Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Question about amps for the Stax SR-009
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Question about amps for the Stax SR-009 - Page 27

post #391 of 711
I tried the sr009 with the wes at SSI and it sounded bad compared to the sr007 =/
post #392 of 711
This probably sounds an idiotic suggestion, but when testing and comparing not just the LL and BHSE, but any amps, the source that should be used is an iPod. Yes it does sound daft but when I took my BHSE and 009's to a head-fi meeting the source I took was my iPod, ( my main source weighs 33kg and I've only got it insured via my home insurance ) and all that had a listen were very impressed.
I'm suggesting an iPod because as I've said before, I do believe a quality source shortens the gap in SQ between amps being used, whereas IMO an iPod shouldn't do that.
post #393 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by purk View Post

Yes it is a common practice on tube amplifier.  

i understand. I was simply pointing out that it really is commonplace with amplifiers regardless of whether they use tubes or not. 

post #394 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by David1961 View Post

I'm suggesting an iPod because as I've said before, I do believe a quality source shortens the gap in SQ between amps being used, whereas IMO an iPod shouldn't do that.

Broad strokes and generalizations ...If it works for you,  great. Not how I like to audition gear I am looking to buy personally.

post #395 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by David1961 View Post

This probably sounds an idiotic suggestion, but when testing and comparing not just the LL and BHSE, but any amps, the source that should be used is an iPod. Yes it does sound daft but when I took my BHSE and 009's to a head-fi meeting the source I took was my iPod, ( my main source weighs 33kg and I've only got it insured via my home insurance ) and all that had a listen were very impressed.
I'm suggesting an iPod because as I've said before, I do believe a quality source shortens the gap in SQ between amps being used, whereas IMO an iPod shouldn't do that.

I disagree.  A good source is in part resolving enough that you can hear when and how much the amplifier or transducer is a bottleneck.  Good sources do not lessen the gap, unless they are highly colored.

 

In the case of the ipod, the output V is so low I'd suspect that would be the largest reason for hearing a difference in between amplifiers, which is not at all what you would want to assess to figure out a qualitative difference between amplifiers.  Its kind of like saying "this one can go louder so its better."

post #396 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio_head View Post

I am saying it depends on the person.  Some tastes will prefer A, the LL, over B, the BHSE.  Those same people will likely prefer A over C the KGSSHV irrespective of B being better or worse than C because B and C are related.  If they prefer B to A, it could well be they'd also prefer C to A, again not because if B is better for them than A and is better than C as a given then C must be better than A - rather it is simply because B & C share characteristics in sound that A does not possess.  

 

 

 

LoL, perfectly explained! I think? tongue.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio_head View Post

I disagree.  A good source is in part resolving enough that you can hear when and how much the amplifier or transducer is a bottleneck.  Good sources do not lessen the gap, unless they are highly colored.

 

In the case of the ipod, the output V is so low I'd suspect that would be the largest reason for hearing a difference in between amplifiers, which is not at all what you would want to assess to figure out a qualitative difference between amplifiers.  Its kind of like saying "this one can go louder so its better."

Agreed here completely. I will use my source CDP --> W4S DAC-2 via XLR for my impressions. I will also let both amps come to temperature for about an hour each and then start my impressions from there. 

post #397 of 711

Come on, lets face it, if it wasn’t for the enormously long waiting line for a BHSE we’d all own one.

ph34r.gif

post #398 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwmclean View Post

Come on, lets face it, if it wasn’t for the enormously long waiting line for a BHSE we’d all own one.

ph34r.gif

speak for yourself brah

post #399 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by sachu View Post

speak for yourself brah

Just rooting for my team.tongue.gif

post #400 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio_head View Post

I disagree.  A good source is in part resolving enough that you can hear when and how much the amplifier or transducer is a bottleneck.  Good sources do not lessen the gap, unless they are highly colored.

In the case of the ipod, the output V is so low I'd suspect that would be the largest reason for hearing a difference in between amplifiers, which is not at all what you would want to assess to figure out a qualitative difference between amplifiers.  Its kind of like saying "this one can go louder so its better."

