Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › The Stax Thread III
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Stax Thread III - Page 121

post #1801 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keithpgdrb View Post


In all seriousness, why are all the new lambdas so bright? They are supposed to be the pinnacle of audio. Is this signature preferred in other parts of the world or something?

 

They are. Listen to an HD 800 and then switch to a 407... it's a different level IMO. 

post #1802 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keithpgdrb View Post

In all seriousness, why are all the new lambdas so bright? They are supposed to be the pinnacle of audio. Is this signature preferred in other parts of the world or something?
I think that by now it's pretty clear that some people find them bright and others don't. Some find them god aweful (especially many long time Stax heads) but coming from dynamics I feel that my 507 is fairly balanced and smooth. Having said that, if the 009 does share a similar tonality with the 507 but is a bit brighter, then I'm happy to stick with my 507 and 007. I love the 507, but if it were much brighter I probably wouldn't care for it as much.

PS I live in the US, and I don't think we're all treble heads wink.gif
Edited by mangler - 3/22/14 at 4:37pm
post #1803 of 5043

Got a cold... Talk about bright sound from my 307. And imbalance.. Sigh :(

 

It's funny how there are so many different opinions on the new x07 series. 

 

It's also interesting how some just swear to 'stats and others don't.

post #1804 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by mangler View Post


I think that by now it's pretty clear that some people find them bright and others don't. Some find them god aweful (especially many long time Stax heads) but coming from dynamics I feel that my 507 is fairly balanced and smooth. Having said that, if the 009 does share a similar tonality with the 507 but is a bit brighter, then I'm happy to stick with my 507 and 007. I love the 507, but if it were much brighter I probably wouldn't care for it as much.

PS I live in the US, and I don't think we're all treble heads wink.gif

all very interesting.   I just wonder why everything seems to moving to a brighter signature.  all the new lambdas are on the bright side (to most).  the hd800 is notoriously bright.  Yet most of the current orthodynamic flagships are MUCH darker in comparison, and a LOT of people love them.  is this just different companies philosophies in sound production?

 

I suppose each technology has its strong points.  Orthos seem to rule the world of bass reproduction, but i have yet to hear one with good airy highs..  Stats are clear winners to me for airy highs and midrange, but the bass reproduction lacks.  (I've not spent any time with the top tier stax, so I know its different up there)

 

having said all that, I'm just trying to figure out why stax voices the current lambda line in the way that they do.  especially when most of us would (and do) choose discontinued lambda models over the current lineup.  Shouldn't they try to reproduce the characteristics of their best models, then make them better from there?

post #1805 of 5043
It's been discussed a few times and there are different suppositions that can be made:

1. More forward voicing to have a more engaging sound which helps with in-store auditions against competing dynamics and other orthos.

2. A bi-product of a search toward ever more efficient / easy to drive & transparent transducers. People in the dyi arena are happy with much thicker milar films and wider spacers than Stax is using with its most recent offerings apparently. As has been often said, amps are the weak knee if stax products as competing offerings don't need such energizers. Stax sells almost at a loss per some of the mafia's allegations and the product follow strict weight and budget constraints. Stax hence has much interest in releasing easier to driver earspeakers.

3. A change in taste / hearing of the people involved in the voicing of products. From my discussions with them, it's not just one person who calls the shots but the panel is certainly made of similar experience long time stax staff.
post #1806 of 5043

thank you for a well written response.  I apologize if I brought up something thats been covered at length. 

post #1807 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by zolkis View Post
But this post is about the SR-007 Mk1....The first revelation came when I made the headbands shape similar to that of the 507, i.e. flatter in the middle, the leather headband almost touching the metal bands. Then, set the angle of the drivers from the ends of the metal headbands, to follow the head and ensure even and the right amount of pressure around the ear.

 

.....I think it is impossible to review the 007 Mk1 properly, unless the reviewer takes the time to properly adjust and personalize the 007.

