[nc8000]

Thanks again mate I really appreciate your help

I have placed a m3u file in all my playlist folders And I just copied those folders on to the WM music folder and the playlists titles now appear in the playlists option on the WM...

But unfortunately under the playlist titles on the WM screen it shows no songs in any of the playlists... the songs are on the WM but are not being recognised as part of the playlists in the playlists option on the WM...

The m3u text file I made for each playlist sits inside the playlist folders...

Am I putting the text file in the right place or is there something else I should have done please?

So I am halfway there... the playlists now appear on the WM unfortunately there’s no music in the playlist showing up on the WM...

Thanks

I’m guessing that the path references to the songs in the playlist file are not correct

 

[Fishdo]

I’m guessing that the path references to the songs in the playlist file are not correct

Thanks mate

I am using Music Brainz Picard to tag all my tracks...

I also have a separate version of playlists in just individual audio Flac files sitting in a folder those individual tracks have all their information including album single artwork, genres, title, artist year etc it’s all the information that Tidal give a track you purchase..

I am not sure what might be missing...

 

[nc8000]

Thanks mate

I am using Music Brainz Picard to tag all my tracks...

I also have a separate version of playlists in just individual audio Flac files sitting in a folder those individual tracks have all their information including album single artwork, genres, title, artist year etc it’s all the information that Tidal give a track you purchase..

I am not sure what might be missing...

Try to make a play list on the player and look in that play list file to see how it specifies the path to music files

 

[Lookout57]

Thanks mate

I am using Music Brainz Picard to tag all my tracks...

I also have a separate version of playlists in just individual audio Flac files sitting in a folder those individual tracks have all their information including album single artwork, genres, title, artist year etc it’s all the information that Tidal give a track you purchase..

I am not sure what might be missing...

I store all my music in the following tree structure under /MUSIC on the internal or external volume:

A/
B/
C/
etc.

Then for example under /B I'll have
/Bowie, David/

Then under Bowie I'll have the albums like this:

/1969 - David Bowie [Hi-Res]

So the playlist entry for a song on that album would look like this:

#EXTINF:316,David Bowie - Space Oddity
/MUSIC/B/Bowie, David/1969 - David Bowie [Hi-Res]/01 Space Oddity.flac

The key is the path in the playlist must exactly match the path on the player. There needs to be nothing in front of /MUSIC as the Sony builds playlist by volume so it doesn't understand volumes and playlist tracks can't cross volumes.

 

[Peter Ruby]

Concerning only the 1a

What re the sound signature differences between each software version
Your reply will help me decide a purchase, please help

My advice is to purchase the 1A. Use it every damn chance you get with whatever firmware it has. Then after a few weeks, pick a new new one, rinse and repeat until you find the one(s) you like best.

Then go buy the 1Z and start the process all over again. In the end you’ll own 2 of the best damn DAPs ever made.

 

[hamhamhamsta]

Thanks for sharing! I checked out the Oriolus BA 300 s review and I'm surprised that sound descriptions are quite similar to what I experienced lately. It's very addictive. With the modification I did on my WM1A, I get the warmth lush full sound very similar to 1Z. Maybe slightly warmer actually. On top of that, I get more open, airy, nice long decays and with right amount of weight in them. Soundstage is huge and image is pin point actuate. Feel like there is no limit in depth or room size. Strings, singers and other music instruments could it could keep resonate forever. Also, everything seem so smooth and soft very relaxing and pleasing the hear at the same time. Much less colder and brighter than before now. Cymbals sound very convincing. Lot of lower level details and textures that I had never heard before. Very long decay. I can feel its weight and even metal vibration from cymbal itself. Very satisfying. More sub-bass than 1Z counterpart. Very like sound from drums. Good kicks, nice texture, tight and not muddy or too colored.

Oriolus BA 300s amp would amp everything you love even more, it also increase the soundstage. I know it sounds implausible, how can that be? But my ears don't lie. Now I can't just use 1Z anymore, I need to add the amp everytime I'm listening to something.

There are tradeoffs though; first there is noise floor, can be heard a little on 1Z, but after the music start you will not notice it anymore. Also, it picks up RF interference from phone or ipad, especially when they are charging, so you may want to keep them away as far as you can. And then it gets hot and 8 hours playtime or so. However, the trade off to me is worth it; everything I love is amped up big time. But you will need to get the one with the 3 connectors from musictek, I heard it people said it reduces the noise floor by quite a bit, so I am not taking any chance.

