Sound Analysis.
I’m glad I waited for fw 2.0 update before starting my critical sound analysis of 1Z because in my opinion the new firmware scaled up the sound performance to be less colored, more neutral, still leaning toward a smoother, organic tonality, but with an improved transparency. I prefer DAP sound to be close to neutral, otherwise your headphones sound signature will be colored. But I was also pleased that after the update, 1Z kept its unique sound characteristics without losing that smooth analog sound texture.
Our brain often plays a trick on us, where after a period of extended listening we get adjusted to the sound, what is called a brain burn in. When analyzing 1Z, I was constantly switching between different DAPs to keep my sound reference in check for a relative comparison. I was impressed how natural 1Z made every pair of headphones sound. Regardless if it’s a dynamic driver bass with a deep visceral rumble or a BA bass with a fast, articulate impact, or if it’s a lean neutral lower mids or a thicker one with additional body, or if we are talking about a smoother natural upper mids or cold analytical revealing ones, or if a treble has elevated vivid tonality or a reduced sparkle with a more natural definition – 1Z makes everything sound more natural, yet still revealing; warmer, yet not congested; smoother, yet still layered; intimate, yet still multi-dimensional with holographic imaging. Also, it refines the bass quality without affecting too much the quantity.
Another distinct characteristic of 1Z is the black background, especially from balanced output, making the sound more dynamic with a faster transient response when notes are triggered on/off. At the same time, 1Z wouldn’t be my first choice to analyze the sound under microscope when I’m looking for a more analytical source. 1Z is great when you want to enjoy listening to your music without too much of a revealing edge that going to make the sound more fatigue.
Since I don’t like to use EQ, I prefer to pair up brighter tuned headphones with warmer sources, and vise verse – warmer tuned headphones with more neutral-revealing sources. Here, I was able to pair up and to enjoy everything, regardless of the sound signature.
Additional thing worth mentioning, even so I’m not a big collector of DSD tracks and only have about a dozen I use for testing, when I started to listen and to compare playback of these tracks across my other DAPs, WM1Z stood above them all with the most transparent, layered, and expanded (soundstage) sound.
3.5mm vs 4.4mm
Before fw 2.0, there was a bigger gap in sound quality between SE and BAL, where 3.5mm output was warmer, smoother, and more congested. After the fw 2.0 upgrade, the sound quality of 3.5mm SE output really scaled up, with a very noticeable improvement in soundstage expansion, more transparency in sound, brighter tonality, and darker background.
But even with these improvements, 4.4mm BAL output is still ahead of 3.5mm SE. BAL output soundstage is wider, more holographic, with an improvement in imaging and separation. The background is blacker, making overall sound tighter, more transparent, and with a faster/sharper transient of notes.
Comparison.
Here are my observations while comparing 1Z to other DAPs using multiple IEMs, all volume matched. Obviously, the sound is described from a perspective of how I hear it through those IEMs where the actual sound is the result of their pair up synergy.
1Z vs iBasso DX200 w/amp4 – both have a very wide soundstage, though 1Z is just a little bit wider, but when it comes to soundstage depth 1Z is deeper which makes its soundstage to be more elliptical while DX200 soundstage has relatively less depth which makes its soundstage to be more stretched left-to-right with a shallower depth. Both have a deep black background with a similar retrieval of details, a very similar sound dynamics, but a different tonality. 1Z has a fuller body, smoother, slightly warmer sound which is more analog, like it’s coming from a hardware amplifier. DX200 w/amp4 tonality is brighter, with a more neutral body, more revealing sound, and also colder tonality in comparison to 1Z.
1Z vs Lotoo PAW Gold (LPG) – very similar soundstage where 1Z is just a little wider, while both have the same depth. In terms of tonality, LPG is brighter, colder, especially when it comes to treble where you have more energy and more sparkle – in comparison, 1Z treble is smoother and more relaxed, being slightly laid back. Another noticeable difference is in the bass where 1Z has a deeper sub-bass extension while LPG has more emphasis on mid-bass impact. Both have a dynamic sound with a black background and fast transient of notes on/off. Also, both are the prime example of pure-audio playback devices.