I've previously done the  "bending the front arc" tweak to reduce the front of pad pressure, but what's the purpose of flattening the top of the arcs? If it's to reduce the overall pad pressure, then I imagine that's only applicable for "big headed" people - I find the default arc setup already gives me a fairly loose fit.  

 

BTW, I tried rotating the spring as you have done. Sound seemed to change, but not conclusive as to what's best, so for the moment it's back to pointing to the seam. I guess this is more significant with the foam change

 

Finally, have you tried damping the arcs? As per edstrelow's thread.

 

I agree with your last point, particularly for those who find the 007's too dark or lacking bass impact. These types of changes do open it up nicely. However, all this flexibility is a double edged sword for the impatient: It's great that you can tweak it to sound brilliant, but it's also a drag that you have to tweak it to sound brilliant.

post #1808 of 5043

The warmest/darkest sounding lambda in my opinion is the Lambda Nova Signature. It sounds very similar to the 007 but lacks the bass response of its bigger brother.

My favorite Lambdas are definitely the Lambda Normal Bias and Lambda Signature from the 80s.

post #1809 of 5043

There is so much wrong in the few posts made by people who have not heard or obviously have no clue what they are talking about. 

 

I'll make judgement on these posts later on when I'm sober.

post #1810 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefQon View Post
 

There is so much wrong in the few posts made by people who have not heard or obviously have no clue what they are talking about. 

 

I'll make judgement on these posts later on when I'm sober.

Those people will have to wait for a loooong time :D 

 

Ali

post #1811 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAttorney View Post
 

I've previously done the  "bending the front arc" tweak to reduce the front of pad pressure, but what's the purpose of flattening the top of the arcs? If it's to reduce the overall pad pressure, then I imagine that's only applicable for "big headed" people - I find the default arc setup already gives me a fairly loose fit.  

 

Correct. No particular purpose, other than setting the correct distance between the two earspeakers, then using the angling to follow one's head shape.

I have tried a loose fit too (achievable by flattening the arc and/or modifying the angle), and it sounded nice and open with a bigger soundstage, but it is inferior to a medium tight fit with the correct shape: the latter is the same open, has better focused sound stage, snappier bass with deeper string resonance.

 

Then, too wide (too flat) headband shape is not good, either, somehow sounds like out of phase speakers.

 

Quote:
 

BTW, I tried rotating the spring as you have done. Sound seemed to change, but not conclusive as to what's best, so for the moment it's back to pointing to the seam. I guess this is more significant with the foam change.

 

Indeed the foam change makes it more prominent. In my case it is obvious and quite big effect (for me). I think the effect is more noticeable when everything else is correctly set: this is the last fine-tuning which should be done.

 

 

Finally, have you tried damping the arcs? As per edstrelow's thread.

 

The arcs don't really bother me, until I hit them :). Yes, I tried, it's not significant IMO, and it looks bad. In turn, I was playing with the thought to damp the spring, the circumference of the earspeakers below the pads, and perhaps the perforated plate too, with thin felt pads - likely would make the highs even more "calm". But this is a bit difficult tuning, and in the end I am fine with the treble of the 007. Likely it is worth doing with the 009, but maybe not with the 007.

 

I agree with your last point, particularly for those who find the 007's too dark or lacking bass impact. These types of changes do open it up nicely. However, all this flexibility is a double edged sword for the impatient: It's great that you can tweak it to sound brilliant, but it's also a drag that you have to tweak it to sound brilliant.

 

 

I couldn't agree more. Very few manufacturers seem to put enough money in truly optimizing the acoustic environment of the headphones. That's why I mentioned in some earlier post that e.g. earpad design is like black magic. I don't know if there is a reliable methodology (e.g. finite element analysis) which can help designing earpads given the earspeakers' measurements.

