WM1ZM2 v WM1ZM1 (Mr. Walkman) Impressions at 40 hours
Disclaimer: I try to be as rational as possible, and these are my subjective impressions. Note that 'new toy' lens is in effect, blah, blah, etc.
IEM used: IER-Z1R
Have been switching between the 1ZM1 and the 1ZM2 all week and I'll start with the short and sweet.
The 1ZM2 is a clear upgrade over the 1ZM1 in terms of technical performance. Contrary to spec-sheet, the 1ZM2 is
not a side-grade. Rendering of details (superb non-fatiguing treble), imaging (spacial cues, 3 dimensionality, depth, height, layering)
is on another level.
Bass hits deeper and is voluminous in quantity.
Treble is interesting, on first impressions is deceptively laid back, however as you get familiar with the 1ZM2's presentation it becomes clear it is rendering more details than the 1ZM1 and is effortless in it's presentation. I was casually picking new minor backing sounds without concentrating or in a critical listening mindset.
The most exciting aspect of the 1ZM2 sound is how cohesive the sound field is, both L&R channels play 'deeper' into my head, and gives the impression/ illusion of listening to loudspeakers. Although it's not chest thumping, clean bass from a DAP/ IEM going deep into my head is a new experience to me.
The one technical aspect that the M1 has over the stock M2 is using Mr Walkman's CFW is with the extra high gain modes active, the M1 can get 10-15 points louder. Useful for harder to drive IEMs/ headphones.
Where things get subjective (as usual with comparisions between WM1 series devices) is the tonality.
The 1ZM2 is darker than the 1ZM1 and you end up losing forwardness in vocal presentation. On brighter Mr Walkman CFW settings the 1ZM1 produces a crisper sound. For example guitars have more of a bite on the M1.
Although the 1ZM2 is sounding less congested after additional listening/ burn-in. There is still a slight nasally quality that it adds to vocals.
In a word:
1ZM1 = engaging
1ZM2 = immersive
*Sorry for the potato-quality pic