The Stax thread (New)

[HeadphoneAddict]

Originally Posted by ericj

Alright, got 'em home almost two hours ago. An hour and a half of constant play has them waking up. They continue to sound better and better.

Unfortunately, the pollen count in this valley is off the charts and my sinuses are sixteen different kinds of inflamed, so i can't claim to have a clear opinion of them yet.

At the moment I'm using a makeshift rig of thrift store gear. Carver CT-3 preamp, Kenwood KM-105 power amp (reputedly 100 or 125WPC, depending on who you ask) and the SRD-7 that came with it, which is in better condition than my old one but hasn't been gone over with deoxit yet. Source is a DIY USB DAC with FLAC streaming off the linux box.

Two questions:

1: Where's a place i can get some new pads for less than what AC2 wants for 'em. Mine are a little stiff.

2: Strain relief on the cable entering the right side is pulled out, with a rectangular bit of metal hanging onto it. Not affecting performance, but, has to be fixed. What's the best way to proceed there?

I hope the allergies and the sound clear up for you. I have two SR-Lambda and they both sound the same as mine that you heard at the CO meet, which is pretty sweet. Even with my SRD-7 and SRD-X they are nice.

I'd be interested in knowing the source for pads too, but fortunately I don't need any just yet.

[tako_tsubo]

Don't the sr202 pads fit the Lambda/Lambda pro and are cheaper?

[ericj]

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict

I hope the allergies and the sound clear up for you. I have two SR-Lambda and they both sound the same as mine that you heard at the CO meet, which is pretty sweet. Even with my SRD-7 and SRD-X they are nice.

Yeah.







You know this is really all your fault, right?

[HeadphoneAddict]

Originally Posted by ericj

Yeah.







You know this is really all your fault, right?

Yes, of course!

[Victor Chew]

What kind of minimum quality source should one use in order to substantially benefit from the any stax setup?

[fuzzy]

Originally Posted by spritzer

Better caps will let more information through but you could always have them upgrade the unit later.

Ohh and you are far from maxed out with Auricaps, I would personally go for Mundorf silver/golds but they aren't cheap...



The original Omega was born out of a project to rethink how the earpeakers were desinged i.e. start from scratch with a different type of transducer and even new D/S gap and higher bias. They did of course use what experience they had but thank god that the SR-Omega sounds nothing like the Pro's... The SR-007 just built on that research with a stiffer chassis, better earpad design, much better headband and more inert drivers with acoustic damping.

Ok I know a bit about the Stax history in the 80s ad 90s and their design philosophy too and I own them all but have you ever listened in depth to the Lamda Pro/ED1 Df EQ combination side by side with the Omega phones? In historical sequence? With the right recordings? Read the papers on binaural recording and diffuse field equalisation as it pertained to headphone playback frequency response in relation to state of the art stereo microphones like the Neuman KU100 and the AACHEN Head binaural recording system and listened to the recordings of the "STAX" label? Then you would know where I was coming from.

[ericj]

Originally Posted by Victor Chew

What kind of minimum quality source should one use in order to substantially benefit from the any stax setup?

if your alternative to Stax is a dynamic headphone, I'm here to tell you that you will substantially benefit if the source is better than a fisher-price cassette deck.

Any substantially detailed headphone can make you decide that you need a better source. Doesn't mean you're not benefiting.

[edstrelow]

Originally Posted by spritzer

I must say that my SR-007A is very close to the Mk1 with the small mods in place with only a bit more forward presentation which I kind of like. PM me if you want to mess with your expensive headphones...

So are you now saying that the MkII is as good or better than the MkI?

[fuzzy]

Originally Posted by ericj

if your alternative to Stax is a dynamic headphone, I'm here to tell you that you will substantially benefit if the source is better than a fisher-price cassette deck.

Any substantially detailed headphone can make you decide that you need a better source. Doesn't mean you're not benefiting.

I plug my ipod into my STAX Omega 717 combo and it sounds vey, very good. My ipod has my recordings in it that I burned to MP3 320 format. The Ipod has its limitations, bad enough to make it not worth to load lossless on it. This is made clear by the Omega, but it still sounds very, vey good. Stax is very revealing but I would not be afraid to plug a casette deck in it but it better be a Nak Dragon or at least a TOTL 3 head Onkyo or Technics..

[Victor Chew]

Stax, can be a "slippery" road, sources can be as well. After getting a particular source, one may realise that, "this is the weak link" and the wheel to upgrade and upgrade goes on and on.

