hung031086
1000+ Head-Fier
Im using cfa vega and meze 99 classic. I sold my qp1r cus of UI and the wheel.
Will the 4.4mm adapter cable give the same sq with the 4.4mm custom cable ?
SONY NW-WM1Z / WM1A
- Thread starter leylandi
- Start date
- Status
Im using cfa vega and meze 99 classic. I sold my qp1r cus of UI and the wheel.
Will the 4.4mm adapter cable give the same sq with the 4.4mm custom cable ?
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2014
- Posts
- 3,500
- Likes
- 1,138
The Vega pairs very well with these Sonys. They're my go to reference IEMs at this point. Cheers
rushofblood
100+ Head-Fier
I got to spend some time with a few other DAPs that are attracting a lot of attention and questions from people, thought I'd share a few more thoughts. Again, all listening done with my Aethers.
Having returned my friend's DX200 to him, I popped by Music Sanctuary to give their DX200 a listen for comparisons. Their unit has about 120 hours of burn in, and my WM1Z has about 120 hours of time on the balanced circuit. All listening done on the balanced circuits of both players.
While most of my impressions from my earlier post hold in terms of the general signatures of both players, DX200 seriously opens up in the first 100 hours of burn in; much of the haze I described in my initial impressions has disappeared, showing a jump in resolution and closing the initial gap between the two players.
WM1Z has a softer, more euphonic/acoustic sound than the DX200 (and it is as such, too, against other flagship DAPs like the various AK380 variants), with richer tonality and trailing decay being hallmarks of the sound. DX200 is more towards the signature of the AK380; leaner, brighter and faster. Comparing the two, I hear details being rendered more obviously by the WM1Z, aided by the decay characteristic which adds naturalism, realism and contributes to the extreme sense of 3D positioning afforded by the Sony (in my opinion the absolute best in the current market). The DX200, in comparison, renders the sound in a less 3D soundstage with less depth than the WM1Z (DX200's soundstage is wider than it is deep) and comes pretty close in detailing but loses out on the finest microdetails that WM1Z and AK380Cu can render. That said, the DX200 is airier sounding than the WM1Z, aided by the less tonally dense presentation; instruments do not fill the soundstage as thickly and densely as the WM1Z, affording for more air between the rendered instruments. It also sounds brighter and faster, which may be easier to pair up with IEMs and headphones (some dark sounding transducers can get overly dark sounding with the WM1Z)
This is no slight against the DX200; in fact, it is utterly impressive for a DAP at its price point to come as close as it is to the WM1Z and the AK380. It is my new automatic recommendation for DAPs to friends given its extremely keen price point, the sound quality which bears more similarities than differences with AK380 and the versatility of Android.
Following that, I popped by the local Sony store to compare the WM1Z with the WM1A. Both players compared balanced; the store WM1A play counter has almost 300 hours, although it's my guess that most of those hours were put on the single ended circuit.
While both players lean towards the general Walkman house sound, I find that the signature differences between the A and the Z have sonic implications that affect more than just how thick or musical they sound. WM1A is a slightly brighter, faster and less dense sounding which ends up still being more euphonic than most DAPs on the market, yet WM1A does not have the same trailing decay characteristic as the WM1Z. This makes the WM1A sound less natural and realistic in comparison, and makes the imaging and positioning capability of the WM1A a clear step behind that of the Z. Differences in microdetailing are also present, with the WM1A pushing the mids out a bit more prominently and in a forward fashion in tandem with the leaner and faster signature; and yet, even the denser signature of the WM1Z is able to show more of the finest details in music (usually denser sounding products sacrifice resolution for tonality). Does the performance difference justify the massive price gulf between the two? Rationally, no. But if you're looking at the WM1Z, you aren't really 100% rational in making the decision; such a purchase also involves strong emotion and personal attraction, just like someone ascribing positive feelings towards the copper machining or the heft of the device.
The burning question I unfortunately cannot answer directly is WM1A vs DX200 as I was not able to directly compare both devices. Relative comparisons from memory and using the WM1Z as a yardstick for both players seem to suggest that the performance of both players is very very close, so close that there is no clearly superior option in the lack of a direct comparison. Generally speaking, the DX200 sounds more airy and energetic than the WM1A, and the WM1A sports a touch more musicality than the DX200. I will refrain from making any more comments before I get a chance to try both side by side, if possible.
All these DAPs only highlight one thing; there has never been a better time to be into portable audio gear, with brands bringing ever increasing sound quality at lower price points to the market. I would dare say, even, that on sound quality alone, any of the 3 DAPs discussed herein will easily impress all listeners with their overall performance and unique sonic characteristics, especially when placed against their older DAP counterparts. Happy listening all.
Having returned my friend's DX200 to him, I popped by Music Sanctuary to give their DX200 a listen for comparisons. Their unit has about 120 hours of burn in, and my WM1Z has about 120 hours of time on the balanced circuit. All listening done on the balanced circuits of both players.
While most of my impressions from my earlier post hold in terms of the general signatures of both players, DX200 seriously opens up in the first 100 hours of burn in; much of the haze I described in my initial impressions has disappeared, showing a jump in resolution and closing the initial gap between the two players.
