Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Stax SR-009: suggestions to tone down the brightness?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Stax SR-009: suggestions to tone down the brightness? - Page 7

post #91 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by David1961 View Post

 

This is why I'd like to be clever enough to design and build my own headphone, it would look very similar to the HE-90 but with a wider headband, only the very best leather would be used, the metal would be titanium for lightness and strength then powder coated in matt black and the wood would be amboyna burl. I hope Sennheiser or Stax headphone designers will be told to look at this post and do something about it.

No matter what the product there is always a place where they cut corners, always. I was going to buy the set of all leather pads a few years ago for the HE90's made by a sponsor on Head-Fi but they could not produce them for some reason. Hell even when you upgrade the interior of a car to leather you only get it on the seatng area of the front seats and gearshift knob and steering wheel, that's it. The other 85% of the interior is vinyl; talk about a rip-off. I can't think of any headphone designer that takes a cost no object approach as you're suggesting and I doubt they ever will. No offense at all, it's just reality. Gary

post #92 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guss2 View Post

No matter what the product there is always a place where they cut corners, always. I was going to buy the set of all leather pads a few years ago for the HE90's made by a sponsor on Head-Fi but they could not produce them for some reason. Hell even when you upgrade the interior of a car to leather you only get it on the seatng area of the front seats and gearshift knob and steering wheel, that's it. The other 85% of the interior is vinyl; talk about a rip-off. I can't think of any headphone designer that takes a cost no object approach as you're suggesting and I doubt they ever will. No offense at all, it's just reality. Gary

 

No offense taken Gary, I'm only dreaming. It would be nice though if headphone companies that sold expensive headphones to offer the potential buyers to choose the material used. The problem with a lot of companies nowadays is they want to make as much profit by building whatever they do as cheaply as possible. But there are also places that still like to give value for money.

 

          Dave.


Edited by David1961 - 10/14/12 at 1:43pm
post #93 of 197

Yeah that would be cool like buying a new car, upgrade this option that.  

post #94 of 197

Relevant to this thread even though I never had an issue with the 009 being 'bright'. 

 

Yesterday we had a meet in Dallas where I finally got to try a source better than my own...and it really showed me I need a new one. 

 

The Ayon CD-1 that Al had retailed for about twice what my Cambridge player did and it showed. The miss came bass improved and the SSSSSs became smoother. The most noticeable difference was on the fiddles from Union Station. They became so much sweeter. 

 

I realized a proper tube source goes a long way for a set up with the 009s. Though I'll be trying the Perfect Wave DAC soon as well. We'll see how that goes.

post #95 of 197

The issue with having a tube source is they "tube up" everything.  I much prefer to do that at the amp stage so I can use the same source with multiple amps/systems.

post #96 of 197

While that's true I honestly don't really plan to have another amp/can for at least awhile. Plus I've never been worried about 'too much tube sound'. I like it. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio_head View Post

The issue with having a tube source is they "tube up" everything.  I much prefer to do that at the amp stage so I can use the same source with multiple amps/systems.

post #97 of 197

If the source is properly designed then it will not matter if it's valve (tube) or solid state based.  

If the designer has tried to skew the sonic signature of the source then for me its a bad thing and should be avoided.  I personally don't want any source that tries to impose some artificial rose tinted view of the recording. 

One of the main issues we face today is the lamentable quality of mastering recordings these days in some recording studios, compressed without dynamics, equalized to provide an over emphasis in certain areas et alt...  No source tube or otherwise can rectify whats been laid down on the final cut of the recording. I think in many areas we have gone backwards when you compare them to recordings made during the '60's.  There are some exceptions like Chesky Records.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio_head View Post

The issue with having a tube source is they "tube up" everything.  I much prefer to do that at the amp stage so I can use the same source with multiple amps/systems.


Edited by complin - 10/15/12 at 8:46am
post #98 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorbidToaster View Post

Relevant to this thread even though I never had an issue with the 009 being 'bright'. 

Yesterday we had a meet in Dallas where I finally got to try a source better than my own...and it really showed me I need a new one. 

The Ayon CD-1 that Al had retailed for about twice what my Cambridge player did and it showed. The miss came bass improved and the SSSSSs became smoother. The most noticeable difference was on the fiddles from Union Station. They became so much sweeter. 

I realized a proper tube source goes a long way for a set up with the 009s. Though I'll be trying the Perfect Wave DAC soon as well. We'll see how that goes.

The Cambridge 851C from my experience (used it for a year or so) is harsh possibly even an aggressive sounding DAC. In comparison my Buffalo DAC (ESS Sabre ES9018) is as smooth as butter, with no tubes used in the output. A better DAC is what your after, it doesn't need to be tube based either. Personally I would never use a DAC with a tube output - just my 2c.
post #99 of 197

I think the Lampizator is the worst DAC I've heard, and that epitomizes current tube DACage to my mind.  That thing is like a rabid cult.

 

I'm inclined to agree with John, but if you've heard quite a few and enjoy the Ayon, by all means go for it.

 

I don't know where I have this from, but I copied some of what Doug (ECP) said about tubes in DACs into my email a long time ago:

 

 

Warning: Don't remember context (Click to show)

 

I can't answer most of this, but I can make some huge over generalizations about tubes in DACs. And, that is, while I like tubes, and consider them to generally be the best active way to produce voltage gain, there isn't much place for them in most DACs outside of marketing, at least those using current out chips. The reason is that a current out DAC chip works best into a low impedance.  That means either an opamp or the source/emitter/cathode of an active device.  The input impedance for one of these devices is ~1/Gm.  With a BJT or a FET, this is easily under an ohm.  However, even a super duper high Gm tube, like a 7788, is still orders of magnitude higher. And, those are rare and unlikely to be seen in a commercial device.  The highest Gm tube you are likely to see in commercial gear is a 6922, and it has an input Z around 80 ohms which is too high. Moreover, most higher end DAC chips run a pretty high current out, so you'd need to really push a tube like the 6922 to carry that sort of current.

Secondly, there is also often a buffer stage, but again, sand devices just work better here.  A cathode follower really offers no benefit over a source/emitter follower sound wise and has worse drive ability.  And, it costs a lot more to make. And it is likely noisier.

 

 

post #100 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnwmclean View Post

The Cambridge 851C from my experience (used it for a year or so) is harsh possibly even an aggressive sounding DAC. In comparison my Buffalo DAC (ESS Sabre ES9018) is as smooth as butter, with no tubes used in the output. A better DAC is what your after, it doesn't need to be tube based either. Personally I would never use a DAC with a tube output - just my 2c.

The 851C hasn't been out a year. Unless you got a prerelease unit around this time last year and just got rid of it.

In my system the synergy with the Ayon seemed great. I'll get to hear the PWD soon in my home and see how I like that, but Ayon has a really nice offering around 4k with lots of options the looks nice. Also considering a used K-07.
post #101 of 197

I see a used Skylla II for 4K, which is a really good price for it.  If I was going tube route that's where I'd go.

post #102 of 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio_head View Post

I see a used Skylla II for 4K, which is a really good price for it.  If I was going tube route that's where I'd go.

Is that here on Head-fi? Not seeing it on the 'Von. I'm keeping my eyes out for the 1SC used right now.
post #103 of 197

Nope, it's in a special place.  If you're interested I can pass along your info.

post #104 of 197
At that price it may not last long enough to get the funds. :'(

Pass it on just in case though.
post #105 of 197

Will do.  I highly doubt it will last more than a week.

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 › Stax SR-009: suggestions to tone down the brightness?