Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The Stax thread (New)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Stax thread (New) - Page 15

post #211 of 18428
2/23/07 at 5:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lloyd297 View Post
The answers are yes, no, yes, and variable........

Look, I've never heard the Omega but I have briefly heard the Orpheus; I own Stax 404's and X-III's along with a number of speakers (Apogee Stage, ProAc Response 2, Electrocompaniet Qube, D'Appolito Aria 5), several power amps (Krell, Nuforce, Bel Canto, Metaxas), two preamps (Electrocompaniet and Metaxas) plus 4 sets of interconnects (Transparent Audio, Luminous, Nordost Blue Heaven and Magic), plus sundry other bits of audiophilia and I'd throw the lot out for the JBL's. OK - I'd keep the X-III and the Apogee (plus a pre and power to drive them) because they do a couple of things perhaps marginally better than the JBL (although even here I'm not sure).

Resolution of the 6328 is at least as good as the Stax phones and psycho-acoustically it's considerably better. By this I mean that the perceived resolution is better because you're not only hearing the fine detail; you're feeling it too. It seems as if your attention is drawn to things that you feel viscerally. .

However, a few caveats. In my experience audiophiles do not like music sounding too explicit. They prefer it sounding "delicate" and like to spend their time listening for "low-level detail", etc. The JBL's make low-level detail clear and unmistakable and this may deprive the audiophile of one of his greatest pleasures.

Another thing: if you like stats for what I think they often do wrong, you may not like the 6328's. If you like to luxuriate in misty, vague, impressionistic soundscapes all the time you may not like the 6328's. If it's in the original recording they'll luxuriate with the best of them but if it ain't they won't fake it either.
It's hard to argue about equipment you haven't heard and I haven't heard these speakers. I have seen some other reviews and they are generally positive for "monitor use" which in my understanding means optimised for falt frequency response and power handling. Those are pretty good things to have in any speaker, but there is an issue about detail, which your descriptions seem to gloss over. For example, how do you feel low level detail viscerally? Listen at 120dB?

However, I have heard the Stax SRXIII's which you consider to be in the running as good phones. In fact I owned them and long ago got rid of them. I know there are some fans of them here, but they lacked bass and had a honky midrange. Even run through a pretty good power amp and a transformer I wasn't impressed. At any rate they are 30 year old technology, using low bias and thick diaphragms. If those were my best stat phones, I would probably prefer speakers too.

You mention the 404's, which are representative of modern stats, but don't say what you are running them with. They can be very good although the consensus is that the Omega is better, but at at about 8 times the price it should be. Most complaints about the 404 are about treble etch, and lack of mid bass. However, I sure wouldn't describe them as "misty...vague and impressionistic."
Reply
post #212 of 18428
2/23/07 at 5:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by spritzer View Post
You have to be very careful when you solder near an electrostatic driver. A tiny drop of flux will burn right through the driver and can destroy it. It's much easier to manufacture something where you can have the parts ready in advance and just connect some connectors for final assembly.

I had a look inside the SR-X Mk3s last night, and mine have the capacitor (resistor? don't know!) like the 'blue-thingummy' in the earlier picture on the other thread. (Picture attached - click below - I don't know how you guys get the snaps to be in the posting itself: do you have to upload the photo to head-fi first, to get the http:// bit?)

Why might some have this 'thingummy' and some not, or is the photo without them not of an SR-X?

And, I might add, it still looks quite easy to snip off the crimped connectors and solder them direct: the capacitor (or resistor or whatever it is) is soldered, so it can't be that heat transference will damage the diaphragm.
Reply
post #213 of 18428
2/23/07 at 5:22am
Thread Starter 
I must say, my wallet is rather glad I enjoy the Sigma Pros more than the Omega IIs.
Reply
post #214 of 18428
2/23/07 at 5:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Blue View Post
I had a look inside the SR-X Mk3s last night, and mine have the capacitor (resistor? don't know!) like the 'blue-thingummy' in the earlier picture on the other thread. (Picture attached - click below - I don't know how you guys get the snaps to be in the posting itself: do you have to upload the photo to head-fi first, to get the http:// bit?)

Why might some have this 'thingummy' and some not, or is the photo without them not of an SR-X?

And, I might add, it still looks quite easy to snip off the crimped connectors and solder them direct: the capacitor (or resistor or whatever it is) is soldered, so it can't be that heat transference will damage the diaphragm.
Yep, yours and mine look the same. The Gamma cable is soldered on, with the resistor/capacitor thigy too so it looks like they decided soldering was a good ploy later.
Reply
post #215 of 18428
2/23/07 at 6:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeggy View Post
Yep, yours and mine look the same. The Gamma cable is soldered on, with the resistor/capacitor thigy too so it looks like they decided soldering was a good ploy later.
Yes, I might have a go at soldering my SR-X Mk3s: I've got all my soldering gear out at the moment (making some new DIN to phono interconnects with Van Damme OFC cable and Neutrik plugs - anything to squeeze a bit more into the SR-X Mk3s!). I reckon if I'm careful and put some card underneath, in case of flux dripping, I should be OK.

