Does Anyone Else Think The Stax 007 Has A Constricted Soundstage?

I have some hesitation criticizing this phone since it does so much so well and it is one of the best phones ever made, if not the best. However it is not perfect. I was struck by a comment another member made in the Stax thread a few weeks back about not liking the soundstage of these phones compared to some other stats and it "resonated" with some of my own thoughts about these phones.

I myself generally prefer the soundstage of the Sigma/404 and probably even the Sigma pro and Sigma to that of the 007, but that is because I like the openness of sound that the Sigmas have due to the forward location of their drivers, what I call the pre-aural location. But what about the soundstage of other traditional circumaural phones compared to the 007?

The term "soundstage" is somewhat nebulous and open to differing interpretations. I distinguish between "imaging' of stereo sources and "soundstage."

Imaging refers to the ability of set of phones to give the listener precsiely localized positions of instruments and voices from left to right. This is based on interaural timing and amplitude differences between the two ears and is something that the 007 does exceedingly well. The superb imaging was almost the first thing that stuck me when I got my own 007 set some while back. The locations of sound sources were precisely localized and very stable over time, better than anything I had ever heard or for that matter have heard since.

So what is soundstage and what is the problem with the 007? I use the term soundstage to refer to other aspects of the sonic image that make it sound realistic, open, out-of-the head and the like. It generally means a realistic stereo image but you can also talk about the soundstage of a monaural source played through headphones, if it sounds somewhat realistic. (I don't want to push monaural listening too much, generally this is pretty boring through headphones but occasionally I hear a monaural recording which is fairly listenable through phones even though it lacks any real stereo image.)

The problem with the 007 is that like the other commentator, I find it somewhat lacking in openness even compared to some other circumaural stat phones such as the Stax 404. Certainly there have been times when I put them down and replace them with the Sigma/404 even though the 404 phones do not have the same precise imaging and fine detail of the 007.

At this point one has a problem of definition as to exactly what 007 and even what 404 I am discussing. My 007 is the 007A, with the Spritzer spring modification, which flattens the spring inside the cup. The ear pad is swivelled so that the thickest part is below and slightly behind the ear.

My 404 is also modified in that I have removed the foam from the back side of the ear cups, something which I feel gets rid of some midrange honkiness of the 404 as well as expanding the soundstage. At any rate I sat and listened to the 404 and 007A side by side in my 717 amp for about a week and think even the 404 is more open sounding.

I am less familiar with the 007 Mk1 but I did spend some time with it at the last Canjam and didn't think it had any obvious soundstage advantage over the A model.

At any rate, I wondered why I might be hearing what I think I am hearing and a couple of thoughts came to mind.

Firstly, the 007A has a somewhat pronounced lower bass boom which, especially when the system is not warmed up ( I use the 717 amp) tends to make the bass somewhat ill-defined and poorly localized.

Secondly though, as I looked at the phones there is a significant difference in construction which I don't think helps the 007. Whereas the 404 has a fully open back with only a minimal cage behind the driver, the 007 has a solid wall projecting about 3/8 in from the driver and fully around the driver so there is a sort of chamber behind the driver. I other words the 007ndriver is far more enclosed in the rear than in the 404 or other Lambdas.

[IMG][/IMG]

Basically the 007 driver is recessed about 3/8 inch from the back screen and there is a solid "ring" also about 3/8 inch deep circling the back of the driver. It may even create sort of a resonating chamber.

I think this may matter. For example if I place my fingers anywhere near the back of the 404's when they are on my head, I hear a disruption of the soundstage. And of course if I put my hands over the back of the 404 they sound pretty dull. So the manner in which the backside of the earcup is constructed may make a big difference to the sound and the Lambdas may have an advantage in this regard by being more open in the back.

Anyway those are my thoughts. The 007 is a great phone but did Stax miss the opportunity to make it better by making the back more open or by some other design change?

I recall this review although I have not read it in some time. I guessed that his detail-perceived-distance argument was based on a comparison between perceptual stimuli for distance as they occur in vision and audition.

It has been argued for some time in experimental psychology that one of the monocular stimuli for distance(i.e. distance cues not dependant on comparing differences betwen the images of the two eyes, or non-Avatar stereoscopy) is a blurring of detail with increasing distance of objects from the observer. This relationship arises in part because of the inability of the visual system to register details as objects become smaller in size on the retina with increasing distance. Basically we run up against the limit of resolution of the visual system. Also atmosperic pollution and moisture may block out more details as more atmosphere comes between the observer and the object.

Something like this may also occur in listening to sounds. Certainly as distance is increased from a sound source, high frequencies decline so in that sense sonic detail is lost with distance. The reverse side of this argument may be what people sometimes call "presence" in a recording or playback system. If there are clear and prominent mid and upper frequencies one may perceive the music as being closer.