These are some brief comments from my comparative listening notes, along with some explanatory notes and background information.
Input tubes (GEC/Osram U709 rectifier, Tesla E83CC regulator):
1958 CBS 7308 -> 1961 Sylvania Gold Brand Triple Mica 5751
Output tubes (Philips Holland Metal Base GZ34 x 2 rectifiers, Telefunken EL84 military falcon regulator):
Philips Holland EL34 Metal Base
The following tubes were chosen in an effort to highlight the strengths of both headphones in the comparison:
1958 CBS 7308 - A fine, instrumentation-grade, vintage 6SN7 in a 12AU7 format. This is certainly the largest, most dynamic small signal tube ever made, with seemingly limitless bass response. This tube was reportedly created to compete directly with the Telefunken frame grid flagship. Rated for 20,000 hours.
1961 Sylvania Gold Brand Triple Mica Grey Plates 5751 - The iconic and coveted high gain small signal tube, liquid, lush, and a bit over-the-top.
Early SN 703XX Stax SR-007 MK1:
Background: This is where things get a little personal. This headphone belonged to at least a couple of forum members, and I obtained it about 2 years ago. It was far and away their favorite electrostatic headphone short of the SR-Omega. One of them measured it alongside the MK2, R10, and some other notable headphones. The MK1 are notoriously hard to measure, so they used a few pairs of different pads and so on. They noted that the early MK1 is indeed quite different from the later MK1, and the MK2. The bass response is far better, and the somewhat strange treble transition endemic to the 007 series is scaled back significantly. These early MK1 stators were reportedly fitted into a supporting carrier frame and used to replace some of the later failed SR-Omega stators. To say that I like this headphone is an understatement.
Extra long musical analogy: At a luthier workshop, Bill Collings was once asked by a guitar forum member whether decorative wood inlays affect the guitar's tone. The reply was reportedly the incredulous exclamation, "Everything affects tone!". I believe this is true of all instruments, and likely also true of all musical reproduction in general. In an attempt to illustrate the tonal and timbre differences between the headphones here, there are three general categories of guitars I would like to refer to:
1) New production (think Martin D28, USA Fender Stratocaster) - very fine instruments. There is something curious about them. Whether solid or hollow body, you can walk into different guitar shops, pick up 9 of any of the above new production guitars and they will sound, well, average. However, the 10th one will have a character entirely its own. It has chime. It has subtlety, dynamics, life, that the other guitars simply don't possess. Once in a while, some rather average new tone woods in the body come together with the neck to produce something rather extraordinary.
2) New production, vintage construction (think Martin Heritage, Golden Age, Fender Custom Shop) - exquisite instruments. Many are made with cow hide glue, traditional bindings, and much greater attention to detail. Interestingly, their sonic character is often just as variable and potentially unexciting as a typical new production guitar. If you land on a good one, however, it is a thing of wonder.
3) Vintage guitars (think a 1930's Martin, well kept, gently but frequently played) - a thing of unspeakable tonal beauty. The carefully dried and developed tone woods, benefitted from years of resonance due to frequent playing, give these a life entirely their own. To have one in your possession from even the 40's, 50's, 60's, or perhaps even 70's, is a fine heirloom. The sound produced can be subtle, or dynamic, or gigantic, and is certainly exciting in an unforgettable way, provided the instrument was a fine example in the first place, and well-kept.
Listening notes: The early MK1 SR-007 is a #2 from my analogy - a new production, vintage construction example of an iconic instrument. On top of that, I would say that it's a very fine example, and has benefitted from perhaps 25 year of careful playing and storage. It is a thing of wonder, and lacks nothing. It certainly combines excitement, size, and resonant bass response unlike any electrostatic headphone I've tried prior to it. However, I will also say that it does not have the chime and immense subtlety of a #3 instrument from my analogy. It is as though the tone woods have simply not aged long enough. It possesses enough of the potential vintage heritage to keep you quite happy for the rest of your life, as well as progressively happier and wealthier, year after year.
By comparison, I would say that the SR-009S is an average new production instrument, an average example of a #1 from my analogy, while the SR-009 is an outstanding example of a #1, a 1 in 10 find. These are still fine instruments. But they are a little tense. A little restricted. A little nasally. A little sharp. A little intrusive. And they don't readily show off the pure captivation they are capable of.
Shangri-La SR:
Listening Notes: Right off the bat, I would like to say that this is not a straight #3, not a 1930's Martin, from my analogy. At least not with merely the Megatron driving it, that would be too generous a statement. The Megatron has far more than enough heft for the Stax cans, but the Shangri-La needs at least a T2 or one of the 300b amps to shine. It's very difficult to compare the output of these amps unless they're side-by-side, due to the capacitive load nature of electrostatic cans. I suspect the T2 would perform the best. Perhaps a DHT 845 based amp would do the trick, with the sonic compromise of a real-world-priced, non-solid-silver output transformer (it would be no Ongaku, that's for sure).
However, I would say that as it stands, the Shangri-La SR is firmly in #3 territory, that of a fine vintage Martin guitar, of perhaps 60's or 70's vintage. The sound is subtle, with the finest details coming forward in an appealing way. Just a gentle strum of the fingers, the very faintest input, and the warm, nuanced, richly textured sounds of the tone woods come to life. Of course, the Shangri-La possess no tone wood, except the somewhat modest-looking mahogany veneer. But it does posses the capacity for delicateness, intimacy, and also for the same kind of, giant, expansive, room-filling sound that leaves the player of a fine vintage guitar indeed incredulous. Like a fine vintage instrument, there are simply more harmonic sounds and overtones coming out of that resonant box than your brain is telling you rightly could be. It is immediately appealing, holds your attention for hours, and never becomes tiring or overbearing. It is firmly the finer successor of the early MK1 SR-007.
Conclusion:
The Shangri-La SR does everything better than the early MK1 SR-007. Unbelievably, the bass is more textured, defined, larger, and goes far deeper. The entire sound is more refined. Both are exceptionally lifelike, but the Shangri-La SR adds both maturity to the tone, and a hefty dose of realism. Fine nuance is immediately more apparent. The soundstage is larger, even convincingly borderless. These are both fine instruments, and among the finest electrostatic headphones to own. I do have a few choice words to share about comfort, as well as the build quality of the Shangri-La SR, however, but more on that, later.
and from the description the HE1 is an intimate headphone. While the SR has done the opposite of going larger, bigger, bolder with that concert feeling.
