Cantorvs.IER-Z1R
Sound & Specs Comparison
Information
Both IEMs are widely regarded in the audiophile community. See how they differ in terms of sub-bass response, upper mids, clarity, and overall tonality. Spider charts and rating breakdowns included.
Objective Comparison
Facts, details, stuff.
| General Info | Cantor | IER-Z1R |
|---|---|---|
| Brand | AFUL | Sony |
| Country | Taiwan | – |
| IEM Description | The AFUL Cantor combines technical precision with musicality in a hybrid design. Featuring a dynamic driver for powerful bass and multiple balanced armatures for clean mids and sparkly highs, it delivers a spacious soundstage with excellent separation. Tuning leans slightly toward a balanced-bright signature, making it a solid choice for detail lovers who still want some low-end punch. | Despite their small size, the Sony IER-Z1R earphones feature a sophisticated 3-way design with two dynamic drivers and a highly precise balanced armature. The sound quality is not just high-resolution—it's ultra-high-resolution, reaching an impressive frequency response of up to 100 kHz. Housed in a precisely crafted, virtually resonance-free aluminum shell, the design ensures that all three drivers remain in perfect phase alignment. The cables are fully balanced and made from high-purity OFC copper with silver plating for maximum detail retrieval. |
| Price Level | 500 – 1.000 | 2.000 + |
| Housing & Driver | ||
|---|---|---|
| Driver Config | Multi-BA | Hybrid |
| Driver Types | Balanced Armature | Dynamic Driver + Balanced Armature |
| Shell Material | – | – |
| Cable | 4Braid 5N OFC Cable | – |
| Technical | ||
|---|---|---|
| Freq Range | – | 3-100.000 Hz |
| Impedance (Ω) | 20 | – |
| Sensitivity (dB) | 106 | 103 |
| Crossover | RLC Network Electronic Crossover | – |
| Platform Info | ||
|---|---|---|
| Comments | 2 | 0 |
| Visit Count | 134 | 95 |
| External Reviews | 1 | 1 |
Meta Ratings
// Nothing to compare yet.
Sound Characteristics
Low-frequency extension on IER-Z1R feels a more natural and authoritative, while Cantor lacks some reach (9 vs 8.5). Listeners may find the low-end impact on It a more engaging during high-dynamic passages (9 vs 8.5). It strikes a b better balance between presence and smoothness in the upper mids compared to Cantor (8.5 vs 8). It provides c more refined lower treble, resolving fine detail and air with greater finesse than Cantor (9 vs 8). It captures ambient cues and reverbs m more precisely through its upper treble, enhancing spatial perception over Cantor (9.5 vs 7.5). The stereo field on It feels a wider and more holographic, whereas Cantor sounds more intimate (10 vs 8). It retrieves micro-details a more effectively, revealing nuances that are less apparent in Cantor (9.5 vs 8.8). Track elements feel e more isolated and clean on It, offering clearer focus than Cantor (9.5 vs 8.3). It shows e better control of masking effects, maintaining clarity across frequency ranges better than Cantor (9 vs 8). It adds d more body and density to musical notes, enriching the overall texture compared to Cantor (9 vs 7.5). It delivers s stronger slam and physicality, making drums and transients hit harder than Cantor (9 vs 8.5). The upper range of vocals is a cleaner and more forgiving on It, helping it avoid sibilant harshness that Cantor shows (9.5 vs 8.5). Timbre on It sounds a more realistic and natural, whereas Cantor feels slightly more artificial or colored (9.5 vs 7.5). It renders texture a more precisely, making instrument surfaces and vocal grain more palpable than Cantor (9 vs 8).
| Cantor | IER-Z1R | |
|---|---|---|
| Sub Bass | 8.5 | 9.0 |
| Bass | 9.0 | 9.0 |
| Bass Feel | 8.5 | 9.0 |
| Lower Mids | 8.5 | 8.5 |
| Upper Mids | 8.0 | 8.5 |
| Lower Treble | 8.0 | 9.0 |
| Upper Treble | 7.5 | 9.5 |
| Sound Stage Width | 8.0 | 10.0 |
| Detail | 8.8 | 9.5 |
| Layering | 8.3 | 9.5 |
| Masking | 8.0 | 9.0 |
| Note Weight | 7.5 | 9.0 |
| Slam | 8.5 | 9.0 |
| Sibilance | 8.5 | 9.5 |
| Timbre Color | 7.5 | 9.5 |
| Tonality | 8.8 | 9.0 |
| Texture | 8.0 | 9.0 |
Tonal Signature
// Nothing to compare yet.