1Z vs Cowon Plenue 2 – 1Z soundstage has more width, while soundstage depth is similar. Here, the first thing that stands out is how neutral and colder P2 sounds in comparison to a fuller body smoother 1Z. Starting with a low end, 1Z has more textured sub-bass extension while P2 has stronger and faster mid-bass punch, lower mids are leaner and more neutral when listening with P2 while 1Z has more body, and treble is brighter in P2 as well, while 1Z is smoother and more organic. Both have a dynamic sound with a black background, and nice layering and separation, but in this example I typically use P2 for more analytical listening while 1Z is used to enjoy the music.
1Z vs theBit Opus#2 – here, while soundstage depth is similar, 1Z is wider in staging. Another noticeable difference is 1Z having a blacker background. Both have a similarly expanded dynamic sound, though 1Z sounds tighter and with a better layering and separation. When it comes to low end, both have a similar emphasis on sub-bass with a similar mid-bass impact. With lower mids, both are a little north of neutral with more body, though despite similar natural tonality – upper mids are more detailed and more transparent in 1Z. With treble. Opus#2 is closer, but still has a little more sparkle in lower treble vs smoother 1Z.
1Z vs FiiO X7ii – 1Z soundstage is wider and deeper, where width difference is more noticeable. Also, 1Z has a blacker background, and a better dynamic expansion. X7ii sound is leaner and more neutral in comparison to a fuller body smoother sound of 1Z. They both have a nice sub-bass rumble, while X7ii has a little stronger mid-bass punch. Lower mids are leaner and upper mids are thinner in X7ii, while 1Z has more body and more organic in comparison. Treble is also thinner and brighter in X7ii.
1Z certainly has its own unique smoother fuller body sound with a warmer tonality in comparison to many other DAPs. I know many are probably curious how 1Z compares to 1A, but unfortunately I don’t have access to it. The same with A&K latest SP1000 which I have zero experience with, thus not being able to compare.
Twister6 Reviews 
Great review. While I think the 1z is crazy in price, from everything I’ve read the 1A sounds similar, with the same excellent soundstage but maybe slightly different color across the spectrum.
I had been wondering about the Cowon Plenue R as a good portable player with good battery life, but then started thinking of spending more for a DX200 (as I’d been impressed with the DX80). But after reading this and the available comparisons between the 1Z and 1A, it looks like the 1A is great value for money, with excellent sound, battery life and GUI.
LikeLike
you definitely have to take into consideration the “diminishing returns” factor. 1Z will have premium components which going to result in fine-tuned sound in comparison to 1A, but the sound quality improvement is not 3x better. A block of pure copper material is VERY expensive, and manufacturing/milling is additional cost… Plenue R I’m familiar with, but some told me ZX300 might be compatible and some say check out AK70mkII as well. Too many choices… I would recommend starting with figuring out your budget first. Then, if you need streaming apps, power requirements, 2.5mm or 4.4mm balanced (depending on your headphones). That would help you to narrow down your selection.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Completely agree – too many choices! You’ve been giving me some advice on the Plenue R thread at head-fi too, and I’m thinking I might just bite the bullet, spend more and avoid further upgrades. Thanks for your input and reviews, very helpful!
LikeLike
Your review of this DAP is really close of what i hear in the AK380, even in the balanced port….in the beggining some people compare it…even the idea of the body material as grounding effect to the sound…what I can’t believe too much, sony takes this thing of body material to a new high level with copper and gold (too much bling for my taste)…in my opinion maybe the difference in sound between 1z and 1a and between AK380 models are caused by different sound tunings and less caused by this premium materials, but i’ts only my opinion…
The Sony ZX2 was a really good sounding android DAP, maybe too analytical or digital, but sounds good (i have it in his time), then the warm-neutral sound leads the ears of the audiophile crowd and sony reacts with this WM1 series…
Your review was very good as always, maybe in the near future I think in a new sony DAP to my collection since the sound description is near to my tastes
Regards
LikeLike
You can’t really compare 1Z to 1A directly, assuming the sound change is due to different chassis material, they use different critical components that will influence the difference in sound. But i did confirm, the circiut ground is connected to the chassis, so you have a better conducting massive ground.
