Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Stax Sigma Low Bais and Stax Sigma Pros
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stax Sigma Low Bais and Stax Sigma Pros - Page 6

post #76 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by edstrelow View Post
Have you tried your set-up with some lambdas or even an SRX3?
Yes. And HE60s, O2s, 950s, Gammas and SR50s.
post #77 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
Yes. And HE60s, O2s, 950s, Gammas and SR50s.
So how do they compare?
post #78 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by edstrelow View Post
So how do they compare?
For DH? I find the SR-Xs don't do so good a job because of their horizontally compressed soundstage, but it doesn't seem to be a supra-aural thing as the electrets sound as okay as their technology will allow. The HE60s sound good with music, but fail at movies due to their bass rolloff. The Sigma Pros are the reverse and make for some great TV. The ESP-950s and 4070s are pretty normal sounding with DH and hard to define. It's been a while since I last used the O2s, and I'm struggling to remember how different they sounded between using DH and listening straight. If memory serves they sounded circumscribed either way.
post #79 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
For DH? I find the SR-Xs don't do so good a job because of their horizontally compressed soundstage, but it doesn't seem to be a supra-aural thing as the electrets sound as okay as their technology will allow. The HE60s sound good with music, but fail at movies due to their bass rolloff. The Sigma Pros are the reverse and make for some great TV. The ESP-950s and 4070s are pretty normal sounding with DH and hard to define. It's been a while since I last used the O2s, and I'm struggling to remember how different they sounded between using DH and listening straight. If memory serves they sounded circumscribed either way.
Something must depend on what Dolby Headphone source you are using. I am using the JVC adapter

http://www.amazon.com/JVC-SUDH1-Surr.../dp/B000ETBZ5G

with a digital out from a dvd player to the JVC and a transformer to power the unit itself. The JVC then feeds a Stax SRDP. Everyone who hears it with the 404 is blown away. It's clear sounding, and realistic with great dynamics, and significant front/back differentiation.

The JVC didn't sound all that good using its own amplifier for a number of fairly cheap dynamic phones I tried, but with the old Stax amp and 404 it was in another league.
post #80 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by edstrelow View Post
Something must depend on what Dolby Headphone source you are using. I am using the JVC adapter

http://www.amazon.com/JVC-SUDH1-Surr.../dp/B000ETBZ5G

with a digital out from a dvd player to the JVC and a transformer to power the unit itself. The JVC then feeds a Stax SRDP. Everyone who hears it with the 404 is blown away. It's clear sounding, and realistic with great dynamics, and significant front/back differentiation.

The JVC didn't sound all that good using its own amplifier for a number of fairly cheap dynamic phones I tried, but with the old Stax amp and 404 it was in another league.
I'm using the Philips unit. It has massive amounts of gain (I should try a K1000 out of it sometime, just to see how it does), but is otherwise pretty similar in concept to the JVC. My 100Wpc/class A power amp has far more drive than the SRD-P, which could account for some of the sound difference, as I can pretty much drive everything except the O2s as well as is needed. In my system I notice colourations/resonances more than any muddiness/flabbiness, which is why I like Lambdas and Gammas less than others do, their flaws are quite audible in my setup, whereas the weaknesses of phones like the Sigmas and 4070s are not.
post #81 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by pabbi1 View Post
I quite agree - and, to be fair, I have owned Lambda non-pro / SRM-1 before, so they already had a leg up. Again, more about me than them - but, Sigma over Lamba is not universal either, and just baffling to me. It wasn't even in the same ballpark, region or universe.

Perhaps these (the one pair I heard) were somehow not up to par? That is the only possible thing I can think of, because I can usually see what the appeal is, but this one just escapes me.
It could be damaged or the fiber glass moved in some way so they didn't function like they are supposed to. It has a tendency to cover part of the drivers and that muffles the sound a bit. If the pair hasn't been looked over by somebody familiar with the Sigmas that could be it. The driver are in a special cage to protect them so they should be fine but you never know. When you spend enough time time with this stuff you start to wonder why they do last this long with such a small margin for error...

Even though the Sigmas were more expensive then any of the Lambdas they were never considered superior, simply another way of doing things. The Lambdas were always the main line and they sold quite a few of them over the years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
Heck, Birgir doesn't even like the HE90s. There's no accounting for the tastes of some people...
Hey!!! Not liking is something I reserve for dynamics and class D amps. The He90 just doesn't come close to the standards I set for a statement electrostatic headphone...
post #82 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by spritzer View Post
Even though the Sigmas were more expensive then any of the Lambdas they were never considered superior, simply another way of doing things. The Lambdas were always the main line and they sold quite a few of them over the years.
Well, I think Naotake Hayashi considered them superior. Most of the Stax engineers clearly favoured the Lambda.