WM1Z has a softer, more euphonic/acoustic sound than the DX200 (and it is as such, too, against other flagship DAPs like the various AK380 variants), with richer tonality and trailing decay being hallmarks of the sound. DX200 is more towards the signature of the AK380; leaner, brighter and faster. Comparing the two, I hear details being rendered more obviously by the WM1Z, aided by the decay characteristic which adds naturalism, realism and contributes to the extreme sense of 3D positioning afforded by the Sony (in my opinion the absolute best in the current market). The DX200, in comparison, renders the sound in a less 3D soundstage with less depth than the WM1Z (DX200's soundstage is wider than it is deep) and comes pretty close in detailing but loses out on the finest microdetails that WM1Z and AK380Cu can render. That said, the DX200 is airier sounding than the WM1Z, aided by the less tonally dense presentation; instruments do not fill the soundstage as thickly and densely as the WM1Z, affording for more air between the rendered instruments. It also sounds brighter and faster, which may be easier to pair up with IEMs and headphones (some dark sounding transducers can get overly dark sounding with the WM1Z)
This is no slight against the DX200; in fact, it is utterly impressive for a DAP at its price point to come as close as it is to the WM1Z and the AK380. It is my new automatic recommendation for DAPs to friends given its extremely keen price point, the sound quality which bears more similarities than differences with AK380 and the versatility of Android.
Following that, I popped by the local Sony store to compare the WM1Z with the WM1A. Both players compared balanced; the store WM1A play counter has almost 300 hours, although it's my guess that most of those hours were put on the single ended circuit.
While both players lean towards the general Walkman house sound, I find that the signature differences between the A and the Z have sonic implications that affect more than just how thick or musical they sound. WM1A is a slightly brighter, faster and less dense sounding which ends up still being more euphonic than most DAPs on the market, yet WM1A does not have the same trailing decay characteristic as the WM1Z. This makes the WM1A sound less natural and realistic in comparison, and makes the imaging and positioning capability of the WM1A a clear step behind that of the Z. Differences in microdetailing are also present, with the WM1A pushing the mids out a bit more prominently and in a forward fashion in tandem with the leaner and faster signature; and yet, even the denser signature of the WM1Z is able to show more of the finest details in music (usually denser sounding products sacrifice resolution for tonality). Does the performance difference justify the massive price gulf between the two? Rationally, no. But if you're looking at the WM1Z, you aren't really 100% rational in making the decision; such a purchase also involves strong emotion and personal attraction, just like someone ascribing positive feelings towards the copper machining or the heft of the device.
The burning question I unfortunately cannot answer directly is WM1A vs DX200 as I was not able to directly compare both devices. Relative comparisons from memory and using the WM1Z as a yardstick for both players seem to suggest that the performance of both players is very very close, so close that there is no clearly superior option in the lack of a direct comparison. Generally speaking, the DX200 sounds more airy and energetic than the WM1A, and the WM1A sports a touch more musicality than the DX200. I will refrain from making any more comments before I get a chance to try both side by side, if possible.
All these DAPs only highlight one thing; there has never been a better time to be into portable audio gear, with brands bringing ever increasing sound quality at lower price points to the market. I would dare say, even, that on sound quality alone, any of the 3 DAPs discussed herein will easily impress all listeners with their overall performance and unique sonic characteristics, especially when placed against their older DAP counterparts. Happy listening all.
rushofblood
100+ Head-Fier
I recently got to try the Vega with my 1Z balanced and it sounds bloody good on high gain...if you can live with the monstrous bass output from those IEMs. I like more bass than the average listener and even I found the combination a touch too bassy for me.
doofalb
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Posts
- 154
- Likes
- 29
Overkill much?
Looks like you're making sure that all of your equipment get's used
Seriously tho, which cable did you use to for the digital out to the Mojo? I was under the impression that the WM1A doesn't do digital out..
bvng3540
AKA bvng2210, dragon430
Looks like you're making sure that all of your equipment get's used
Seriously tho, which cable did you use to for the digital out to the Mojo? I was under the impression that the WM1A doesn't do digital out..
That picture show the zx-2, but
1a and 1z both do digital out via hugo and mojo but you need that cable which has the chip in it.
doofalb
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Posts
- 154
- Likes
- 29
Great, good to know! Which ones have the chip? Does the the WMC-NWH10 have it or are there better quality cables?
bvng3540
AKA bvng2210, dragon430
That the only cable that has the chip, ppl buying that cable and cut the USB end and reconnected with micro USB, it very easy to do as it is color coded you can't make mistake reconnect it
gerelmx1986
Headphoneus Supremus
Will wait for @mscott58 Review on Both the A and the Z, he knows he is burning both to be at least some how equal in bur-in time, @rushofblood grabbed a store one and to know which side was burned in is a tricky so i will take this one with a grain of salt.
doofalb
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Posts
- 154
- Likes
- 29
I have heard someone who has compared both owned units with over 200 hr, 1z's resolution is much much higher than 1a and so imaging is better..
Jazzi
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2015
- Posts
- 831
- Likes
- 116
Looks like you're making sure that all of your equipment get's used
Seriously tho, which cable did you use to for the digital out to the Mojo? I was under the impression that the WM1A doesn't do digital out..
Sorry doofalb, that's not my kit. I found the picture on Twitter and found it amusing, so I shared with the thread.
Also note that @Rushofblood's comparison was stated when he first posted that he would continuously update the result as his unit has not reached 200 hrs mark yet.
- Status
Users who are viewing this thread
