Mar 9, 2008 at 9:03 AM Post #16 of 33
Quote:

Originally Posted by facelvega /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Shhh! That's the kind of talk that drove up the prices in the first place!


He he
wink.gif

Ok, I will keep my mouth shut. [size=xx-small]..or will I?[/size]
 
Mar 9, 2008 at 10:56 AM Post #17 of 33
One thing I should point out is that the Suprex PEP-74 is rocking now because I made it that way. It is a very bland sounding headphone stock and needs to be completely rebuilt to sound good. The basic structure of the phones is rather good but Suprex made some bad decisions in the design process.
 
Mar 9, 2008 at 12:34 PM Post #18 of 33
I am (actually used to be) a home audio guy. Stats were my choice most of the time, however, room constraints would require me to use celestion's.

I have (I think) an extensive background into sound. I was a part of the original R&D team that created the sound for Cary Audio. I traveled to CES promoting the product.

None of these cans or home systems reproduce live sound accurately, but they all have their flavor/color of musicality.

Being that I wasn't looking to buy a year ago, the prices haven't gone up to me. So, I am just looking for help and ideas from the people that have been around for a while.

BTW, I play guitar and drums, so I hear real vs. reproduced...

Stacey
 
Mar 9, 2008 at 1:39 PM Post #19 of 33
No transducer is going to do anything other then portray their own version of the performance but electrostatics do IMO come a whole lot closer then regular multi driver dynamics. The main problem is cost and finding something good enough to drive them. This applies to both electrostatic speakers and headphones.

The transformer boxes aren't all that bad if coupled to a quality amp and can be made even better by replacing the wiring inside and by bypassing all unnecessary connectors or connections. Soldering the speaker cables directly to the windings of the transformers would be ideal. Amps aren't that expensive either for something that will last another 20 years easily but they could also use some simple upgrades here and there.

While most of the vintage phones are good there are some better then others. Most of the Stax OEM phones aren't as good as the Stax models they are based on as Stax designed them to be like that. The best vintage phones are the late 70's Stax models, SR-X Mk3, SR-Lambda and SR-Sigma. They are all normal bias so any amp can be used and the transformer boxes are dirt cheap. You can still get new earpads for all of them and the drivers are likely to last another 30 years.
 
Mar 9, 2008 at 2:58 PM Post #20 of 33
Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta /img/forum/go_quote.gif
We should point out that Superex's first-gen 'stats used normal dynamic headsets with tall earpads. The PEP-79 (owned by ericj) was one of these. It has very little bass because of this mismatch between driver and headset. Then Superex got smart just before they passed from the scene: they drastically shrank the earcup volume and vented the back to produce PEP-74E, which is the Superex that FV owns.


You mean PEP-71. The energizer is pep-79 or pep-79e.
 
Mar 10, 2008 at 2:02 AM Post #21 of 33
The products called PEP-77 and PEP-79 shared the same headset (PEP-71) but used different transformer boxes (regular bias vs self-bias). The ensemble you have is collectively the PEP-79 and that's what was on the outside of the box. But yes, the headphone itself is the PEP-71.
 
Backstory: If you bought the PEP-77C (which hit the market first), your box could drive two headphones. The headphone was available separately as, you guessed it, the PEP-71. Nice and neat. Once they decided to introduce a cheaper self-bias model with only one output, however, the nomenclature became instantly confusing, but they stubbornly stuck with it to the end. My earlier posts called the PEP-74 a PEP-74E, and that's incorrect-- my belated apologies to facelvega! Just as with the PEP-71, when the PEP-74 headphone was sold with the self-bias box, it was called a PEP-79E. When it was sold with the more expensive AC-powered box, it was a PEP-77E.
 
Stax did something similar with the nomenclature of their electret line: the SR-80 headphone packaged and sold with the SRD-4 transformer box is called an SR-84. Confusing, but it points up the connection between Stax and Superex.
 
Mar 8, 2011 at 4:46 PM Post #23 of 33
I loved my Superex 'stats which I owned many, many years ago. The first electrostatics I owned in any form and the only 'stat headphones I owned.
 
I was wondering what models I had. The phones were yellow plastic, large sealed cups. The energizer was wood cased, dual outputs and it had a power cord but the power wasn't required to operate. Could anyone identify these based on my vague description?
 
Thanks!
 
Mar 9, 2011 at 9:46 PM Post #26 of 33
That's them.
Looks like I had the PEP-71 with the original adapter box, so I had the PEP-77C package. Interestingly even though that adapter box had an AC input, the phones would play (at lower volume) with no power applied.
Ugly yes, but I have very fond memories of the sound. They weren't terribly good on the low end, but the mids and highs were so incredibly fast. If one of the drivers hadn't given out, who knows maybe I'd still have them.
I have only tried one modern 'stat, the Stax Lambda and I didn't care for the balance, but also perhaps my tastes have changed over the past many years.
 
Quote:
These ugly things by any chance  http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=170580450490
 
 



 
 
Mar 10, 2011 at 1:48 AM Post #27 of 33
I don't think they are that bad looking honestly.  They have that sort of DT48 industrial look to them.  I'd wear them over the new AKG Quincy's.
 
Jul 16, 2015 at 1:59 PM Post #29 of 33

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top