[Lloyd297]

Michael Jackson: Thriller (Epic)

Stats have a reputation for not kicking ass. Stat-lovers rarely listen on their feet, it is assumed; rather, they tend to lounge around with dreamy, langurous expressions on their faces.

So, do either of these cans make you wanna dance?

And.........it's straight into "Wanna Be Starting Something": the X-III's are much closer, taking us right in the middle of the musicians; the 404 is more distantly balanced except for the very upfront and rather scratchy-sounding percussion and the blaring, synthetic brass. On the X-III these sound more like real brass instruments. Also the voice is more real and "there". The overall sound through the X-III is prettier, with more "shine' and "gloss" but this doesn't sound spurious or synthetic but alive. More percussive snap with X-III but soundstage is larger with 404. X-III sounds quite expansive and occasionally almost as big as the 404 , very vivid, and full of life. However it also sounds slightly edgy. The 404 balance is far more laidback making the listener as much an observer as a participant. Drums have more of a "thud" than a "snap" through the 404.

"Baby Be Mine": I'm a sucker for that fat synthesizer bass and the 404 does it better with a round, full, and relaxed pulse; the X-III is more "mid-rangey" and the bass, while very tight and faster than the 404, doesn't provide the same foundational cushion. The 404 sounds bigger and invites you in to listen; the X-III is closer but the image height is lacking; it's less of a soundstaging experience. The X-III is exceptionally transparent; it's as if there is no veiling present at all; the sense of direct contact is remarkable. Instruments sound more natural and more identifiable; the cymbals (although very processed-sounding) sound like processed-cymbals but with the 404 they sound as if a drum-machine is producing them.

Title track: the "scary" intro with its creaking doors, echoing footsteps, howling wolves, etc, sounds decidely more dramatic, more cinematic, on the 404. It sounds small on the X-III. And once again the bass has that extra foundation with the 404.

So I'm going to make it a tie: a B Plus for both with the X-III more danceable, clearer, and more realistic tonally, but the 404 having that vital (on this music) extra 2/3 of an octave bass and a bigger, more bigscreen soundstage.

 

[Lloyd297]

So far, I've done all my comparisons of the X-III and the 404 through the same amp, the Stax 006t. However, I prefer to listen to the X-III through one of my power amps and, in particular, the Nuforce RF9 monoblocks. So I'll now move on to compare the X-III/RF9 combo (the amp driving the Stax SRD-7 transformer) to the 404/006t (also known as the 4040 system).

If this seems unfair, I'll just point out that this is the real-world situation. I listen to the X-III through various power amps while with the 404 I'm tied to hooking up to the 006t due to my lack of the requisite Pro transformer box.

And so let's return to "Thriller".........

Actually, I can summon up the comparison with one salient fact: after listening for a while to the X-III/RF9 I moved to the 404/006t and immediately thought something was wrong with the 004, it sounded so veiled, thick, murky, and colured by comparison. With both hooked up to the 006t, moving from one to the other revealed noticeable differences (there was no way I could mistake one for the other) but I adjusted very quickly to the differing sonic signatures. But this time, it took several minutes for me to adjust to the 404. Frankly, there was no comparison any more, the X-III was clearly superior in almost every respect and in some, like resolution and transient speed, it was light years apart.

The 404/006t sounded positively murky by comparison; it sounded as if there was a thickish blanket between my ears and the musicians. Transients sound clearly softened and compressed with the "crack" and "snap" of percussion almost disappearing when compared with the X-III/RF9. Bass on the X-III, previously lacking in extension through the 006t, was as abundant now as the 404 but with much greater weight, punch, tangibility, and timbre. It also rose in level so that it drove the music along in a way that the 404/006t failed markedly to match. Bass sounded muffled and indistinct through the 404/006t. Musicians also sounded much more alive and inspired through the X-III/RF9 while the 404/006t made them appear half-asleep.

The soundstage also opened up quite dramatically through the RF9. The opening to the title-track of "Thriller" now sounded holographic with unbounded effects; it also sounded as large as the 404/006t.

Resolution and focus were much more evident through the X-III/RF9; it seemed completely unsmeared, although occasionally on the "cool" and analytical side. It only sounded "euphonic" when the recording demanded it. Even so, tone-colours were utterly ravishing, only matched in my experience by the gorgeous Apogee Stage. The 404/006t sounded dulled, thickened, muted, and lacking in timbral magnificence. Even its lushness sounded artificial.

I'll just point out that this new-found difference is largely attributable to the RF9's superiority over the 006t. I'd imagine that the 404/RF9 combo would yield comparable benefits.

 

[Tachikoma]

Quote:

I'll just point out that this new-found difference is largely attributable to the RF9's superiority over the 006t. I'd imagine that the 404/RF9 combo would yield comparable benefits.

So... why aren't you doing that already =P The SRD-7's normal outputs can drive the SR-404.

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tachikoma So... why aren't you doing that already =P The SRD-7's normal outputs can drive the SR-404.

