Stax SR 507 or 407 ? - Page 2

Yama told me in an email that all the new Lambdas have the same driver. He said that he felt the SR-407 was the best bang-for-the-buck in the line, and that the SR-507 was, by a small but audible margin, the best. Being an audiophile, I of course had to buy the SR-507. I love it. I have read numerous posts by VisualGuy saying how the 507 isn't very good, but that has not been my experience. It is better, clearly better, than my HD-600, HD-650, AKG K701, Grado SR-80, and Fostex T-40 RP-II (ortho). I have large ears, and I find it very light and comfortable. I use it with a Stax tube amp. In my experience, it is the first headphone that made me really, truly enjoy headphone listening. I also find that the sound is very similar to my Quad ESL-989s with both Pass Aleph monos and BAT VK-60 monos (tube). In my book, that's not too shabby. That is my experience, for what it's worth. YMMV. Good luck. 

If SR-207, SR-307, SR-407, SR-507 having different parameters (like capacity, resistance) have the same driver, then the cable and pads do the difference.

How far the SR-207 lays sonically below SR-407?

If it's anything like the differences between 202 vs 303 vs 404 vs 404LE then I would say the differences are minor in grander scheme of things. I do remember that the 404LE has much more detailed and articulated midrange and bass compared to the 202. Edgier-sounding too unfortunately... 

I really want to believe that all of the have the same driver, so I can just get the 207 or 307 and get the 507 pad which would be a lot cheaper. But...

If all of them have the same driver, why is it that they have different specs? Earpad difference would not reflect on its electrical properties. If it is the cable, why is it that 407 and 507 have similar specs despite having different cables? While the 307 and the 407 have more spec difference while they have the same cable?

From what I have researched so far they have identical driver housing.

Elsewhere I read that the 207 sounded like the 307 and the 407 sounded like the 507. The prices of the bottom 3 models are closer to each other while the 507 is quite a bit more expensive. It seem to make sense so say that the 407 is the value buy.

The cable between SR-207/SR-307 and SR-407/SR-507 has differ geometry and in effect differ capacity, so impedance - that is why specs are differ.

impedance = 1 / ( 2 * PI * capacity * frequency )

SR-207 spec: 120 pF, 132 kOhm at 10 kHz

1 / ( 2 × 3.14 × 0.000000000120 F × 10000 Hz) = 132696 Ohm

SR-407 spec: 110 pF, 144 kOhm at 10 kHz

1 / ( 2 × 3.14 × 0.000000000110 F × 10000 Hz) = 144759 Ohm

These differences are rather slight, so probably there is something else making SR-407/SR-507 a better headphones. Earpads?

Quote:

Originally Posted by borizm 

Stax SR-307, judging by the parameters, seems to have differnet diaphgram than SR-407 (which looks like similar to SR-507), and has different cable.

What is the real difference in the sound signature between them both? At the start I like to buy the cheapest but the good one.

This is my first stax headphone - Sr 307 , and I do not regret my decision to own it at all. And most of all , I will chose 507 for next upgrading or 009 far beyond . 407 's not good - not bad for this situation when you start with 307 imo

I like the 507 enough that I sold my LCD-3 the same day I got the Stax. I think it might be due to the amp. I don't think Schiit Lyr is that good of an amp for the LCD-3. All that aside, the planars are too heavy for my neck. 

I will have the 007Mk1 very soon, and few weeks from now I will get to audition the HD800 and LCD-2 that belongs to another fellow Headfier who lives in Pittsburgh.

The 507 is quite forward, liquid sounding, yet being transparent and faithful to the source. What I like particularly is the speed and resolution of it. It just handles everything I throw at it with ease. Very slightly tilt up treble, but never harsh nor dry.

Quote:

Originally Posted by koonhua90 

I like the 507 enough that I sold my LCD-3 the same day I got the Stax. I think it might be due to the amp. I don't think Schiit Lyr is that good of an amp for the LCD-3. All that aside, the planars are too heavy for my neck. 

