[JimL11]

If I don't find the same cons, they why should I refer to them if I don't happen to share them? This is a snapshot of my experiences with this system. I found it quite balanced regardless of output volume level; though I would have preferred some more bass down low (and as mentioned, I had to add some EQ to help this out).

Remember the original Sennheiser HE90 was single ended and many here loved it and still consider them one of the best headphones produced. I personally am not a stat headphone designer and just went off what I heard. The Hifiman HE1000V1 & V2 are both single ended headphones and some of the very best headphones I've heard with very low distortion. Generalizations like this aren't very helpful IMO. Typically 2nd order distortion results in a tad more bass and a warmer sound (like comparing the HD800S to the HD800). I did not hear that with the Sonoma headphones. Actually I would say that they are brighter than either the SR-009 or HD800 headphones and still sound very clear and transparent overall. So I'll only write to my personal experiences. If you had others, I suggest you write a review of them here on Head-Fi. I'm always keen on reading as many impressions as possible.

I never had an issue with playing them loud as I could get to 87dB peaks without much of an issue.

Well, if you didn't hear any problems, then great. Considering that those concerns have been raised, it might have been good for you to mention them, if only to state that they were not a problem.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Well, if you didn't hear any problems, then great. Considering that those concerns have been raised, it might have been good for you to mention them, if only to state that they were not a problem.

I think I mentioned in the past that as I write a review, I try to avoid other comments/reviews about the gear I'm listening to as I don't want to prejudice my comments and notes. I want to be as honest as possible with my experiences. So for this case, it wasn't possible for that reason. I didn't realize that a limited number of folks had that issue until after it was completed.

 

[mulder01]

Seems like the people who said they distorted at loud volumes were listening at shows and what is perceived as 'normal' at a noisy show is probably very loud in a quiet home environment so it's likely not an issue if you're listening at home. As it wasn't for Macedonian Hero.

Plugged into my Lotoo Paw Gold, my Abyss distorts at higher volumes especially in the bass department. I see the distortion as a reminder to stop being a dick and turn it down. I am pretty keen to preserve my hearing. If you like to listen to bass heavy music really loud then maybe don't buy the Abyss and a DAP, or a Sonoma Model 1. Otherwise, if you listen at responsible levels, it should be fine. How's that.

 

[FLTWS]

I had no problem with volume level at home. My biggest disappointment with the Sonoma (aside from the physical aspects of the cable) was it was so good from the some point in the lower midrange on up that the falloff at the lower bass frequencies cut the legs out from under the music. I'm not a bass head by any stretch but I like the sense of an increase in air pressure with a bass drum thwack, I want my tubas and horns to exhibit some guttural growling, the sense of bow rubbing on string with basses and the lower range of cellos, and the contrabassoon to make me think to myself every time, how does that instrument get that low. The kind of stuff one feels as well as hears, no competition with speakers obviously, but my Utopia and even my HD800 are a bit better in the bottom in this respect.

 

[wink]

You can play this video frequency sweep to listen to and see the peaks and dips of any headphone. (Though I guess you can't do it now with the M1 since you no longer have it.)

https://www.dropbox.com/s/pyi1gug2s2jumzq/sweep.mp4?dl=0



Neither do I—with what was written, that is. I do have an issue with what was not written, however; namely, the lack of comparisons. If you don't compare to as many other high-end headphones you've heard as possible, in great depth, and with all types of music, it's not going to provide a frame of reference for those reading the review, and the countless people trying to make purchasing decisions based on impressions aren't going to have any info to work with besides a sense that it sounds good. Yes, any reviewer has the right to review in any way they see fit...but I fail to see how neglecting to make meaningful comparisons to other headphones would help those reading it.

What we need here is David Mahler to revive his epic compare post and update it with the plethora of newer high end phones that have been released in the last couple of years.
Come to think of it, perhaps David Mahler was psychic and foresaw these phones coming down the pipe and opted out before he had to sell the farm to keep up...

I had no problem with volume level at home. My biggest disappointment with the Sonoma (aside from the physical aspects of the cable) was it was so good from the some point in the lower midrange on up that the falloff at the lower bass frequencies cut the legs out from under the music. I'm not a bass head by any stretch but I like the sense of an increase in air pressure with a bass drum thwack, I want my tubas and horns to exhibit some guttural growling, the sense of bow rubbing on string with basses and the lower range of cellos, and the contrabassoon to make me think to myself every time, how does that instrument get that low.

My K1000 bass light has a wonderful midrange and highs, but absolutely dies in the bass department.
The K1000 bass heavy has good bass, but doesn't have that glorious midrange....

 

[JimL11]

Seems like the people who said they distorted at loud volumes were listening at shows and what is perceived as 'normal' at a noisy show is probably very loud in a quiet home environment so it's likely not an issue if you're listening at home. As it wasn't for Macedonian Hero..

