I have a Z1 and I know I am in a 'pro' Sony Room, but can someone answer this question logically. Sony decided to make it's signature DAP with it's house sound and market it as a product that achieved their ideal sought after sound in accordance to the engineers vision. Why did the sound signature change on each and every firmware update if they did such a great job initially? If you read the reviews when it first came out and bought it some years later then the reviews wouldn't even be relevant anymore.
Everyone can't agree that after each FW Update that is got better and better. Some like the earlier updates better than the latter and vice versa. Then we have the regional sound differences on top of that. Do you think that's wishy washy and Sony couldn't stand by it's signature product and that they didn't have a real vision but just made an expensive mass market product that they want to sell to the broadest audience?
I have a Z1 and I know I am in a 'pro' Sony Room, but can someone answer this question logically. Sony decided to make it's signature DAP with it's house sound and market it as a product that achieved their ideal sought after sound in accordance to the engineers vision. Why did the sound signature change on each and every firmware update if they did such a great job initially? If you read the reviews when it first came out and bought it some years later then the reviews wouldn't even be relevant anymore.
Everyone can't agree that after each FW Update that is got better and better. Some like the earlier updates better than the latter and vice versa. Then we have the regional sound differences on top of that. Do you think that's wishy washy and Sony couldn't stand by it's signature product and that they didn't have a real vision but just made an expensive mass market product that they want to sell to the broadest audience?
That should be the question for the engineers, but IMO, something good for now, doesn’t mean it is perfect, and striving to continuing to improve their stuff will show how dedicated they are into development of the products.
for example , tube TV was good in the 50th....why do we have LED and OLED now ? Can you imagine a world where human is always satisfied with what they have and don’t strive to find ways to improve and make it even better ?
So, something good now, doesn’t mean it will still be good tomorrow. It is called “a progress”, and that is all
But yeah, this is an odd question for sure ..... I would be worried if Sony just stop making stuff...
English sites are usually filled with normal tech sites who complain, why pay this much for a DAP review with or neutral ones with users bitching, "my iPhone costs less and can play music and play games, is (DAP MAKER) stupid?" In High-end DAP, usually have to resorts to blogs and the alike.
I have a Z1 and I know I am in a 'pro' Sony Room, but can someone answer this question logically. Sony decided to make it's signature DAP with it's house sound and market it as a product that achieved their ideal sought after sound in accordance to the engineers vision. Why did the sound signature change on each and every firmware update if they did such a great job initially? If you read the reviews when it first came out and bought it some years later then the reviews wouldn't even be relevant anymore.
Everyone can't agree that after each FW Update that is got better and better. Some like the earlier updates better than the latter and vice versa. Then we have the regional sound differences on top of that. Do you think that's wishy washy and Sony couldn't stand by it's signature product and that they didn't have a real vision but just made an expensive mass market product that they want to sell to the broadest audience?
that's because there shouldn't be anything that's "perfect" especially from a business perspective. There's always room for improvements, especially on man-made stuff + there's also possible reasons that cost wasn't feasible at that time, they were able to find a new solution, etc. If you're happy with you currently have, then just stop there and dont' buy into the impulse / don't let people get into your mind if youre happy with it (don't question yourself).
The interesting thing is prior to firmware 2.0, the WM1Z was a little muddy. I mean what’s an engineer’s vision? I feel it may have changed slightly and became more mid-centric. A signature for Sony maybe is liquid to a point that...”why not”?
The Sony “house sound” is a bunch of different things. I mean each amp/headphones.......1A, 1Z, TA, MDR-Z1R, IER-Z1R and XBA-N3 all exhibit a slight variation in tone!
The evolution of the 1Z........
To curtail the bass........add speed and bring up mid-centric elements (for me anyway) enhanced the well-roundedness and offered a special sound, regardless of a departure from prior 2.00 firmware?
Meaning Sony was also learning what sound was ultimately possible and achievable in the amp process. I envision the amp character as an ever changing thing? Maybe they were like, “Hold on a second, this is maybe not our goal vision.” “It’s too muddy.” Rome wasn’t built in a day?
Though still, it’s subjective as there was a whole group loving prior 2.00?