 

I will have the 007Mk1 very soon, and few weeks from now I will get to audition the HD800 and LCD-2 that belongs to another fellow Headfier who lives in Pittsburgh.

 

The 507 is quite forward, liquid sounding, yet being transparent and faithful to the source. What I like particularly is the speed and resolution of it. It just handles everything I throw at it with ease. Very slightly tilt up treble, but never harsh nor dry.

Yup, you need something better than the Lyr to really make the LCD-3 sound great (plus your source should be stellar too). I do agree that the 507 is a really nice headphone too, great value at about 1k imo. Best treble reproduction short of the 009s imo. On the whole, from a good amp and source (liquid fire and say a Moon 750D), the LCD-3s are definietly better but the 507s are certainly great headphones.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyl1dyl 

 

Yup, you need something better than the Lyr to really make the LCD-3 sound great (plus your source should be stellar too). I do agree that the 507 is a really nice headphone too, great value at about 1k imo. Best treble reproduction short of the 009s imo. On the whole, from a good amp and source (liquid fire and say a Moon 750D), the LCD-3s are definietly better but the 507s are certainly great headphones.
 

 

Better is relative though. There too many dynamic headphones, and there are so many amps and cables to choose from, so I went for the easy way and got the electrostats 

Main detraction on the LCD-3 for me, is the weight and the clamp. I wouldn't say the LCD-3 is better in every way. They trade blows, with the LCD-3 having great extension and bass punch, warmth smooth sound, greater width and depth. On the other hand, in terms of clarity, speed, detail extraction, resolution, the 507+T1 as a package clearly outclasses the LCD-3+Lyr. And it happens that I put a lot of emphasis on those criteria.

Quote:

Originally Posted by koonhua90 

 

Better is relative though. There too many dynamic headphones, and there are so many amps and cables to choose from, so I went for the easy way and got the electrostats 

 

Main detraction on the LCD-3 for me, is the weight and the clamp. I wouldn't say the LCD-3 is better in every way. They trade blows, with the LCD-3 having great extension and bass punch, warmth smooth sound, greater width and depth. On the other hand, in terms of clarity, speed, detail extraction, resolution, the 507+T1 as a package clearly outclasses the LCD-3+Lyr. And it happens that I put a lot of emphasis on those criteria.

Yup, comfort is a big negative for the LCD-3. Thats true, the 507s do beat the LCD-3s in speed and clarity. I do feel that the LCD-3s though do detail extraction/resolution about as well from a good amp like a liquid fire or a beta22.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyl1dyl 

Yup, comfort is a big negative for the LCD-3. Thats true, the 507s do beat the LCD-3s in speed and clarity. I do feel that the LCD-3s though do detail extraction/resolution about as well from a good amp like a liquid fire or a beta22.

 

At the price of a Liquid Fire, I would rather save up and get the Stax 009 instead, and then DIY my own KGSSHV or T2 to go with it (although the latter is very hard to build) 

Although the main complaints here seem to focus on the LCD3's veil issues, reusing the arc assembly from the LCD2 is my biggest gripe of them all. Is revising the design to be more ergonomically friendly too much to ask for? 

Anyway, two years ago I had the same dilemma whether to upgrade to the LCD2 or the 404LE. After comparing them, both properly driven with the β22 and KGSS respectively, I ended up with the orthodynamic as it seems more forgiving and a better all-rounder in general. The LCD2 (and LCD3) is relatively easy to drive and quite forgiving but like the HD650, elevating it from merely "good" to "awesome" is a bit tricky. 

507 is not bright, those brightness & harshness are coming from the stax amp. 

cheap internal wire, fuse, caps, metal-film resistors,unregulated power supply  etc....

The real issue of 507 is the timbre, the bass has a little too much impact,

the mids lack some intimate when comparing to the 80's Lambdas.

& the highs sound a bit  hard.

I use it mostly when listen to  rock / techno / orchestral / instrumental music,

the brasses, bass, electric guitars & drums sound more correct & real on the 507

for vocals ,I will take the 80's lambdas, the old lambdas sound more relaxed.

violins, woodwinds are better, smoother than the 507

比較的