[Socrates]

How would you describe the level of improvement from one to the other. I got the 3030 recently from E-Bay and love the eletrostatic sound. To upgrade to the Omega II would be an investment of between four to five times the cost of the 3030, and while I obviously wouldn't expect a proportionate increase in performance, I'd like some idea of the perceived differences. Are there any areas where the 3030 is better than the Omega?

My source is an Arcam DV88+ so I'd be interested in any differences in viewing movies as well, particularly on the bass front. My musical preferences are for acoustic and female vocals, as well as some classic rock.

If I were to get the headphones only and use the amp from the 3030 system, how much of the benefit would I be getting, or more importantly how much would I be missing from not getting the Omega amp.

No where to demo where I live, so I'd appreciate any advice.

Thanks.

 

[Downrange]

They are very different sounding systems. My guess is you'll be a little disappointed in the OII with the 313 or 323 amp. Even with a decent amp, you'll have a learning curve to master, (or maybe I should say an "unlearning curve"), as the current lambdas are very forward, and the Omega IIs are a bit less "involving" at first. It takes time to appreciate them, and you'll not get their best sound from less than a very good amp.
I'm pretty happy with the 007tII amp, but want to try the KGSS too. One of those two amps is probably about the minimum for those 'phones, so figure on that expenditure, at least.

 

[tubaman]

I'm pretty happy with the 007tII amp, but want to try the KGSS too. One of those two amps is probably about the minimum for those 'phones, so figure on that expenditure, at least.[/QUOTE]

Interesting comment! What would be better than the those two, in your opinion?

 

[Downrange]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tubaman /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm pretty happy with the 007tII amp, but want to try the KGSS too. One of those two amps is probably about the minimum for those 'phones, so figure on that expenditure, at least.

Interesting comment! What would be better than the those two, in your opinion?[/QUOTE]

Well, the Blue Hawaii seems to be particularly well thought of...

 

[Socrates]

Thanks for the replies. Going cheap on the amp would appear to be a false economy !

If someone who has heard both, could let me know where the differences between the two would be most apparent that would be great. Also any opinions on whether or not the Arcam DV88+ would be out of it's depth with the Omega would be appreciated.

 

[Quint]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Socrates /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thanks for the replies. Going cheap on the amp would appear to be a false economy ! If someone who has heard both, could let me know where the differences between the two would be most apparent that would be great. Also any opinions on whether or not the Arcam DV88+ would be out of it's depth with the Omega would be appreciated.

The Arcam is a great player--I've owned several of their products over the years, including most recently the FMJ DV29. While I believe that the source is especially critical with headphones, I think the DiVa is a nice piece. Can the Omegas benefit from better? Sure. But they can also benefit from a great amp. Personally,if it were my money, I'd look into a better amp and save the player upgrade for the future. Just my two cents.

Good luck!

 

[spritzer]

While I used the SR-007 with the SRM313 for well over a year I wouldn't recommend it. It simply doesn't have the power (no amp that Stax makes does) to push them and it is sterile and cold. The SR-007 is IMHO the best headphone available but it needs a very good amp to shine and the SRM-007tA/II isn't it. They are forgiving of a lesser source and cables but they really shine when the system is neutral and extended. They sound very different from the Lambda line and it takes awhile to get used to it but in direct comparison the Lambdas are way too forward with an artificial soundstage and bloated and uncontrolled bass.