If you are looking for even greater sound performance, this amp definitely delivers. And man I do love Sony eq and DSSE-HX for Andromeda.

 

[JML]

I can listen to Focal Clear on the Walkman just fine. Does it sound better on my desktop rig? Sure. But it's hardly unlistenable on the Walkman either.

Also eyeing Audio Technica headphones - especially the more recent ones such as the new portable ATH-WP900, beautifully crafted portable wood headphone with 53mm drivers which sounds pretty fantastic even out of an A series Walkman.

I just saw those new AT headphones online. I can't find any reviews, but I have had several AT cans in the past and find these very interesting, especially given that they come with a balanced cable for the 4.4mm port on the WM1A. Can you share any more insights about them?

 

[SupperTime]

It’s like each piece is gear is a variation on a tone knob. All of us have subjective ideas about what tone we want. This tone is when the music sounds right. Many don’t EQ. So it’s using DAPs, IEMs and cables to EQ. The final thing here is also the firmware.

Regarding firmware, some fail to notice any difference; meaning to them all firmware updates sound the same. To many though (including myself) each firmware update bestows a tone personality to the Sony Walkmans.

It’s not like an Apple product as we as users can roll back or go forward to any firmware that has ever been written for the players. There was only one primitive software that originally came in 2016 that can’t be rolled back to? Still that original didn’t sound that good and was quickly replaced 1.02 then 2.0 and so on.

The 1A is fantastic and in my humble opinion the best value in the Sony line. You have at your disposal a collection of firmware updates to change the sound to fit your taste and help reach a specific tone with your cables and IEMs used.

The 1A, sounds best to me with 3.01 update. Though remember same as you, it depends on the other equipment and tone goals. You’ll find plenty of folks using 2.0 firmware, 3.01 firmware and 3.02 firmware with the 1A. There is no right or wrong as it’s personal preference and getting the players to sound best with your other gear.

3.01 sounds more bass heavy, with both the 1A and 1Z.
3.02 has better soundstage and more detailed midrange and I like it with the Sony Walkman 1Z.

3.02 sounds slightly thin in my uses with the 1A. So I keep my 1A with 3.01.

Someday Sony will make a firmware update and all of us will then have even more freedom.....and more choices. It’s all win, win and not a reason to buy a 1A or not. Remember too, it’s probably safe to think that a person will not even know which firmware is their favorite till at least 100 hours of burn-in and they are getting close to knowing how the players sound. Sony recommends 200 hours till the sound arrives.

Edit:
If I had a very murky and bass heavy IEM that also needed an expanded soundstage, 3.02 could very well be the firmware update I would choose to try with the 1A. In our group of listeners at Head-Fi, you have folks into more neutral “reference” performances from their DAP, and people wanting a more colored “V” or “U” shaped response. I fall on the side of wanting more bass so with my IEM and cable combinations 3.01 seems to be the ticket. None of this makes the players permanently good or bad sounding, it’s just finding a tone that you like.

Due to their being many potential end tones, it’s good to have lots of choices in the end.

There are differences between the 1A and 1Z, that I have not concerned myself writing here. If your on the fence between either a 1A or 1Z, I would write a much different response than what was written above.

I want more midbass impact, but not necessarily more overall bass rumble
I know it depends on the iem at hand but what software version you'd recommend on the 1a, for a more mid bass impact

 

[Mindstorms]

any wm1a user happy on 3.02?

 

[Lookout57]

any wm1a user happy on 3.02?

I use 3.02 on my WM1A and WM1Z. No complaints.

 

[endlesswaves]

any wm1a user happy on 3.02?

IMO 3.02 is the best FW to pair my WM1A with my JVC FW01. It brings out extra details, better notes separations and wider soundstage at the expense of thinner note size and slightly less bass quantity.

Using 1.20 now with Obravo Cupid. This pairing makes the Cupid more mellow and organic (not sure how to describe it but this is the best I can do ATM) . Vocals sounds best with 1.20, IMO.