[dvse]

Originally Posted by fuzzy

Ok I know a bit about the Stax history in the 80s ad 90s and their design philosophy too and I own them all but have you ever listened in depth to the Lamda Pro/ED1 Df EQ combination side by side with the Omega phones? In historical sequence? With the right recordings? Read the papers on binaural recording and diffuse field equalisation as it pertained to headphone playback frequency response in relation to state of the art stereo microphones like the Neuman KU100 and the AACHEN Head binaural recording system and listened to the recordings of the "STAX" label? Then you would know where I was coming from.

These are all good points, but binaural recordings are more or less a technological dead end these days and all hope for realistic soundstage on headphones lies with infinitely more flexible custom HRTF and associated processing. Not sure if this will ever become popular though until there is a way to do individual calibration without in-ear microphones etc.

[spritzer]

Originally Posted by ericj

1: Where's a place i can get some new pads for less than what AC2 wants for 'em. Mine are a little stiff.

2: Strain relief on the cable entering the right side is pulled out, with a rectangular bit of metal hanging onto it. Not affecting performance, but, has to be fixed. What's the best way to proceed there?

1: Find an online store in Japan and have a deputy service buy them for you. They shouldn't be much more then 2000Yen per pair plus all the fees and shipping.

2: This should be easy to fix. The metal plate slides into place with the baffle out of the way and secures the cable. Lift up the four corners of the earpads and remove the screws. Pull the baffle out and align the metal plate and cable just like on the other earcup and push into place.

Originally Posted by Victor Chew

What kind of minimum quality source should one use in order to substantially benefit from the any stax setup?

A good vintage dac is plenty. Most Stax phones aren't too picky and do the best with what they are fed.

Originally Posted by fuzzy

Ok I know a bit about the Stax history in the 80s ad 90s and their design philosophy too and I own them all but have you ever listened in depth to the Lamda Pro/ED1 Df EQ combination side by side with the Omega phones? In historical sequence? With the right recordings? Read the papers on binaural recording and diffuse field equalisation as it pertained to headphone playback frequency response in relation to state of the art stereo microphones like the Neuman KU100 and the AACHEN Head binaural recording system and listened to the recordings of the "STAX" label? Then you would know where I was coming from.

The DF EQ has always sounded like crap to me and I was quick to sell my units again. The binaural recordings are fantastic for what they are but this is a very limited niche market that Stax abandoned. I've spent a lot of time over the last few months dissecting the Omega phones to help people make better DIY phones as well as fixing the damn Mk2. The Omegas have borrowed from nearly every Stax headphone ever made but Stax have simply gone down the same road a Fostex did with the T-50v1. Create a great driver and mount it to a secure platform.

Originally Posted by edstrelow

So are you now saying that the MkII is as good or better than the MkI?

Nope, the Mk1 is more neutral to my ears but the Mk2/A is a close second and I'm sure that many would prefer the more forward nature.

[fuzzy]

Originally Posted by dvse

These are all good points, but binaural recordings are more or less a technological dead end these days and all hope for realistic soundstage on headphones lies with infinitely more flexible custom HRTF and associated processing. Not sure if this will ever become popular until though until there is a way to do individual calibration without in-ear microphones etc.

Saying that binaural is a dead end is like saying good stereo recordings are a dead end. Well, welcome, this is the high end headphone thread. After 1000s of recording I believe stereo (and binaural) is alive and well and computer HRTFs will never replace a real recording. The Stax experiements were not just about binaural but about proper equalisation of headphones. The DF eqs (ED1 monitor) do not sound like crap, I can prove that is I still have mine. Actually they are a must have in the collection of a serious Stax listener.

[ericj]

Originally Posted by dvse

These are all good points, but binaural recordings are more or less a technological dead end these days and all hope for realistic soundstage on headphones lies with infinitely more flexible custom HRTF and associated processing. Not sure if this will ever become popular until though until there is a way to do individual calibration without in-ear microphones etc.

You know, HRTF is such a cool sounding acronym that hardly anybody remembers that it means "Head-Related Transfer Function".

The difference between making binaural recordings and using an additive HRTF (whether it's digital or analog) is that in the case of the binaural recording, the HRTF is attempted through physical means of an artificial head.

Neither method is intrinsically superior.

There's some research recently into how the shape of the outer ear affects some sounds. Are we going to get HRTF filters customized to our personal geometries or something? I doubt it.

[dvse]

Originally Posted by fuzzy

Saying that binaural is a dead end is like saying good stereo recordings are a dead end. Well, welcome, this is the high end headphone thread. After 1000s of recording I believe stereo (and binaural) is alive and well and computer HRTFs will never replace a real recording.

Sure they will, at least to those people for whom standard dummy heads don't work or to those who want to listen to 99.9+% of recordings out there.