LikeLike
Mmm…you mean the kimber cable vs ofc cable of the internal wiring??….the circuit ground connected to the chasis are the same excuse for AK for the use of different materials (copper ot SS), of course you have better conductivness with this features….and this maybe increase the medible sound quality…
But the difference in sound described by users i think is more akin to sound tunning in both brands, even more with the Sony because it’s already have too much digital sound effects in his DAPs
But to me this is not a bad thing, the quality of the construction and the materials and the different sound tunning will obviously raise the price
LikeLike
no, the copper chassis itself are connected to internal ckt ground, you can check continuity from the ground of headphone jack to copper chassis.
LikeLike
Ok I understand… I don’t want to begin an Apple vs Samsung discussion, i don’t want to bite the hands of the brands that feed my ears…
I don’t want to discuss the internal features of this DAP, i only believe that the tunning of sound differences between WM1 series are more important than the physical differences when we talk about sound coloration and maybe even sound quality …but is only my opinion
Peace 🙂
LikeLike
Did you ever ask sony for wm1a for review?
Would be nice for comparisons with all the other daps you have.
LikeLike
Don’t think they care about 1A review since zx300 sounds very close. So, no with 1A. Plus, it’s getting old already, companies prefer to promote their new or newer releases.
LikeLike
I’m having a hard time hearing a difference between se and balanced to be honest. I was going to go out and get new cables terminated in 4.4 for my iems but i feel that probably not needed.
I mean you could argue the se is “burned in” and the balanced is not if you believe in that. I’ve only tried the balanced today. Maybe i just don’t have great hearing, shrug.
LikeLike
What is your iems/headphones? Do you have the latest 2.x fw? There was a much bigger difference in fw 1.2 between se and bal. Also, depends on how resolving your headphones too, and of course, we all have a different hearing level. Consider it as blessing if you can’t hear a difference, will save you on new cables lol!
LikeLike
I am in love with my Sony NW-WM1A. I use Sennheiser HD650 headphones in balance, as well as Shure SRH1540 headphones. As much as I love it, I’m getting the upgrade bug for the 1Z. I am blown away by how well it drives the 650s. It sounds better than off my Paw Gold Diana, which has much more power. Power alone doesn’t dictate how well a headphone sounds.
LikeLike
don’t have experience with any full size Senns cans, but I can imagine the tonality and the resolution will scale up with 1Z 🙂 I tested ZX300 at canjam, so using that as a baseline because many people tell me that ZX300 is 85-90% in sound quality of WM1A (just going by what others said). To me ZX300 was nice, but had this “digital” coloring. WM1Z sounds like an analog desktop piece of gear. I like SP1000 a lot as well, but 1Z still has this analog tonality like no other daps.
LikeLike
Thanks for the comparison with ZX300, that will probably seal the deal for me for a 1Z
LikeLike
I am thinking about the WM1Z, N8 or LPGT. Any thoughts on the three?
LikeLike
all 3 are good, in their own way. Read my reviews, figure out your own personal Cons and Pros, see which sound you would prefer (especially based on pair up with different earphones and headphones). I know, too many choices 😦
LikeLike
> In high gain, I hear more sub-bass rumble, mids have more body, there is improved layering, better retrieval of details, and treble has more sparkle.
Thank you for putting this in the Review.
That way i instantly new that nothing of this is wroth anything and i can easily forget what i read and look for a more serious review.
LikeLike
You are referring to an ancient 4+ year old review, back when I was getting my feet wet 🙂 But the key point there, wm1z is so underpowered by today’s standards. The balanced output in high gain at maximum volume only has 125mW of power, it is literally a joke by today’s standards. Now, drop it to low gain and depending on a specific pair up synergy with whatever used for testing, it could be night and day in comparison to when you switch to a high gain. Now, 4+ years later and dozens of daps I have tested, wm1z has been surpassed by many.
LikeLike