[quasimofo]

I feel the M7 & M9 are more for the WM1 series and the Z1R (which I don’t have) for the new $7000 Walkman.
I have both M7/M9 and the M7 sound a bit more refined than the Z5 but the M9 leagues above the Z5. Better clarity and soundstage.

Any further impressions of M9? I am trying to decide between it and Andromeda S, neither of which I have the opportunity to audition where I live...

 

[DONTGIVEUP]

I don’t know about Andromeda.
The M9 has clearer highs and the bass is what I hear in the iSine 20, not boomy just the right touch to make you feel ur front stage with a vocalist.
Sony really got it right with the M9 for me that is.

Any further impressions of M9? I am trying to decide between it and Andromeda S, neither of which I have the opportunity to audition where I live...

 

[quasimofo]

I don’t know about Andromeda.
The M9 has clearer highs and the bass is what I hear in the iSine 20, not boomy just the right touch to make you feel ur front stage with a vocalist.
Sony really got it right with the M9 for me that is.

In general terms do you think Sony have achieved a ‘reference’ tuning? Are there any peaks or suck out evident in the frequency response?

 

[mahesh]

No any reviews yet?
Come on guys,

 

[audionewbi]

No any reviews yet?
Come on guys,

Buy me one and I’ll review it, gladly.

 

[Ryouta Sasaki]

I like more IER-M7 than IER-M9.
I want to listen IER-Z1R!

 

[venamoris]

Auditioned the Andromeda and the M9 and I liked the M9 slightly more, it's really close. M9 has a bit more bass oomph and treble, tuning feels relatively flatter, and as a result sounds better on EDM tracks (thought it was a hybrid iem initially). Speed and attack were also there when tested with metal songs. Andromeda definitely shines in the vocal department and is less fatiguing to listen to.

 

[davidmolliere]

I encourage you to read @Deezel177 in depth impressions of the M7 and M9, very enlightening as usual

Sony IER-M7

Now, that’s what I’m talking about! Sony’s IER-M7 is an impressively coherent and open-sounding monitor, but more outstanding is how well it preserves tonal balance and vocal density. It’s very reminiscent of 64Audio’s A6t, but with a calmer bass response. Overall, it’s a clear and airy tonal palate, but the star of the show is its dense, well-structured and clean midrange. The bass serves as a great foundation, while the treble provides a deep, open stage and a decently black background.

The M7’s bass plays a more foundational role to the midrange - not particularly noteworthy in impact or physicality, but outstanding in how well it coheres against the rest of the frequency response. It’s paced really well; quick enough for the stage to remain clean, but lingers sufficiently to fill the presentation in a dynamic sense. Extension is impressive for the price, with adequate sub-bass rumble surrounding the perimeter of the stage; only visceral and present when called for. The mid-bass is rather calm and never intrudes into the presentation, which - once again - serves vocal delivery. It’s not the most resolving or textured low-end I’ve heard, but it perfectly complements the M7’s sonic palate. A touch more mid-bass would've given the in-ear a more natural tone and better body, but I’m very happy with where Sony ended up nonetheless.

The midrange is the M7’s star in my opinion. A laid-back lower-midrange gives notes proper definition, and strongly contrasts them against the black background. Following that is a 1-2kHz rise that gives vocals great body and density. Instruments are structured very naturally, with a sufficiently realistic tone. Vocal delivery is dynamic and impactful, paired with the M7’s impressive headroom and depth. The upper-midrange is linearly connected to this rise, but the presence range is relatively neutral. As a result, higher-pitched instruments like female vocals are ever-so-slightly withdrawn, but this results in a more even and rounded image. Pianos in particular deliver both impact (in the force of the keystroke) and melody; a telltale sign of a well-balanced, realistic midrange.

The treble comes tuned with light peaks along 7-8 and 12kHz for clarity, while a 6kHz dip prevents sibilance. Instruments are articulate, yet gracefully smooth. While the A6t uses its wet mid-bass to counteract its treble, the M7 has a relatively more withdrawn treble, so it remains pretty even with the centre-midrange; a touch forward relative to the upper-mids. Though, the A6t sounds a touch fuller with its stock cable. Once again, linearity and coherence is fantastic, and I wouldn’t be surprised if someone told me the M7 was a one-to-two-driver monitor. Extension is adequate as it posits an open stage with decent sphericalness. Pricier TOTLs still have the edge in imaging precision, stability, background blackness and resolution, but the M7 is an excellent performer at its MSRP.

Overall, the M7 caught me by surprise. It’s a tuning I wouldn’t immediately associate with Sony, but I love what it has going for it. It’s forgiving, fun, articulate and - above all - deliciously smooth. The linearity and coherence it portrays is outstanding, and so is its midrange structure. Fans of the Campfire Andromeda looking for a cheaper and more ergonomic alternative will find much to love in the M7.

Sony IER-M9

Compared to the M7, the M9 has a more v-shaped response with an emphasis on impact, dynamic energy and contrast. Bass and treble quantities are definitely elevated relative to the midrange. As a result, the M9 has a cleaner stage, a blacker background and fuller instruments. It delivers more punch compared to the M7, but with less linearity in its tone and vocal structure. The M9 is more fun and full-bodied than coherent and refined.