Quote:
Hey!!! Not liking is something I reserve for dynamics and class D amps. The He90 just doesn't come close to the standards I set for a statement electrostatic headphone...
post #83 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
Well, I think Naotake Hayashi considered them superior. Most of the Stax engineers clearly favoured the Lambda.
The Lambdas are "easier" but I like the Sigmas for the sheer insanity of the design. The Sigma could never have been a mass market success like the Lambdas but they still made them for people that "got it". Not a whole lot of business sense but that's why I miss old Stax sometimes. This concept design is also pretty unique as they start off with an idea and then develop ways to make it work rather then just hammering something together and see if it works.
post #84 of 472
Thread Starter 

Sigmas and Lambdas In my opinion

should never be compared to each other. They are totally different in design and the goals of both are different. Sigma;s are also know as Panoramic or Panoramic Pros. They were created as an experiment in the art of sound staging. At that same time people were in the process of listening to- if you remember it- Quadraphonic Sound. Many companies brought out their own line of Quadraphonic Headphones including Koss and JVC. The sound within the Sigma Earspeakers bounces and reflects differently into the human ear than do the Lamdas. It like comparing apples and oranges. I don't think you can really do such a comparison. Certainly as a unique-specialized headphone, the Sigmas are from another planet. Additionally, if a person can has the economic power to invest having a full set of Sigmas, Lambda etc meets the audiophiles desires and musical options. This is my humble opinion. Scottsmrnyc
post #85 of 472
I just saw this thread. I currently have two pair of SR-Sigma earspeakers. One is my everyday pair and the other is a dead mint pair that I'm half afraid to take out of the box. They were supposedly never used and they look like they were never used.

I've been thinking of using some drivers from a rough pair of cheap Lambda Pros to upgrade one of my SR-Sigmas to the Sigma Pro version. Problem is, a cheap set of these has yet to come up!

I do still spend a lot of time listening to my Lambda Pro's as well.
post #86 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottsmrnyc View Post
Sigma;s are also know as Panoramic or Panoramic Pros.
By whom?

Quote:
It like comparing apples and oranges.
More like comparing an Ultrasone and a Beyer.
post #87 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrstein View Post
I just saw this thread. I currently have two pair of SR-Sigma earspeakers. One is my everyday pair and the other is a dead mint pair that I'm half afraid to take out of the box. They were supposedly never used and they look like they were never used.

I've been thinking of using some drivers from a rough pair of cheap Lambda Pros to upgrade one of my SR-Sigmas to the Sigma Pro version. Problem is, a cheap set of these has yet to come up!

I do still spend a lot of time listening to my Lambda Pro's as well.
I'd really like to convert an old beat up Sigma to the 404 standard but using the Lambda Pro will yield yet another flavor of sound. I really like the old SR-Lambda drivers though as you can get a phenomenal result with them if they are fed well. If you put L-Pro drivers in them they will not be like the Sigma Pro's as they used Lambda Signature drivers and the PC-OCC cable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl View Post
By whom?
Well Stax called them "Electrostatic panoramic-sound earspeakers" so that might be what he's talking about. It's better then perpendicular weirdo phones...
post #88 of 472
Well my plans to make the Sigma my portable phone are coming along well. I've scored a SRD-X (comes with a Lambda too, which I plan to sell), so if it works fine the only missing piece will be a portable player.
post #89 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottsmrnyc View Post
should never be compared to each other. They are totally different in design and the goals of both are different. Sigma;s are also know as Panoramic or Panoramic Pros. They were created as an experiment in the art of sound staging. At that same time people were in the process of listening to- if you remember it- Quadraphonic Sound. Many companies brought out their own line of Quadraphonic Headphones including Koss and JVC. The sound within the Sigma Earspeakers bounces and reflects differently into the human ear than do the Lamdas. It like comparing apples and oranges. I don't think you can really do such a comparison. Certainly as a unique-specialized headphone, the Sigmas are from another planet. Additionally, if a person can has the economic power to invest having a full set of Sigmas, Lambda etc meets the audiophiles desires and musical options. This is my humble opinion. Scottsmrnyc
I agree with most of these sentiments/facts but since the Sigma preceded the Lambda and used basically the same transducers it is hard not to want to make Sigma/Lambda comparisons. In fact I regularly have a set of each plugged into 2 of my systems and go from one to another regularly so I am always comparing them.

Sigmas - good for vocals (all kinds), opera, choral, pop/rock, jazz. Helps any recording which is too dry sounding because it brings up the ambience in the recording and the treble roll-off helps recordings with harsh treble.

Lambdas - better dynamics and bass than Sigmas. Best with symphonic and good rock/pop recordings, i.e. that which is not to treblish or dry. sounding. With a first-rate balanced recording, I don't think the 404 and 717 amp can be beat for realism , excitement and beautiful sound.

With regard to the Sigmas more unque quality, the externalization of the soundfield, I feel that they are only a partial success. However when I directly compare either the Sigma/404 to the 404 or Sigma Pro to the Lambda Nova, the soundfield of the Lambda seems to collapse.

Also I have been more impressed by the externalization with the low bias Sigma, possibly because it has more ambience than the pro designs, although this could also be influenced by the SRA12 amp I use for the low Bias Sigma.

Many times I have been seduced by the low bias Sigmas into thinking that my speakers were running, something which I think is a good indication of perceived externalization of sound. This effect just doesn't seem as pronounced with the pro models.
post #90 of 472
Quote:
Originally Posted by spritzer View Post
The Lambdas are "easier" but I like the Sigmas for the sheer insanity of the design. The Sigma could never have been a mass market success like the Lambdas but they still made them for people that "got it". Not a whole lot of business sense but that's why I miss old Stax sometimes. This concept design is also pretty unique as they start off with an idea and then develop ways to make it work rather then just hammering something together and see if it works.
I tend to agree. The Stax engineers were thinking "out of the box" when they designed these. Oddly enough they ended up putting the boxes on your ears.

It's too bad there have not been more experiments of this sort. The basic circumaural, which is the design used for most flagship phones, cannot be the ultimate in cup design.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Stax Sigma Low Bais and Stax Sigma Pros