Well, no. Here's what Tyll at InnerFidelity said, "It just does everything—well, except for that distorted bass at high levels—very well." So he did hear the bass distortion in a home setting. So some will hear it, and some won't.

 

[Music Alchemist]

I had no problem with volume level at home. My biggest disappointment with the Sonoma (aside from the physical aspects of the cable) was it was so good from the some point in the lower midrange on up that the falloff at the lower bass frequencies cut the legs out from under the music. I'm not a bass head by any stretch but I like the sense of an increase in air pressure with a bass drum thwack, I want my tubas and horns to exhibit some guttural growling, the sense of bow rubbing on string with basses and the lower range of cellos, and the contrabassoon to make me think to myself every time, how does that instrument get that low. The kind of stuff one feels as well as hears, no competition with speakers obviously, but my Utopia and even my HD800 are a bit better in the bottom in this respect.

Tonal balance is one of the least important factors for me since EQ exists and, with enough effort, you can make any headphone roughly neutral. (Though it's obviously better if it's already fairly neutral in the first place.) What matters infinitely more is what happens after proper EQ; what cannot be changed by it. The impact and texture (etc.) of the bass is one example

The thing is, though, the M1 measures very similarly to the STAX SR-009 and SR-207 (my neutral headphone reference, as it follows the diffuse field curve closely and has the most natural tonality to my musician ears). I had plenty of bass with the SR-207. Anyway, it's difficult to assess tonal accuracy with headphones since there isn't a universally agreed upon compensation curve, whereas with speakers, you can make them perfectly neutral in a way that everyone can agree upon via measurements. (And yeah, speakers can do bass on another level, though room acoustics makes that more challenging. I have to move further away to get the deepest bass with my speakers.)

 

[Christer]

Well, no. Here's what Tyll at InnerFidelity said, "It just does everything—well, except for that distorted bass at high levels—very well." So he did hear the bass distortion in a home setting. So some will hear it, and some won't.

I auditioned the Sonoma today for about an hour and I was not very impressed. To begin with the cable was one of the most horribly microphonic cables I have ever heard and boy did it make itself audible, I had to hang it up over the stand originally intended for the headphones to be able to listen.
And even then I had to sit absolutely still frozen like a statue. Even the slightest movement would excite the cable to rumble ominously.
I simply don't understand how they could have chosen such a very microphonic cable!
Simply the worst cable experience in recent memory for me.
Moreover the headphones themselves were sitting like a vice around my ears and I could hear my blood pumping with the first positioning and only careful re-arranging lowered that very strange experience.
The Utopias are very comfortable in comparison.
I also possibly made the mistake of starting with one of my reference albums Mahler's 5th a DSD 64 recording ,I know in and out and how it should sound, but Chord HUGO 2 and both my HEKV2 and Utopias sounded clearly better than the Sonoma did.
Playing at anything approaching realistic levels was a definite no go with the Sonoma and bass at loud levels was muddy and climaxes more congested than via HEKV2 or Utopia.
It sounded fine at mf levels and with simply scored music but it is definitely not a headphone I would choose for any large scale symphonic music and certainly not Mahler!

I also compared it to the much more comfortable to wear,Ultrasone Edition 25 via Moon Audio's 430 amp DAC and that combo sounded more convincing at basically everything than the Sonoma.
I will bring my HEKV2 to audition the Moon Audio 430 next time. It seemed to have more potential than the Sonoma combo.

 

[JimL11]

Tonal balance is one of the least important factors for me since EQ exists and, with enough effort, you can make any headphone roughly neutral. (Though it's obviously better if it's already fairly neutral in the first place.) What matters infinitely more is what happens after proper EQ; what cannot be changed by it. The impact and texture (etc.) of the bass is one example

I disagree because:
1) not everyone has EQ capability
2) not everyone who has EQ capability knows how to use it to achieve a neutral tonal balance.

As you say, it's obviously better if it's already neutral - then if you have EQ you can use to to modify to taste, but you have a solid baseline to work from.

 

[urs]

Dear all,

At the CanJam in Munich, I had the chance to listen to the SONOMA M1 – for me a first and I should add an "ear-opening experience".

Even though it’s an electrostatic model, until now, this headphone was way off my radar, as it appears to be predominately a Digitally-Integrated System.

Hence my query:


Who has listened to the Sonoma via the ANALOG inputs ?
Is the superb sound quality maintained by using the cinch connectors ?



Thanks for your comments


Regards


Urs

I’m a long time “STAX addict”, currently using the 009 with the German AudioValve SOLARIS amp.


My system is virtually full-analog, including various tube components , as I regard even my NAIM CD player as being "analog"…..

 

[urs]

No one with analog sources, who uses the SONOMA ??

Urs

 

[mulder01]

I think there are almost no members with the sonoma at all...

