Most affordable entry into electrostatic headphones?

Well the Stax SR-001 MKII System sells at Audiocubes for $239 or if you want some full size cans, the Stax SRS-2050A Basic System II goes for $549. Both of these come with the headphones and an amp you can drive from a line out. You could probably get either cheaper through PriceJapan. Some of the Koss ones might be cheaper but I'm not too familiar with those.

You can get some very cheap stats on the second hand market. Certainly under $50. The question is, will they outperform a KSC75?

If you're after something actually good, look for second hand Staxes from the late 70s and 80s. The SR-5, SR-X mk2/3, and SR-Gamma are all good options. Even better if you can buy from Japan as some nice old Stax amps (SRA-3S for example) go for practically nothing.

I personally would look for a second hand Gamma setup on ebay.

Older, cheaper ones such as the Koss ESP9 or ESP6 really are not worth it, even when they go for very little.

SR-X mk3 + transformers seem to go for around $200 and less. Truly an audiophile bargain if I ever saw one.

Best,

-Jason

I suggest the Stax SR-001 MKII (only $239.00 from Audio Cubes).
Great sound in a small package.

sry to dig up an old trend, but ive been curious about electrostatic headphones.
I know the electrostatics are suppos to be super detailed headphones, but how do the SR-001s compare to dynamic headphones? Is it apples and oranges? How portable are these headphones?

Also, is there anything new on the market or available used that was is different from a year ago?

thanks

another vote for the SR-001 MKII from audiocubes.com. that's were i got my pair.

I think the ESP9 might outperform a KSC75 after i replace all the diodes and capacitors in the E.9 box.

But that keeps not happening because i hardly feel like it's worth it. Those cans are pretty uncomfortable.

A fully restored pair would cost more than $50, from what the ebay prices look like these days.

Sony ECR-500's are Very Nice but Very Rare. And it's a uni-electret rather than a full-blown electrostat.

I second the Stax SR001Mk2. Then if you want something better you have a useful portable system.

Some of the old Stax are pretty good but prices keep climbing, partly I suspect as a result of things that are said about them in these forums.

The SRXMKIII has some good definition but tends to harshness and a lack of deep bass. It sounds better equalized, but then many phones do, except for the slight loss of definition that equalizing adds.

I think you would be better to look for an old Stax Lambda, either high or low bias.

There are also occasionally cheap older portable Stax amps, such as the SRDP or SRDX, some are low bias, some are high bias, some have both sockets. These run on either 8 C cells or an outboard 12v dc power supply.

And thats how much people read replies

Dutchess, I've only heard SRS-4040 for few hours so I'm no expert on this issue.
Maybe someone could give quick lowdown on dynamic vs electrostat.. or just do search. Probably a wealth of information available.

anybody know how the SR001 compares to IEMs or Dynamic Headphones? Will they be able to replace my SF5pros? Anybody own both them and say DT880s or HD650s?

Seems like the search function is invisible to most people. I've ranted on and on about how the SR-001 compares to IEMs and full-size cans, including, yes the HD600 and HD650.

But what the heck, I've got time to kill...

The SR-001 will soundly beat most IEMs in terms of sound quality. I have not heard a single universal-fit, except the E500 when it is driven by a synergistic amp (in my case the original Hornet), that's anywhere near in overall sound quality. In terms of custom IEMs, the ES2 is, frankly, better, but it is also one heck of a lot more expensive. The ES2 is better because it is much more well-rounded, whereas the SR-001 has certain very visible sonic flaws, but what it does well, it does much better than the ES2.

The sound signature is warm, with a lot of lower midrange emphasis specifically and a lot of midrange emphasis in general. The treble is rolled-off and not very extended. The bass is fairly linear, with some midbass emphasis but less than many dynamic phones. Together, it makes for a colored but very seductive sound. Vocals and guitars readily stand out, as does anything that's solely in the midrange really, while the bass is punchy and authoritative for an electrostat, but not quite as deep as it could be. Because the treble is recessed, and because electrostats tend to sound diffuse, textures don't come out nearly as crisp as they could be, so everything has a very ethereal sound which is quite beautiful but not very realistic. The soundstage varies from very small to fairly large depending on associated equipment. Imaging is fairly accurate but instrument separation is not as good as other stats. Images will bleed into each other and instruments seem to overlap in space as opposed to being very clearly separated. There is also an airy haze around a lot of instruments when the headphone is used with tube gear (I use the SR-003 with the SRM-007t, for instance) but when you're using the SR-001 out of an mp3 player I doubt you'll have to worry about it that much.

This headphone does very well with rock, jazz, blues, and anything with a lot of midrange emphasis. It doesn't do so well with electronica because of the recessed treble, and doesn't do quite as well with classical because of the smallish soundstage, colored sound and generally hazy instrument separation. However, by "not so well" I mean that it doesn't so as well as the genres that suit it. On the whole, it's still fairly competent.

Naturally, this is an electrostatic driver, so it will have the sonic characteristics of one. With a dynamic driver, you have a lot of excursion, and the driver is capable of moving a lot of air. That means that you get serious bass punch (usually), and a palpable, solid sensation to the sound (this is very present on the HD600, for instance). However, the diaphragm also has a heavy voice coil hanging off it, which means that it cannot respond to changes in the signal very quickly, which in turn hurts transient response and overall speed. So, when the music gets complex, dynamics start to lose resolution and tend to mush everything together (the HD600 is very guilty of this).

