no other explanation, and of course, there is zero fact behind my theory so don't quote me on it lol!!!

 

[bidn]

Re. the issue of Cu vs SS :
These metallic enclosures form the common ground for the device's electrical components. I can give an example showing that this has an electrical reflect which cannot be subjective: using my LCDi4 in a room with carpet on the floor, with my AK240 ( whose ground has relatively less mass) the LCDi4 will get strongly audible electrostatic discharges (this was BTW reported by people other than me on the LCDi4 thread) but these discharges do not occur with my SP1000 which has much more mass for its ground.

Copper and steel have different electrical properties leading to possible differences in the device's ground, so it is not impossible for this to be heard with high-end players, as has often been reported about the AK380 and the SP1000.

Re. cables, with a treble resolving chain (RME → Utopia) and appropriate reference tracks I almost immediately hear the difference between copper ( Utopia stock or Nordost Heimdall) vs silver (Norne) and similar experiences have been so often reported that they cannot be disparaged. Therefore I would appreciate if your remarks contesting people's experiences would be restricted according to HF rules to the following (non-DBT free) forum:
https://www.head-fi.org/forums/sound-science.133/
I find your comments re. twister6 's experience the more inappropriate that you did not even try to experiment the comparisons SP1000SS vs SP1000cu, as twister6 pointed out and invited you to do before disparaging his findings.

Wishing you all a lot of pleasure with your music,
bidn

 

[tienbasse]

But, I have my own conspiracy theory, and it has something to do with that Pro EQ setting which can't be edited I just have a feeling it's tweaked between SS and CU, if everything else remains the same (pwb and all the compoments between SS and CU versions).

There is a relatively long list of things that could affect the sound signature beside the chassis and components:
- digital filters (which AK always refused to let user choose). Subtle effects but definitely perceptible if you know your music well.
- built-in equalizer with "non-flat" default profile (Pro-EQ indeed) and other effects (Cowon is pretty open about these, I'm not sure how open others brands really are, it entertains the idea of tuning being an "art" when it's all about targeting certain customer types). You can call this fine tuning, and I have absolutely no issue with this, only people obsessed with the "reference sound" myth would actually mind.
- manufacturing variability. It's always amazing how people think that manufactured items have to be strictly identical in all aspects. I design high-end medical devices and work with manufacturing to industrialize them (in the same location), and you wouldn't believe how easily crap can happen even when you are very careful about your process. I don't see how it wouldn't apply to DAPs, and little variations don't necessarily mean rejection at the end of the line, especially when these variations are barely measurable or quantifiable, which definitely applies to music rendering.
(...)

So I would definitely take large differences with a grain of salt, while subtle differences are certainly a fact, whether it is by design or by process variability.

That being said, the role of chassis beside taking abuse, grounding and EMI shielding ===> 000. It is science, since music is digital and the chassis never sees any signal.
But yes, bulky/precious/heavy metals DO sell well (bling-bang for the buck).
I would personnally prefer a lightweight titanium or magnesium chassis anyday (as in phones and computers), but it doesn't exactly look as luxurious.

 

[MRT-Man]

I promise you’ll hate me by the end of this if you don’t already.
Does anyone really believe that somehow an enclosure would affect audio the same way that many describe copper cables of doing (which, as luck would have it, is also physically impossible)? It’s ludicrous!

I don't have any personal experience with differences in enclosure material, but if you go over to your local headphone shop, the difference between, say, a copper and a silver cable, would be extremely obvious and apparent within 2 seconds of listening. Try this for yourself before making assumptions.