 

[JimL11]

Yeah, the Sonoma has a niche market. On the one hand, it claims to be inexpensive to manufacture the diaphragms, on the other hand it costs $5000, which is somewhat schizophrenic, but more significantly, well into the audiophile market range. However, it's an integrated system, which appears to be an advantage, but I think actually isn't, in terms of audiophile (headphile?) preferences and prejudices.

A direct analogy would be amplifiers and speakers. There are distinct advantages to powered speakers - you can tailor the amp to the speaker, including reasonable voltage and current limits, electronic crossovers with built-in EQ to smooth out the frequency response and improve impulse response, direct amp drive to the woofer, midrange and tweeter for better control, etc., but somehow powered speakers have never appealed much to serious audiophiles.

 

[urs]

Thank you for your Input.

Yes, the fact of being an "integrated" System is a handicap - IF there any indications that the analog to Digital section is on the same Level as the DAC, I still would face the Problem of an Extension cord.

At the Munich CanJam, the Sonoma People did not have a clear answer, if such an item would be on the standard accessories list “but it could certainly be done”…


Why do I worry about all this ?!?

This Sonoma sounded so superb I’m tempted to get one….



Regards



Urs

 

[headinclouds]

Impressions of the Sonoma M1

After a short listen at London Canjam 2018 I felt that the Sonoma M1 system could be a challenge to existing headphone systems.

A brief listen at a show, even in conditions as good as those in the Sonoma suite, does not allow time for the impressions to clarify so I was pleased to be allowed a system at home for auditioning.

Unpacking the Sonoma System is quite an event as it comes in two custom designed cases.

The system consists of three parts, a DAC/amplifier unit, the headphones themselves and a power supply unit. All cables are supplied which are the mains cable, USB cable and detachable headphone cable.

The impression is that the equipment is beautifully made and presented as befits a luxury item.

The system went together very easily and it took a few moments to download the driver software from Sonoma/support. The Sonoma M1 worked without any problem or fault from the outset. It seems very well sorted to make the ownership a pleasant experience.

Using JRiver I fed it with FLAC files from ripped CD and some high-res tracks all via USB.

For comparison at home I was feeding exactly the same source into an Arcam D33 DAC and my build of the KG Grounded Grid feeding a MrSpeakers Voce.

After listening to many types of music at home in comparison to my current system I found it was impossible to dislike the Sonoma M1 as it sounds so “right” and reproduces most of my selections well. This is disarming as I found myself waiting for the let-down, the bit where it bites you in some way, but everything from rock, jazz, latin, piano, acoustic symphonies and opera delivered musical enjoyment. The Sonoma M1 does many things very well. I feel it has a well-judged frequency response so that instruments and voices have believable tonality. It is capable of revealing detail without being harsh. In complex passages it remains un-muddled and you can follow threads and hear what is happening. I found it could produce plenty of volume for the intended purpose, and would be wary of listening at greater volume, however it did not seem to have the great reserves of power which is a feature of many high end systems. It did at times seem a little bit polite or restrained, but this could be that conventional electrostatic systems do have a bit of edge which exaggerates sibilance for example. That edge can distract from listening pleasure.

Going back and forth between this and the comparison showed that they both had very good tonality and gave lots of musical enjoyment. What was fascinating was that some new musical insights were revealed by the presentation of the Sonoma. That is, something was brought out that had not been noticed in the same way before. That is a great value of different replay systems

The Sonoma M1 system does things slightly differently and that is to be welcomed. I really enjoyed listening to music I know well and hearing it where new things were revealed with a different emphasis.

That does not mean that it was always to be preferred, there were occasions when the comparison system was preferred on a particular piece of music. It often seemed particularly good on the instrumental music but one listener pointed out that the comparison system on a favourite track brought out the vocals a little more clearly so the words were easier to follow.

So to summarise, the Sonoma system is a fascinating new application of electrostatic principles. It has many enjoyable qualities and some strong points are:

It does its job of reproducing music very well.

It is very neat and stylish equipment

It is very well made and finished

It uses a fraction of the energy and resources of the comparison equipment and takes up much less space.

The Sonoma system can be regarded "good value" in the context of high end headphones. It costs less than half the cost of the comparison system. The complete Sonoma M1 DAC/AMP ES headphone system costs about the same as, say, a Trilogy H1 amplifier, and a bit more than the top Stax energiser.

There are no issues with cables and cable matching.

The headphones themselves are the lightest of the ES I have used.

The Sonoma system is a welcome product from the Warwick/Sonoma team

All is not perfect though, as comfort is an important factor and here I found the only significant negative,

I found the headphone pads soft and comfortable but the clamping pressure was too high and I feel Sonoma need to take a look into this design aspect.

This point aside, I can see a fairly affluent music lover who has also some concern about domestic style finding this system a perfect answer. I admire the approach and the great neatness, efficiency and style of the M1.

In a world where the trend seems to be toward smaller and more efficient equipment the Sonoma system achieves great results and makes the existing high-end systems look a bit inefficient. There is a challenge to them to deliver their high quality sound in a smaller and more efficient way.