DynamicEars
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2019
- Posts
- 3,637
- Likes
- 10,176
Depends on what preferences are you looking for. I have both Monarch Mk II and Z1R if there any special questions you would ask.
Tonality are different, the MMkII are more similar to IER-M9 rather than Z1R, they are tuned to be reference monitor tuning, with emphasize on 3khz or high mids with big sub bass. While Z1R is tuned for grande fun.
Bass quality is very noticeable, Z1R win by quite margin, 9.5/10 for Z1R as oppose to 6.5/10 on MMkII. Reason is Z1R bass while very authorative and impactful, it sounded very open until the last trail until its gone, While monarch bass is sounded like trapped sub bass, big rumble echoing inside the tube but couldn't go out and gone somewhere inside, like there is a pseudo wall despite on paper, tuning wise iprefer cleaner upper mid bass of Monarch, but final presentation is wrecked by bad implementation.
Mids while Z1R i dont find recessed because of my habbit listening on high volume level, The Monarch MkII Mids are very enjoyable and solid, I was on fence because scared of shouty, but MMkII never get shouty, just very nice lush, thick, very natural mids presented with nice texture. The mids on Z1R little bit unnatural especially on finger snapping, sounded "too crispy" because of boosted 4khz, It perceived as super high resolution, but derived from naturalness, on other side MMkII mids keeping the best balance between detail, resolution and naturalness. One more about mids that have correlation with soundstage, the MMkII have intimate mids, like the singer especially females, is presented in your head or very close, whisper distance to you (while not shouty) and Z1R mids put the singer clearly in front of you, there is space with air between your nose and the voice, just matter of preferences I can see someone prefer more intimate presentation with black background while another choose more airy presentation. These all perceived differently because of different treble boost especially on 8khz, 12khz and 15khz.
Treble part as i'm a bit treble head beside of picky bass quality person, I give Z1R on upperhand because of the energetic but never harsh and all the details are there. The 6khz boost on Z1R bringing out details from hihats, cymbals, splashes from drum, with its trails until gone in space, very nice. While Monarch MkII trebles is gradually toned down, sounded very natural yet safe. Perhaps few dbs too safe for me. Ideally I would prefer something between the two, but if I have to compare, I prefer Z1R's more detailed treble and give energetic boost that never sounded harsh to me. The small DD, combined with open inner housing and foam damper do the magic.
Timbre is the part while MmkII can get proud of, despite of all those details, the multidriver combination, MmkII sounded very natural while having this great details (especially on mids) that Z1R have to give the point to the MmkII.
Soundstage wise, there is no contest, the Z1R considered the king of soundstage, vs the "small for TOTL" MmkII soundstage. Monarch's soundstage isnt bad, just to be on this level, I was expecting bigger (width and depth) but put aside any price, I will say the soundstage on Medium width with ok-ish depth.
Imaging both have great pin point imaging, sharp but not dot level positioning, both I give 9/10 on imaging and layering, but I've heard slight better in for example sony's M9 (owned but sold) and my UM Mest OG, differences are subtle but they have slightly better layering to me.
To sum up, I rated Z1R on S rank on my preferences, while MMkII on A+ , the bass and the fit are holding back while trebles presentation are just preference base.
Both I bought with my own money, and have them until now, hopefully I can tell my impressions clearly and help your decision with their own strong points and weaknesses.
Cheers!
DynamicEars
