Yes, the pro, all-discrete version; many mastering studios still use them to this day (I remember Mark indicating that they were designed for continuous cycle use and should remain in spec for up to 50 years).

 

Cello released the Audio Palette several years before the preamp version, and though definitely a professional piece there was an entire Cello matching system offered, amps, speakers and cables that was directly targeted for the well-heeled audiophile, preferably one with a large, dedicated listening room.

 

Oh what Halcyon Days!

I am still not sure what this discussion and various other threads about brightness with the 009's.  Mine are not and there is nothing wrong with my hearing.  They are revealing and depending on what my source material is they have the ability to make poor mastering obvious.  I find that particularly evident with certain cd's that have dynamic range compression so that they will sound good in an automobile in traffic with the windows down.  

 

To echo what was already said concerning vinyl.  If the VTA is off, back higher than front, there will be high frequency distortion that may be heard as bright particularly at higher volume.  

Some people are simply averse (or hypersensitive) to treble. The only time I've found the 009s to be bright or biting is while listening at a high volume, which I rarely do anyway. At normal levels the treble seems smooth and extended.
Edited by anetode - 9/23/12 at 1:32pm

Yep, accuphase to accuphase with coax aes/ebu, pure digital connection to the dp75. An accphase dg28: http://www.accuphase.com/historys/dg-28_e1.htm

 

Of course, I had these Kharma 3.2crm-fe speakers, which were super revealing.

Eqium and Firium.

Well, I have found the answer to the 009 brigthness issue when listening loud or to edgy recordings: I just acquired a refurbished 007mk1 with new headband and earpads! I was shocked by the difference with my mk2 version (SR007A in Japan), it feels similar to the change from 007A to 009! In particular, while the 007A sounds quite a bit more alive for lack of better term than the mk1 version (out of stax srm727A amp), it also has that boomy low end and somewhat of emphasis in the treble. The mk1 is all about smoothness, balance. The bass sounds almost too lean but I appreciate how clean it sounds compared to the mk2 (ported version).

In retrospect, I realize why it is the 007A/727A combo that made me jump to the stax world a few years back: upon short term audition in store, it clearly sounds more impressive than the 007mk1/727A. But now that I have the 009 when I need more bass impact, "resolution", liveliness, I feel the 007mk1 is the perfect complement with its polite / non-agressive / non-emphasizing rendering and especially its ability to play loud without any ear strain. The 007A sounds a bit like a failed 009 wannabe now .

Anyhow, I should have listened to the mafia long ago and am glad I am now a happy 007mk1 owner .

Arnaud


Edit 2012/11/3: The Omega 2 I owned was of type SR007A(SZ2). I bought it in summer 2010, a the same time some 007mk2(SZ3) appeared outside Japan and were coined as mk2.5 with probable change in membrane thickness / increase in brightness.
Edited by arnaud - 11/2/12 at 3:54pm

Congrats Arnaud.

 

Edit: With a better amp I wouldn’t call the MK1’s polite. 

Edited by johnwmclean - 10/13/12 at 6:20am

Absolutely spot on

 

I think the SR Omega and 007mk1 are probably the best headphones Stax have ever made.  I simply love my 007mk1's and would never part with them.  The interesting thing with them is they scale so well, as you improve the amplification they just get better and better IMHO.  On a BHSE or T2 rig and excellent source they are simply sublime.  At first listening they can sound a little rolled off at the top in comparison to some of the current crop of top headphones but you very soon realise nothing is missing its all in proportion.  The 007mk1 is so smooth it does not draw attention to any part of the frequency spectrum which is what I expect in a headphone.    

 

I really liked the sound of the SRM007 mk1 also when I had them from 1999-2006 but sold them because of comfort problems (pads were too thin and the ear opening too small and clipped my ear lobe or upper ear).

And I had a small issue with the sort of hard headband that I was always aware of.

The latest 007s are very comfortable, but they don't sound to me like the originals I owned. I'd consider re-buying the old version if it had the newer pads + better top-of-head support mechanism I guess.

Edited by rgs9200m - 10/13/12 at 6:28pm

I agree that the current pads and headband are much more comfortable than the mk1 version. I haven't checked again but several people use mk2 pads with the mk1 phone isn't it? I may try to swap and listen. I also want to measure too

I have to admit I have never had any major issues with any Stax headphone regarding comfort other than in really hot weather when the pads can get a bit sticky over a long period.  I think Stax and the Sen HD800 are the most comfortable of headphones in current production.  I wonder why Stax chose leather for their top of the range while Sen have velour including the Orpheus? 

 

As I understand it, leather pads and a non-perforated baffle plate are the only way you can potentially get LF extension down to a few Hz without roll-off (ear cavity between the ear canal and the diaphragm must be sealed). Dixit most Stax designs except when they thought porting was a bright idea. LCDs are also of that type.

 

Besides potential comfort issue (I also have absolutely no issue with production stax phones and the O2mk1 has stiffer pads but still no issue for me - I have small ears though), another drawback is potential resonances in the earpad and lack of absorption at high frequency (which may or may not be required depending on the driver type, presence of a well designed screen, back side damping and such).

 

Then, you have the HD800 which is using a totally different approach with essentially a microperforated baffle plate to control the front/back cancellation, in which case the earpad seal is a moot point hence lack of leather. Furthermore, I think they must use velour pad in this case to prevent overemphasis of the mid-highs due to relatively inefficient transduction of the almost unbaffled driver at low frequency. 

 

For the orpheus, I never thought about its velour pad design. I guess the driver is such that they could get away with an unsealed pad design and / or needed the additional absorption from the pads at mid/high-frequencies. 

Edited by arnaud - 10/14/12 at 2:16am

 

Thanks! As you may have read somewhere else, the mk1's are politely waiting for a beefier driver to remind them who's running the show... ;)

The SR-007mk1's are no longer made and don't come up for sale very often. But for those that haven't the money to buy another headphone, what Stax should do is try and solve the brightness problem the 009 has,  then allow existing owners to have their's sorted out.   

 

For those that can afford another headphone, Stax should discontinue the 009 and bring out another flagship [ 009mk2 or 011 ] that sounds something between the 007mk1 and 009.

 

I had the 007mk1 and IMO the comfort + build quality of the 009 is a lot better than the 007, which is why I'd prefer Stax to start working on another flagship rather than try and get hold of a second hand 007mk1.