Sure, but not in the way they're intended.

 

[johnmatrix]

Lloyd, I don't think your compairsion is very fair to the 404's. Right now your Sr-x's are being powered by a $3500 monoblocks, but the stax amp is only is about $700 and not even stax's top of the line. Perhaps stepping up to one of the boutique amps like the KGSS or KGBH would help the 404's.

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmatrix Lloyd, I don't think your compairsion is very fair to the 404's. Right now your Sr-x's are being powered by a $3500 monoblocks, but the stax amp is only is about $700 and not even stax's top of the line. Perhaps stepping up to one of the boutique amps like the KGSS or KGBH would help the 404's.

Oh, I think it's fair because it's a real-world alternative. The 006t is a headphone-only amp and so its price is comparable to the Nuforce which, after all, can drive speakers as well. I didn't buy the Nuforce to drive my phones; that is just an added bonus! Also, I think your price for the 006t is wrong. I seem to recall it retailing at about twice the price of the 404.

I really think that Stax should stop producing their amps and just concentrate on the phones. Anybody with the wherewithal to buy Stax phones will almost certainly have a quality power amp already. Being forced to shell out for a limited and poor-quality hardphone-only amp is a waste of money.

 

[wualta]

What Lloyd needs is what Tachikoma's got-- the SRD-7 Mk2. Then he can drive them both with the Nuforce and we shall hear what we shall hear. Should prove interesting.

I have to say, I've been disappointed in the sound I've been getting from the SRM-1 Mk2 Pro. Not that it's not smooth and nice and all that, but it seems like I've only got about 10 watts per channel. Maybe 5. It's like listening to music through a very nice but oppressive AGC. My indelible memories of 'stat sound were based on having 200 free-swingin' watts per channel (8 ohms) available for my SR-X. Gotta git me one o' them SRD-7 Mk2s... but I did want to hear what direct-drive would do-- it was always (going back to Charles Malme's 1959 JAES paper at least) the holy grail of electrostatic speaker/'phone design. I'm just glad I bought the SRM-1 Mk2 Pro used.

Interestingly, the SRD-7 first saw the light of Japanese day in 1971. This is old tech we're dealing with. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

EDIT: Quote:

Originally Posted by Lloyd297 hardphone-only amp is a waste of money..

I don't know if that was a typo, but it's fortuitous: hardship + headphone = hardphone. Which is what you get if you buy Stax stuff new, which most of us would never do, so our comparisons are skewed by the economics.

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta I have to say, I've been disappointed in the sound I've been getting from the SRM-1 Mk2 Pro. Not that it's not smooth and nice and all that, but it seems like I've only got about 10 watts per channel. Maybe 5. It's like listening to music through a very nice but oppressive AGC. My indelible memories of 'stat sound were based on having 200 free-swingin' watts per channel (8 ohms) available for my SR-X. Gotta git me one o' them SRD-7 Mk2s... but I did want to hear what direct-drive would do. It was always (going back to Charles Malme's 1957 JAES paper at least) the holy grail of electrostatic speaker/'phone design. I'm just glad I bought it used.

Yep, that's what I think the Stax amps do; they make the X-III sound small and niggardly. with a monster amp they really open up and expand. And I don't think you'd describe the bass as weak.

Now, what do the 404's sound like thru the Nuforce? If I drive them through the low-bias transformer will it preserve the FR intact? And is there any chance of damaging the phones?

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lloyd297 Now, what do the 404's sound like thru the Nuforce?

I'd really like to know. For awhile now I've been trying to decide which digital way to jump from the well-made vintage VFET and MOSFET amps I have into Icepower, Tripath or Nuforce or... and since the Nuforces aren't outrageously pricey... though the used market's probably small to nonexistent so far..

Quote:

If I drive them through the low-bias transformer will it preserve the FR intact? And is there any chance of damaging the phones?

I'm pretty sure there's no risk of damage unless you cranked the level way up to compensate for the lack of volume you'd initially hear. Haven't tried lowballing the Lambdas, but I suspect they'd sound... well, small and niggardly. If I were you, I'd wait until I could get my hands on a high-bias transformer box, or have someone modify a stock SRD-7. I'll bet we could get our scheming hands on a schematic...

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta I'd really like to know. For awhile now I've been trying to decide which digital way to jump from the well-made vintage VFET and MOSFET amps I have into Icepower, Tripath or Nuforce or... and since the Nuforces aren't outrageously pricey... though the used market's probably small to nonexistent so far.. I'm pretty sure there's no risk of damage unless you cranked the level way up to compensate for the lack of volume you'd initially hear. Haven't tried lowballing the Lambdas, but I suspect they'd sound... well, small and niggardly. If I were you, I'd wait until I could get my hands on a high-bias transformer box, or have someone modify a stock SRD-7. I'll bet we could get our scheming hands on a schematic...