Electrostatic drivers, on the other hand, don't have a voice coil hanging off the membrane, so the membrane is, for all intents and purposes, weightless. That means serious fast transient response and virtually no distortion whatsoever. This also means that as the music gets more and more complex, electrostats start to perform better and better and pull way ahead of dynamics. Even when you torture a 'stat with something as abysmally fast and complicated as, let's say, Nile's "Black Seeds of Vengeance" (brutal progressive death metal) or Stravinsky's "Petrushka" (one of the most complex orchestral pieces I've ever heard) you can still hear the texture and tone of every individual instrument. A dynamic here would lose sight of the microdetails and give you a more general, blurred sonic picture.

On the downside, an electrostatic driver is capable of very limited excursion. That means that it cannot move nearly as much air as a dynamic, so you're lacking the tactile, palpable sensation that a dynamic driver produces. You hear the bass, but you don't feel the slam (as much, you still feel a bit of slam). The treble shouts but it doesn't bite, the drums aren't as real and solid, and everything sounds more ethereal and less grounded.

To compound this problem, electrostats have more diffuse imaging than dynamics, so instead of hearing sounds precisely pinpointed in space, they will seem to come out of a general area in space but you won't always be sure where they're coming from. This usually widens the perception of soundstage, but adds to the airy/diffuse feeling and the perceptible lack of solidity.

Which is why the SR-001 sounds so ethereal and diffuse at times, compared to a punchy, impactful dynamic. This is also why, when the music turns very difficult, said dynamic throws its cards in and folds, whereas the SR-001 gets its groove on. You really can't torture this headphone enough with brutally complex music, and same goes for every 'stat that I've heard thus far (SR-303, SR-404, HE90).

Balanced armatures have a lot of the speed of an electrostat, but they also have some of the impact of a dynamic, which is why I like them so much - when they're well implemented. To this day, though, the ES2 is the only headphone, out of what I've heard, which I can wholeheartedly say implements balanced armatures well. The weakness of this driver technology is high frequency reproduction - I don't think they've cracked 20khz yet; most crap out at 16khz in theory but well before that in practice, so you're missing some of the overtones. That gives a lot of instruments a plasticky, textureless quality and hurts soundstage. Interestingly enough, balanced armatures have the crispest, most precise imaging out of any driver technology I've ever heard (the ER-4S is especially good at this).

And how does the SR-001 compare to the HD650? Favorably when the HD650 is driven by mediocre gear, but when gear quality increases, the HD650 pulls ahead. The SR-001 simply cannot overcome the limitations of its rolled-off treble and diffuse sound. The SR-001 system is also burdened with an amp that, while portable, is really quite far from the last word in sound quality (though under AC power it's not bad). Still, out of the 007t, the SR-003 sounds like what the HD650 should sound like but rarely does - very fast, very warm, with a lush, euphonic but highly detailed character. I prefer it over the HD650 unless you're driving the latter phone balanced, or out of some seriously good single-ended amplification.

So, given how cheap the SR-001 is, I think that's a very high recommendation.

It should be noted that I prefer the HD600 over the HD650 though, and over the SR-001 too, simply because the HD600 is one of the truly few headphones that have managed to get tonal balance, instrument tone and tembre completely right. In fact, out of the phones that I've heard, only the K340 is anywhere as close on this, and still not as good. The ES2 is not bad either, but being a balanced armature it's missing some overtones, so texture and tone are hurt.

Hope this helps...

thanks for the detailed responce, ive been looking through old electrostat trends, but this answers all my questions.
thanks again

We've done Cheap Stats discussions before, but the market keeps changing. Here's what I'd suggest now:

For simplicity's sake, let's confine ourselves to eBay. The three best-sounding under-$50 electrostats are '70s technology, so they're not up to the standards of a $550 Stax SR-2050, but they still have stat guts and stat cred: the Stax-built Realistic HP-100 sold during the '70s by Radio Shack, the similar Magnavox 1A9217 (which has bigger transformers in its transformer box), and the Sony ECR-500 electret electrostatic mentioned by ericj. Those are the only 'stats I know of that sell reliably for less than $50. The caveat is that these were not top-of-the-line 'phones even in their day (this is especially true of the Realistic/Magnavox) and only hint at what modern 'stats are capable of. But that's what you want, something that gives you a rough idea of the capabilities of the type; it's too big of a gamble to rush right out and drown $550 for the sake of something you've only read about.

If you're lucky, you can indeed get the very capable Stax SR-X Mk 3 with its transformer box for less than $200, but the bass is a little weak. It's not a beginner's 'phone. Two years ago you could get one for $75. That's how crazy the market is right now. The 'stat we'd all like you to be able to get is the original Stax SR-Lambda, but there's been a surge in demand recently that's shot the prices through the roof.

So my first recommendation would be the ECR-500, followed closely by the Realistic or Magnavox clones. For now. Try to get them for $30--40 plus shipping.