The M9’s bass is more mid-bass oriented. There’s a stronger sense of melody, body and warmth, while sub-bass presence remains the same. It’s still a bass that’s a touch darker in tone, but the M9's upper-treble emphasis bolsters its clarity and layering. Despite its fatter response, texture is more apparent here than on the M7. Extension is also a touch stronger for more palpable physicality, so it’s a low-end that’s more catered towards synthetic instruments. It’s still a ways away from Sony’s conventional bass tuning - which was a lot bloomy-er, darker and thicker - but it’s definitely tuned for dynamism and body; more so than the M7.

The M9’s midrange is less linear and coherent compared to the M7. Its emphasised lower- and upper-treble peaks make the lower-midrange attenuation more obvious, so notes are a touch crisper. Though, wetness is maintained because of the elevated mid-bass and tone is a touch warmer. This tuning choice generates more clarity and cleanliness, but at the expense of smoothness and refinement. Transients are more harder-edged, so sensitive listeners might consider this tuning more fatiguing. The upper-midrange remains neutral, so higher-pitched instruments remain neutrally-placed in the stage. I’m tempted to draw comparisons to the 64Audio N8 with the M9’s midrange; crisp, clean, mid-bass-fuelled and structurally adequate, albeit lacking slightly in coherence and refinement.

The M9 maintains a similar treble profile as the M7, but with a slightly more emphasised 12kHz region. This results in a crisper transient, while the M7 is a touch more refined. But, it should be said that the M9 has superior body because of its elevated mid-bass. So, if your definition of fatigue stems from a lack of fullness, the M7 will sound more tiring after long periods. Conversely, if it stems from a peaky-er treble, the M9 will be more tiresome. Nevertheless, I think both are relatively smooth and this is true across a huge variety of tracks. The M9’s superior extension creates a more stable stage and a blacker background, as well as a stronger sense of transparency and resolution. Over the M7, it’s definitely a stronger technical performer.

Both the M9 and M7 hold great value in my opinion. They perform excellently for their respective price points and they're two of the most ergonomic UIEMs I've tried in recent memory. The M7's glossy, fingerprint-magnet paint job gets a no from me, but the M9's rugged, brushed aluminium finish (and carbon fibre faceplate) is dreamy. The M7 has a smoother treble and a withdrawn low-end for a more neutral signature, while the M9 has an elevated mid-bass and upper-treble to maintain tonal balance whilst adding tons of dynamic contrast. The M7 has a more uniform response, while the M9 has stronger technical performance. Nevertheless, both have a lovable tone and a thought-out structure that I think will put Sony back on the map in 2018.

 

[Deezel177]

I encourage you to read @Deezel177 in depth impressions of the M7 and M9, very enlightening as usual

Thanks for sharing the post, David! I was very impressed with what both IEMs had to offer sonically and ergonomically, and I can’t wait to hear what the IER-Z1R has up its sleeves.

By the way, I don’t think the photos got carried over with the quote, so I’ll add them here now. Apologies for the vignette - I was in a rush.

 

[davidmolliere]

Thanks for sharing the post, David! I was very impressed with what both IEMs had to offer sonically and ergonomically, and I can’t wait to hear what the IER-Z1R has up its sleeves.
By the way, I don’t think the photos got carried over with the quote, so I’ll add them here now. Apologies for the vignette - I was in a rush.

I like to share the good stuff and since I have been following the thread here, thought I'd share
Yep, sure curious about the IER-Z1R as well and what you think of them!

 

[DONTGIVEUP]

Can’t say without the Z1R about reference tuning.
But now I’m battling between the M9 & EX1000. And it’s close.

In general terms do you think Sony have achieved a ‘reference’ tuning? Are there any peaks or suck out evident in the frequency response?

 

[DONTGIVEUP]

But I don’t get why the Z1R is priced so high with 2BA & 1DD. I expected more drivers of either.

 

[quasimofo]

Thanks for sharing the post, David! I was very impressed with what both IEMs had to offer sonically and ergonomically, and I can’t wait to hear what the IER-Z1R has up its sleeves.

By the way, I don’t think the photos got carried over with the quote, so I’ll add them here now. Apologies for the vignette - I was in a rush.

Are you able to provide a comparison between M9 and its natural rival, Andromeda?

 

[Deezel177]

Are you able to provide a comparison between M9 and its natural rival, Andromeda?

Well, I'm not too familiar with the Andromeda (I've only heard it a couple times). But from memory, the Andromeda more resembles the M7. The M9 - again, from memory - has a heavier mid-bass and a fuller midrange. I can't comment further without an A/B test, unfortunately.

 

[handwander]

From a design aspect, it's a big disappointment that there isn't a totally matte model, The outward facing panel on the M7 should be the entire body material IMO, not its current ugly glossy one. The M9 does have a matte body, but then also has that carbon fiber plate.