Also was Rome envisioned as its ultimate finished form.......at the start?
I have a Z1 and I know I am in a 'pro' Sony Room, but can someone answer this question logically. Sony decided to make it's signature DAP with it's house sound and market it as a product that achieved their ideal sought after sound in accordance to the engineers vision. Why did the sound signature change on each and every firmware update if they did such a great job initially? If you read the reviews when it first came out and bought it some years later then the reviews wouldn't even be relevant anymore.
Everyone can't agree that after each FW Update that is got better and better. Some like the earlier updates better than the latter and vice versa. Then we have the regional sound differences on top of that. Do you think that's wishy washy and Sony couldn't stand by it's signature product and that they didn't have a real vision but just made an expensive mass market product that they want to sell to the broadest audience?
Also it’s maybe impossible to make everything sound exactly the same? I mean stuff sounds relatively unique to each individual part used. So Sony uses individual components which exhibit unique sounds, yet they are blended into a unified vision of what is possible for that end-sound to be. The 1Z end sound is a moving target, maybe?
Also it’s maybe impossible to make everything sound exactly the same? I mean stuff sounds relatively unique to each individual part used. So Sony uses individual components which exhibit unique sounds, yet they are blended into a unified vision of what is possible for that end-sound to be. The 1Z end sound is a moving target, maybe?
It could also simply be that changing anything in the code unintentionally affects the sound. Sony has never acknowledged that they willfully changed the sound with new fw. It was the same with the iBasso DX50 and DX90, they also changed slightly with each new fw dispite iBasso claiming they had never done anything to change the sound
We don’t know? Someone does know though! I figure it has a trajectory, as the sound progression was in a formed way.......going to more and more detail and treble, since before FW 2.00.
But yes, every time they added something, like BT receiver, it could have altered the whole signature into a certain direction. But regardless of that (you in particular) have to agree with (physical mods) still retaining a sound, it’s still a Sony. It’s just that depending on transducers, some liked prior to FW 2.00 and stayed there.......those few which questioned progress. I myself was often months behind, as I simply fell in love with a prior FW version. In a sense it’s what you have......that you love. Love the FW that your with!
It could also simply be that changing anything in the code unintentionally affects the sound. Sony has never acknowledged that they willfully changed the sound with new fw. It was the same with the iBasso DX50 and DX90, they also changed slightly with each new fw dispite iBasso claiming they had never done anything to change the sound
We don’t know? Someone does know though! I figure it has a trajectory, as the sound progression was in a formed way.......going to more and more detail and treble, since before FW 2.00.
But yes, every time they added something, like BT receiver, it could have altered the whole signature into a certain direction. But regardless of that (you in particular) have to agree with (physical mods) still retaining a sound, it’s still a Sony. It’s just that depending on transducers, some liked prior to FW 2.00 and stayed there.......those few which questioned progress. I myself was often months behind, as I simply fell in love with a prior FW version. In a sense it’s what you have......that you love. Love the FW that your with!
I have a Z1 and I know I am in a 'pro' Sony Room, but can someone answer this question logically. Sony decided to make it's signature DAP with it's house sound and market it as a product that achieved their ideal sought after sound in accordance to the engineers vision. Why did the sound signature change on each and every firmware update if they did such a great job initially? If you read the reviews when it first came out and bought it some years later then the reviews wouldn't even be relevant anymore.
Everyone can't agree that after each FW Update that is got better and better. Some like the earlier updates better than the latter and vice versa. Then we have the regional sound differences on top of that. Do you think that's wishy washy and Sony couldn't stand by it's signature product and that they didn't have a real vision but just made an expensive mass market product that they want to sell to the broadest audience?
If you look at it from the perspective of a "system" composed of software, FW, algorithms, OS, etc., it would make sense, and be expected, that there would be changes/enhancements, and that the whole would be affected by the changes to individual parts. Some of the end results expected, and some unexpected.
Looking at it from a Software application perspective, it is a truism that time, usage, and experience will bring changes to the original code. It would be a very rare situation where a piece of Software is so perfect that the developer does not think of changes and enhancements that will make it better. Some of these could be fairly significant changes to the base software, and new/re-written/optimized subroutines.