Think 3.01 is the best all rounder. 3.02 for warmish and dark iems. 1.20 for brighter and analytical types to make them sounds more "less digital", more emotional. Sorry for the bad description, not good with words or not enough coffee.

TLDR just try all 3 FW, 1.20, 3.01 and 3.02 and see which one is the best match for your IEMs.

 

[ttt123]

I want more midbass impact, but not necessarily more overall bass rumble
I know it depends on the iem at hand but what software version you'd recommend on the 1a, for a more mid bass impact

I'm curious about the complexity of following the recommendations from multiple users, and let's say you are able to find a consensus agreement, even though there are so many different variables with everybodies setup, which may be different from yours.
Will you only use this recommended FW and not any others, without bothering to try the others out? No 2 users have exactly the same setup, and even when they are the same components, there are other variables, like oxide build up, batch differences, environmental (RF/WiFi/etc) pollution, different ears (hearing differences) and processor (brain), etc, etc.

How will you know that the other FW may not be enjoyable, both in expected, and perhaps unexpected ways? As an audiophile, would you really only use what other's recommend for you, without trying the different options, which are easily available, for yourself?
If you try the different FW out, for a period of time each, you would know exactly what YOU think of them, and not what somebody else thinks. Won't that be a better conclusion, to know what YOU like, and not what somebody else likes?

Just some thoughts from these posts asking for a very specific portion of tone signature recommendation, as to how they could be used...

 

[SupperTime]

I'm curious about the complexity of following the recommendations from multiple users, and let's say you are able to find a consensus agreement, even though there are so many different variables with everybodies setup, which may be different from yours.
Will you only use this recommended FW and not any others, without bothering to try the others out? No 2 users have exactly the same setup, and even when they are the same components, there are other variables, like oxide build up, batch differences, environmental (RF/WiFi/etc) pollution, different ears (hearing differences) and processor (brain), etc, etc.

How will you know that the other FW may not be enjoyable, both in expected, and perhaps unexpected ways? As an audiophile, would you really only use what other's recommend for you, without trying the different options, which are easily available, for yourself?
If you try the different FW out, for a period of time each, you would know exactly what YOU think of them, and not what somebody else thinks. Won't that be a better conclusion, to know what YOU like, and not what somebody else likes?

Just some thoughts from these posts asking for a very specific portion of tone signature recommendation, as to how they could be used...

Regardless of iem make/model, a midbass bump would be noticed if it's a characteristic of the dap (in this case software version)
I got the details, resolution, clarity ect I want from my iem, just looking for the sw version that has the most midbass jump.
I simply am not interested in the other sw versions. I came here to get a version number, not a short story on how I should try all the sw versions to find one best for me. I'm busy with work, in due time I'll bother with it all, but for now, just want a sw number, not a lesson in elementary thesis

 

[captblaze]

I'm curious about the complexity of following the recommendations from multiple users, and let's say you are able to find a consensus agreement, even though there are so many different variables with everybodies setup, which may be different from yours.
Will you only use this recommended FW and not any others, without bothering to try the others out? No 2 users have exactly the same setup, and even when they are the same components, there are other variables, like oxide build up, batch differences, environmental (RF/WiFi/etc) pollution, different ears (hearing differences) and processor (brain), etc, etc.

How will you know that the other FW may not be enjoyable, both in expected, and perhaps unexpected ways? As an audiophile, would you really only use what other's recommend for you, without trying the different options, which are easily available, for yourself?
If you try the different FW out, for a period of time each, you would know exactly what YOU think of them, and not what somebody else thinks. Won't that be a better conclusion, to know what YOU like, and not what somebody else likes?

Just some thoughts from these posts asking for a very specific portion of tone signature recommendation, as to how they could be used...

here is the most important thing(s) to realize about the updates to the firmware in the player. some add features (as time progressed) what benefit you gain from each is up to you to decide, but rest assured each will work with the player

 

[Redcarmoose]

I want more midbass impact, but not necessarily more overall bass rumble
I know it depends on the iem at hand but what software version you'd recommend on the 1a, for a more mid bass impact

I have often though I was more into mid-bass impact. Especially if you have come from a multitude of consumer-tune IEMs. So many of the popular entry level IEMs like the Piston 3 have exploited the lower midrange bump. But just like what’s been reported 3.01 is the software.