We all agree and disagree on things, that's life.
post #401 of 711

Radio_head--You never said a truer word! Like the advert for Linn Sondek --Rubbish in --rubbish out and Ivor was right. The first stage in any hi-fi system is the limiting factor on the resolution/ fidelity. And no that isn't subjective--its a scientific fact-think about it. That's why I spent so much on a completely open system so I was able to tell the limiting factor was the Stax-727-11 that I own and now heavily modded with more to come. I can hear the tiniest bit of noise/distortion and you don't cure that by "dumbing down" the equipment -so it sounds smoother you attack the fault and Rectify it and therefore achieve a higher fidelity simply because you have more musical resolution in your system. Sticking a "tube somewhere" / or rounding off the frequency response in   SS equipment via the use of small caps or resistance /capacitor frequency response shapers. is not achieving top fidelity.Many wont be happy about this but it is the down to earth truth.

post #402 of 711
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwmclean View Post

Come on, lets face it, if it wasn’t for the enormously long waiting line for a BHSE we’d all own one.

ph34r.gif

Maybe, but if we all had one it would be less exclusive and thus wouldn't be as unassailable atop the hill.  The dragon will become T2, or that Russian guy's tube amp, or even more obscure amps that I can't talk about.

post #403 of 711

UPS guy took forever to come by. Had it shipped to my dad's place as he's retired. I was there after work and still had to wait an hour. confused.gif

 

Just let it warm up for about 30 minutes first.

 

 

Construction wise, seems more "solid" than my old LF and better put together. It's quite a bit smaller than my KGSSHV (which is a beast and almost as big as my home theatre receiver). Insertion/removal of my SR-009s is very tight. I have to hold the amp with one hand and use the other to insert it. Even more so than the Stax SRM727II. But overall the LL has a very nice clean look. The LEDs are a faint blue (a good thing). 

 

My setup for the comparison:

 

CDP (Azur 650C) --> Wyred 4 Sound DAC-2 --> Audioquest King Cobra XLRs --> Stax amps  [So I'm running it balanced...want to hear both amps at their best].

 

1.) KGSSHV: 450V with the 1968 Sanyo parts and the current has been increased to 9mA. Peak to peak: 1800V.

2.) Liquid Lightning MKI: 1600V peak to peak

 

Music: 

Tragically Hip: Yer favourites

Mumford and Sons: Babel

Radiohead: Hail to the Thief

Jazz at the Pawnshop

Metallica: The Black Album - Enter Sandman (love the bass on the intro)

 

Very nice sound actually. The mids are full and (sorry for the pun) "liquid". Very enticing mids. Bass seems to have some depth and some heft. The bass I think is better controlled, deeper and hits a harder with the KGSSHV. The treble on the LL seems very fluid as well and extends well with a slight smoothing. Overall a very nice presentation with an expansive sound stage that is enveloping, but some issues with clarity.

 

I definitely prefer this amp to my old SRM-727II by a good margin (and I thought the SR-009s sounded pretty darn good on that amp). I want to say I like this a bit better than the KGSS which came off a bit too "tight" and a wee bit dry in comparison. The KGSSHV though is another story vs. the KGSS and offered a similar sound bump that I found with the GS-X over the GS-1. I'll definitely need to listen to both more through the rest of this week and weekend.

 

EDIT: Updated typo's and spelling errors.


Edited by MacedonianHero - 9/7/13 at 7:45pm
post #404 of 711
Yeh the LLmk1 design is very nice imo, except for the big blue volume control anyway :P
post #405 of 711

All volume knobs should be made of hardwoods that sink when put in water anyway.

lignum vitae,snakewood, Arizona desert ironwood,gabon ebony, black and white ebony, red mallee, rosewood, coco bolo...

http://gilmore.chem.northwestern.edu/knobs3.jpg

http://gilmore.chem.northwestern.edu/knobs4.jpg


Edited by kevin gilmore - 8/28/13 at 5:31pm
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 › Question about amps for the Stax SR-009