 

For instance, I have also played with e.g. the HE-500, and that was a lot easier than with the 007. Without earpads the HE500 sounded really good, except tizzy and zingy, but bass was excellent, clean and resonant, and was a better starting point that the all-midrange honky sound of the 007 without the earpads. The earpads used in the orthos and the stats are clearly old-school textbook golden paths, unlike the pads on the Senn HD800 or AKG K812. I wonder what earpads could Sennheiser or AKG design for the stats...

 

But then this may all be mistaken, as the earpads of the 007 are actually close to an optimum, especially with the versatility offered by the spring design (though I don't know if that is a side effect or a planned one). Given that earpads cannot really be manufactured at exact tolerances, and because the 007 is so sensitive to this, it is very hard to 'standardize' tuning the 007's. The manufacturer should do this, measure every single headphone like Sennheiser does, and fine-tune each piece separately until they are near optimum. At least my current settings seem to work well with most of my friends and family, so there is a better optimum than the factory default. Stax, take the point for next products.


Edited by zolkis - 3/23/14 at 6:21am
post #1812 of 5043
Just some small observations, the Lambda Pro / SRM-006t combo is simply sublime with Acoustic music and Rock, but seams to struggle a bit with Jazz. I do really like the combo, and the headphones are quite comfortable too.

Is it necessary to cover the headphones when not in use?

Thanks guys, and I look forward to reading more of this ongoing debate about new vs old stax
post #1813 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by DutchGFX View Post

Just some small observations, the Lambda Pro / SRM-006t combo is simply sublime with Acoustic music and Rock, but seams to struggle a bit with Jazz. I do really like the combo, and the headphones are quite comfortable too.

Is it necessary to cover the headphones when not in use?

Thanks guys, and I look forward to reading more of this ongoing debate about new vs old stax

Hi, what aspect of the Pro did you like with respect to rock music ? As for covering the HPs, I put my 007s in the Stax bag and wrap that bag in a towel ! Where I live, humidity can get very uncomfortable.

post #1814 of 5043

I am currently selling off almost all of my dynamic and planar headphones.  And selling a bunch of headphone amps too. I have just gotten to like electrostatic headphones too much, I don't listen to the others any more.  I went through 2 months where I tried to listen to my LCD-2's and HD800s more- and they do have their strengths- but then I went back to Stax and ESP-950's  and I just don't think I can listen to the HD800s or LCD2s any more.  I mean, I really WANT to love the HD800's, they do a lot things right. But I just can't handle their treble.  It hurts my ears.  I have a bit of hyperacusis right right the HD800's have their emphasis and I just can't listen to them. 

 

I think there's also something about my overall sound preferences -  I have had a TON of speakers over the years including some very pricey models. Right now my favorites are my refurbished Quad ESL-57's. Yeah, they don't play REAL loud.  The deepest bass is M.I.A.,  and the treble is a little "plasticky" sounding. But there is something about their sound, especially the midrange and upper bass, that is just what I want, what I'm looking for,  from music playback.  My other system, which I also like very much, is a pair of Magneplanar MG-3.6's, triamped using a DEQX.  These have subwoofers as well, below 45 Hz using an additional digital crossover.  The imaging from these is amazing- the DEQX brings the performance of this system in the time domain into incredible focus.

 

So BOTH of my favorite speakers are panel speakers.  Whatever it is that they do so well is apparently what I also like about electrostatic headphones.  More accurate? Flatter?  Lower distortion?  Better time-domain performance? I don't know.  I don't think it's really related to "accuracy"  or "neutrality" - there's just something in the way they present sound that I lock onto.

 

I wonder- are the other Stax fanatics also big fans of electrostatic speakers like I am?

post #1815 of 5043
Quote:
Originally Posted by milosz View Post
 

I wonder- are the other Stax fanatics also big fans of electrostatic speakers like I am?

 

I like the upper echeon Martin Logans and Nakamichi Dragons. I did not like the Quads when I heard them.

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 › The Stax Thread III