So each iteration of the Sony FW would be incorporating changes, optimizations, features. As the sound we hear is the output of the system, and as we make changes to the System, the sound can be affected. This is not a reflection that the Sony engineers' lack professionalism, or do not know what they are doing. Rather it is just an affirmation that Sony is dedicated to continuing to provide optimizations and changes to the product after release.
And rather than the changes being a negative, they are providing choices to the user. If you like an older FW, then just flash back to the older FW. Pick the one that has better synergy for your ears, and earphones used. Looks like a win/win situation to me.
Of course this is for DAPs using the Sony Linux OS. If it is Android, then you cannot go back to older FWs.
If you look at it from the perspective of a "system" composed of software, FW, algorithms, OS, etc., it would make sense, and be expected, that there would be changes/enhancements, and that the whole would be affected by the changes to individual parts. Some of the end results expected, and some unexpected.
Looking at it from a Software application perspective, it is a truism that time, usage, and experience will bring changes to the original code. It would be a very rare situation where a piece of Software is so perfect that the developer does not think of changes and enhancements that will make it better. Some of these could be fairly significant changes to the base software, and new/re-written/optimized subroutines.
So each iteration of the Sony FW would be incorporating changes, optimizations, features. As the sound we hear is the output of the system, and as we make changes to the System, the sound can be affected. This is not a reflection that the Sony engineers' lack professionalism, or do not know what they are doing. Rather it is just an affirmation that Sony is dedicated to continuing to provide optimizations and changes to the product after release.
And rather than the changes being a negative, they are providing choices to the user. If you like an older FW, then just flash back to the older FW. Pick the one that has better synergy for your ears, and earphones used. Looks like a win/win situation to me.
Of course this is for DAPs using the Sony Linux OS. If it is Android, then you cannot go back to older FWs.
The early (prior to FW2.00) were very tube like, or dark, and cavernous. I feel most like the newer ways? Maybe because they didn’t know what sound they could get from the 1Z? Or they took a turn to more detail and better mid focus?
Having a choice is win/win. Except for early FW you don’t have the bonus quality like APE playback, DAC and BT receiving, among other things.
Thanks everyone for your input regarding my post about FW changing the sound of the Z1. When one talks about a vision; it is generally how you plan/envision the art/product to sound in it's planning stages. I'm sure they had an idea of what they wanted to accomplish with the 1a and the 1z. I'm also sure it wan't the exact same sound signature at the same price. Most people attach price with quality and as the price goes up the assumption is the quality of sound goes up as well. I thought in the beginning it was the 1A was the neutral product and the 1Z was the lush product with greater clarity. It seems they had other ideas as time went on....
When it comes to the video side, I am a purist and want my display calibrated to a standard. So when I watch a movie I am seeing it exactly as the makers intended. Some people prefer the dynamic/vivid setting and don't care about the creators intent and just want a bright and colorful image. So when it comes to a DAP one can look to provide a product that has a flat response while having great clarity, imaging. soundstage and all the other sought after characteristics.
The thing that caught my attention about the Z1 (initial reviews) was the warm bassy sound with extended highs that had great clarity. This is the sound that I was after and when bought the Z1 it was on the 3.02 FW. That was not what I got; it somehow shifted in another direction, away from what I wanted. Luckily being an informed consumer and having the help of this forum I was able to gather the tools to change the region, got a zip of all the previous stock FW from nc8000 and modded FW from Mr. W.
The Chord Dave set out to achieve a goal and the end product is what it is, love it or hate it. I don't really respect changing a product throughout it's lifespan to cater to whom? But this negative ultimately led to the Z1's greatness as it gave us the ability to tune it to our liking. It now sits as an iconic piece of gear which has stood the test of time and is not a throw away piece that get superseded by the latest and greatest.
I hope people will be happy with the new Sony DAP's, but I see a lot of money being spent on cables, ear tips and new IEM's/HP's to get the sound they are looking for. I am currently on stock FW 3.01, stock region and the vinyl processor on standard (this could change at anytime for any reason) lol. I like the idea of having streaming on the new DAP's but was disappointed that power was not increased as some of the full sized HP's I use need the extra horsepower.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