By the way, does anybody know why in the photos on the SR-X v 404 thread
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showth...174766&page=13
the SR-X doesn't have the 'watchacallit/thingummy' but mine and smeggy's does (and the pictures to which I'm referring are the ones linked in evil-zen's post, not the big ones actually in Tachikoma's post)?
Reply
post #216 of 18428
2/23/07 at 6:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
I must say, my wallet is rather glad I enjoy the Sigma Pros more than the Omega IIs.
I need more time, more music and charge on the diaphragms but so far I'm preferring the O2s to the 4070s of which my wallet is also thankful for. They're definitely a lot more isolating though for sure.
Reply
post #217 of 18428
2/23/07 at 6:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Blue View Post
By the way, does anybody know why in the photos on the SR-X v 404 thread
http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showth...174766&page=13
the SR-X doesn't have the 'watchacallit/thingummy' but mine and smeggy's does (and the pictures to which I'm referring are the ones linked in evil-zen's post, not the big ones actually in Tachikoma's post)?
Both of my SR-X/MK3's have a capacitor (or something) between the two stator connectors. No idea what it is good for...
Reply
post #218 of 18428
2/23/07 at 8:40am
It's a resistor or something similar and it is also in the Lambdas and Sigmas. It's an overload protection for the stators. If you put a cardboard over the driver you should be fine but if you are going to solder the cable in place throw the stock one away. It's pure crap and it adds to the phones sibilant nature.
Reply
post #219 of 18428
2/23/07 at 9:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by spritzer View Post
It's a resistor or something similar and it is also in the Lambdas and Sigmas. It's an overload protection for the stators. If you put a cardboard over the driver you should be fine but if you are going to solder the cable in place throw the stock one away. It's pure crap and it adds to the phones sibilant nature.
Throw the stock cable away???!! Surely not? What do you mean?
Reply
post #220 of 18428
2/23/07 at 9:02am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Blue View Post
Throw the stock cable away???!! Surely not? What do you mean?
I think he was talking about the resistor thingy.
Reply
post #221 of 18428
2/23/07 at 9:09am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
I think he was talking about the resistor thingy.
But isn't it there for a reason? Or can I surmise that since some SR-Xs appear not have it (see above), it may be dispensed with?
Reply
post #222 of 18428
2/23/07 at 10:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lloyd297 View Post
Resolution of the 6328 is at least as good as the Stax phones and psycho-acoustically it's considerably better. By this I mean that the perceived resolution is better because you're not only hearing the fine detail; you're feeling it too. .
I think that comparing headphones to loudspeakers is comparing apples and oranges. Even headphones like the AKG K-1000, Jecklyn Float and Stax Sigma do not place the image on a stage some distance in front of the listener like a loudspeaker. I think that if you compare your JBL’s to other Electrostatic loudspeakers (like Quad ESL57 or 63, Martin Logan CLS, Sound Lab…) you will find that they provide a more transparent and accurate window onto the original recording (good or bad). When evaluating the transparency of a system, program material is very important. Try using some of the recordings on the Mercury Living Presence, RCA Living Stereo, Decca, Chesky, Reference Recordings labels. A lot of Pop and Rock recordings are heavily processed and while they may be enjoyable to listen to they are not very usable in evaluating a system. I have a high quality 2 channel audio system but I still enjoy listening to headphones. It’s a different experience.
Reply
post #223 of 18428
2/23/07 at 10:23am
I'm saying that the stock cable is crap and should be upgraded. The sr-lambda cable is good but the new extension cables should be even better. You can get rid of the resistor but I can't see any reason to do it. It isn't in the signal path and there is quite a lot more to upgrade before you do that. If you want an instant upgrade then remove the wool from the earcups. It makes a huge difference but then again it reveals the reason why the wool was there in the first place.

In ET1000 news I've built the bias unit in the Beyer schematic but the phones are still leaking bias. The problem is that I can't open the ear cups without destroying the pads so they'll just have to be like this.
Reply
post #224 of 18428
2/23/07 at 12:20pm
Well, I can never seem to fit my posts on this thread into the current conversation... so this is another off-topic post. But, since it is Stax related, I suppose it sort of fits!

Anyway, I posted a quick-and-dirty webpage of my Stax gear. It has pictures of the pad replacement of my Sigmas, and pictures of the pad and headband replacement of my Lambdas. I just thought some of you may be interested in the pictures...

http://ferrstein.com/headphones.htm

Happy Listening!
Reply
post #225 of 18428
2/23/07 at 12:35pm
Great site you've got there. I would like to point out one error that Stax introduced the SR-1 (the first ear speaker) in 1959 and it started production in 1960 so better make that 50's instead of 70's in the first line...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The Stax thread (New)