Careful buying the Nuforce S/H. The early production was variable and they rapidly improved with time. The first RF8 I heard was rather thin and "digital" sounding and clipped badly on my Apogee Stage (the only solid-state amp I've used ever to do so); the second shut-down (or rather, one of the monoblocks did) as well although it sounded beautiful; the latest RF9 drives my Stages with aplomb and sounds great. But check before buying. The Bel Canto 200.2 I also own sounds synthetic and sterile by comparison although the top octave or two may be even better-defined than the Nuforce.

And yeah, I do need the high-bias transformer box. One thing: some of the criticisms of the Omega 2 - are they due to the Stax amp driving them? How would an O2 sound like through a Stax high-bias transformer driven by something like a Nuforce RF9? I suspect something spectacular......

 

[johnmatrix]

From what I read on here, most the O2's faults are those of the amp.

 

[Lloyd297]

Sorry, but I just couldn't resist. I had to listen to the 404 through the Nuforce RF9 even if it meant violating the principles of technophile protocol and listening to a high-bias phone through a low-bias transformer......

So after hooking up the various hookable devices, it was into thah music!

Wooohhhhhh!!!!!!!!!! What happened? The 404's now sound so much more open and unveiled than they did although their FR irregularities are if anything even more pronounced. But the resolution, the air, the sense of space, are now at least a couple of degrees better than they were with the 006t.

The soundstage is now genuinely 3-D rather than the amorphous and vague spaciousness available on the 006t. And the high frequencies are significantly more palpable and less processed than they were. Cymbals, which previously only hinted that they're actually made of metal, now sound predominantly metallic although their balance is still artificial - thin and rather "tizzy". But the sense of air is gorgeous and I'm prepared to put up with the "hi-fi" anomalies to bask in the floating soundscapes available.

Putting the X-III's back on the 006t and comparing the new permutation I now prefer the 404/RF9 by some distance. The X-III/006t sounds "midrangey" and small with much reduced air and the soundstage sounds largely confined to the ear-speakers and the space between them. And the 404 now sounds almost as kickass as the X-III although the balance is less present.

These are early impressions but so far my feelings that the Stax amps are the limiting factor have been amply confirmed.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmatrix From what I read on here, most the O2's faults are those of the amp.

This is rather endemic amoung electrostatic headphones. The HE60 and ESP-950 both suffer badly from the problem.

I need to get me a high bias transformer box of my own.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Lloyd297 Sorry, but I just couldn't resist. I had to listen to the 404 through the Nuforce RF9 even if it meant violating the principles of technophile protocol and listening to a high-bias phone through a low-bias transformer...... So after hooking up the various hookable devices, it was into thah music! Wooohhhhhh!!!!!!!!!! What happened? The 404's now sound so much more open and unveiled than they did although their FR irregularities are if anything even more pronounced. But the resolution, the air, the sense of space, are now at least a couple of degrees better than they were with the 006t. The soundstage is now genuinely 3-D rather than the amorphous and vague spaciousness available on the 006t. And the high frequencies are significantly more palpable and less processed than they were. Cymbals, which previously only hinted that they're actually made of metal, now sound predominantly metallic although their balance is still artificial - thin and rather "tizzy". But the sense of air is gorgeous and I'm prepared to put up with the "hi-fi" anomalies to bask in the floating soundscapes available. Putting the X-III's back on the 006t and comparing the new permutation I now prefer the 404/RF9 by some distance. The X-III/006t sounds "midrangey" and small with much reduced air and the soundstage sounds largely confined to the ear-speakers and the space between them. And the 404 now sounds almost as kickass as the X-III although the balance is less present. These are early impressions but so far my feelings that the Stax amps are the limiting factor have been amply confirmed.

Good to see you've found the source of your problems.

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl This is rather endemic amoung electrostatic headphones. The HE60 and ESP-950 both suffer badly from the problem.

Y'know, this really bugs me. Howcome these longstanding mfrs. of stat headphones can't build an absolutely killer direct-drive amp? It should be relatively easy, especially with tubes. I wonder what the snag is. Lack of suitable high-voltage versions of key semiconductors/tubes? Selling price?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl I need to get me a high bias transformer box of my own.

No, I need to get me a high-buyit asformer box of my own! Or words to that effect.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Good to see you've found the source of your problems.

Sigh. I wish it were that easy. Oh, you meant audio problems. Sigh.

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta Y'know, this really bugs me. Howcome these longstanding mfrs. of stat headphones can't build an absolutely killer direct-drive amp? It should be relatively easy, especially with tubes. I wonder what the snag is. Lack of suitable high-voltage versions of key semiconductors/tubes? Selling price?

Because direct drive electrostatic amps are a nightmare to build, and when they're made buy a proper company they ususally cost big time like the SRM-T2 and HEV90 do. Also, I'm not sure the amp builders fancy the idea of working with voltages that might send them to an early grave.


Quote:

Sigh. I wish it were that easy. Oh, you meant audio problems. Sigh.

Those problems we shall leave until another day...