3.01 is an amazing improvement over both 3.00 and 3.02 as far as overall sound and adding what I feel is needed to the low end of the 1A response.

3.01 offers higher resolution than the software that came before. Also it is (as quoted) more well rounded. The reason I say used to............is my two flagships that I use now are both missing lower midrange emphasis, so I’ve come to believe that a subtle U response can be a tone that someone could actually move over too, from the warmth of a lower midrange emphasis. But with that said if your IEMs are missing lower mids, you kind of need a firmware which reintroduces those lower mid-range frequencies.

Still the over all effect will be from the recordings you play, the IEMs you use and the IEM cable you choose. Tips are also going to be another factor to getting the tone along with the best firmware for your desired end tone. Also strangely you can help yourself adapt to a point. At times I will not use what I would think is the best firmware for a DAP/IEM combo and try to simply get used to it. That process can work to a point.

Cheers!

IMO 3.02 is the best FW to pair my WM1A with my JVC FW01. It brings out extra details, better notes separations and wider soundstage at the expense of thinner note size and slightly less bass quantity.

Using 1.20 now with Obravo Cupid. This pairing makes the Cupid more mellow and organic (not sure how to describe it but this is the best I can do ATM) . Vocals sounds best with 1.20, IMO.

Think 3.01 is the best all rounder. 3.02 for warmish and dark iems. 1.20 for brighter and analytical types to make them sounds more "less digital", more emotional. Sorry for the bad description, not good with words or not enough coffee.

TLDR just try all 3 FW, 1.20, 3.01 and 3.02 and see which one is the best match for your IEMs.

Yes! Best all rounder. IMO

I'm curious about the complexity of following the recommendations from multiple users, and let's say you are able to find a consensus agreement, even though there are so many different variables with everybodies setup, which may be different from yours.
Will you only use this recommended FW and not any others, without bothering to try the others out? No 2 users have exactly the same setup, and even when they are the same components, there are other variables, like oxide build up, batch differences, environmental (RF/WiFi/etc) pollution, different ears (hearing differences) and processor (brain), etc, etc.

How will you know that the other FW may not be enjoyable, both in expected, and perhaps unexpected ways? As an audiophile, would you really only use what other's recommend for you, without trying the different options, which are easily available, for yourself?
If you try the different FW out, for a period of time each, you would know exactly what YOU think of them, and not what somebody else thinks. Won't that be a better conclusion, to know what YOU like, and not what somebody else likes?

Just some thoughts from these posts asking for a very specific portion of tone signature recommendation, as to how they could be used...

Due to all the firmwares available most have tested stuff. I at first thought 3.01 was the same as 3.00 while using the 1A. I stayed on using 2.0 until folks in this thread convinced me that 3.01 was a big departure from 3.00. Even right away I loved 3.01 with the 1A. The personality of the Walkman 1A is nice but maybe slightly midcentric for my taste. Though on many of the firmwares you can simply use them and get used to them. But overall I’m always trying to add bass to the 1A without using EQ. The Sony IER-Z1R is so subbass strong that it is naturally perfect for me using 3.01 and the 1A. The IER-Z1R has almost too much bass impact using 3.01 with the Walkman 1Z. Though due to the tailored bass response of the 3.02 update the 1Z/IER-Z1R is a great combo.

The reason people ask about software updates is to get clues. At times the differences are so subtle that they are hard to determine. So as a group we like to have group opinion to coincide with out personal testing. But your right, everyone has a different set up and different wants to arrive at the needed sound signature, so they should trust their ears more than anything.

Regardless of iem make/model, a midbass bump would be noticed if it's a characteristic of the dap (in this case software version)
I got the details, resolution, clarity ect I want from my iem, just looking for the sw version that has the most midbass jump.
I simply am not interested in the other sw versions. I came here to get a version number, not a short story on how I should try all the sw versions to find one best for me. I'm busy with work, in due time I'll bother with it all, but for now, just want a sw number, not a lesson in elementary thesis

Short answer:
3.01 is the simple answer. Best bass and resolution combo. Haven’t heard 1.20 in a long while, it’s darker than 3.02 but has not as big soundstage if I remember right. Firmware update 2.0 update is “OK” but I seem to remember liking the bass and detail better with 3.01?

Cheers!