Question about amps for the Stax SR-009

[rgs9200m]

Copied (from myself) in the BHSE thread, as it really belongs in an 009 thread. Sorry if it's bad form to repeat yourself...
 
 
Here's what sounds superb to me with the 009s:
All Beatles.
Rolling Stones.
Fleetwood Mac
Carole King
Joni Mitchell
Carly Simon
5th Dimension
Mamas and Papas
CSN&Y
Neil Young
Led Zepp
Doors
Neil Diamond
Clapton
Cream
Elvis (the king and Costello)
Cars
Boston
Chicago
Madonna
 
So much texture and discovery and reach in vocals, guitar licks, unbelievably satisfying percussion with deep detail, I could go on and on.
Not as nicely euphonic  or full as my LCD3s or TH900s, but it is clear what is being passed over and obscured with these (still very musical and great) other phones.
The 009s lift a lid and expose a wealth of sonic, musical information that has been hiding in all this music for decades, and I feel privileged like an archaeologist to experience it.
All 3 of these phones get about equal head time for me, FWIW. (And I'll toss in my really nice HE500s here, which are also very fine and I spend time with.)
So, with all that, I still will not say that the 009s are "better" than these other phones, because they serve different listening intentions for me.
 
If I just want to kick back and relax and read while listening, I can't do that with my 009, as they rivet my attention. The others allow for that.
 
The 009s to me are what the HD800s strive to be, but the HD800s fail at this because they don't dig as deep into the details and are more glassy sounding,
like each image is covered in some shiny granite or glass covering, whereas the 009s have no coating or cover of each musical object.
 
(The SR007 mk1 and, after a short listen, the mk2, do not approach this level of exposure, for better or worse depending on one's tastes I guess.
However, I admit I never heard them with a BH, for full disclosure, so I will reserve judgement here of course. Maybe someone could comment if the SR007s of any vintage
do what I hear the 009s do with the BH or another amp. I'd  be curious.)
 
And on a positive note, doesn't everyone around here feel blessed that this level of headphone sound is available these days that was not available until relatively recently,
except maybe for things like the unobtanium Orpheus? 
I think Stax should have called the 009 the Hubble.

 

[complin]

I hated my HD800's when I first had them but with the right source and amplifier they are probably the worlds best dynamic currently in production.
With the right synergy they do approach levels of electrostatic transparency and texture also the soundstage becomes integrated and coherent, but they are not an easy headphone to integrate into a system. Its taken me at least a couple of years and a lot of experimenting to get there.
 
Personally I think the 007MK1 as a euphonic version of the 009's, undoubtedly still one of the best Stax (along with the original Omega) have ever produced in spite of their current flagship.
 
Quote:

The 009s to me are what the HD800s strive to be, but the HD800s fail at this because they don't dig as deep into the details and are more glassy sounding,
like each image is covered in some shiny granite or glass covering, whereas the 009s have no coating or cover of each musical object.
 
(The SR007 mk1 and, after a short listen, the mk2, do not approach this level of exposure, for better or worse depending on one's tastes I guess.
However, I admit I never heard them with a BH, for full disclosure, so I will reserve judgement here of course. Maybe someone could comment if the SR007s of any vintage
do what I hear the 009s do with the BH or another amp. I'd  be curious.)
 

 

[duncan1]

I agree with  Complin - The depth -power-solid sound stage- coherence -the bringing together of all the musical instruments to form a whole musical performance while at the same time the  full harmonics of the tiniest bell can be heard not separately but part of the music while listening to classical music exceeds the 009s- IMO. 

 

[dBel84]

Quote:

There is similar DNA as the 717 is indeed a KGSS built under a license.  

 
I hadn't appreciated this, Kevin states :  "I bought the Omega II headphones without the amplifier ($1995 + shipping from EIFL Corporation in Japan). I would love to listen to the SRM-007t or SRM-717 amplifier, but really do not want to fork over $4000 to do so. " LINK . One would have thought Stax to be more reasonable and allow their designers an example of their work or at least a reasonable discount for their IP. 

 

[raulcf77]

Quote:

 
There is similar DNA as the 717 is indeed a KGSS built under a license.  They did change the output stage quite a bit so its far from being as linear as the KGSS.  There is also the PSU (well lack there of really) to consider. 
 
KGSS to KGSSHV was just futher refinement of the design, better circuit board layout and most importantly, a very, very good PSU. 

 
Thanks a lot, very clear explanation!

 

[froger]

Quote:

I hated my HD800's when I first had them but with the right source and amplifier they are probably the worlds best dynamic currently in production.
With the right synergy they do approach levels of electrostatic transparency and texture also the soundstage becomes integrated and coherent, but they are not an easy headphone to integrate into a system. Its taken me at least a couple of years and a lot of experimenting to get there.
 
Personally I think the 007MK1 as a euphonic version of the 009's, undoubtedly still one of the best Stax (along with the original Omega) have ever produced in spite of their current flagship.
 

May I know what source and amplifier do you use to bring HD800 to approach levels of electrostatic transparency and texture?

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

 
I hadn't appreciated this, Kevin states :  "I bought the Omega II headphones without the amplifier ($1995 + shipping from EIFL Corporation in Japan). I would love to listen to the SRM-007t or SRM-717 amplifier, but really do not want to fork over $4000 to do so. " LINK . One would have thought Stax to be more reasonable and allow their designers an example of their work or at least a reasonable discount for their IP. 

 
From what I've read, I was also under the impression that the SRM-717 amp was a Stax design and not Kevin's. Dunno know who the original designer(s) is(are).
 
Seems the KGSS is heavily based on the original SRM-717 design. I wonder if the KGSS amps are built under Stax license? Are Stax amp designs open source?

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

 
From what I've read, I was also under the impression that the SRM-717 amp was a Stax design and not Kevin's. Dunno know who the original designer(s) is(are).
 
Seems the KGSS is heavily based on the original SRM-717 design. I wonder if the KGSS amps are built under Stax license? Are Stax amp designs open source?

 
Did you miss this?
 

 
There is similar DNA as the 717 is indeed a KGSS built under a license.  They did change the output stage quite a bit so its far from being as linear as the KGSS.  There is also the PSU (well lack there of really) to consider. 
 
KGSS to KGSSHV was just futher refinement of the design, better circuit board layout and most importantly, a very, very good PSU. 
 

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

 
Did you miss this?
 

 
No. Did you?
 

 
There is similar DNA as the 717 is indeed a KGSS built under a license.  They did change the output stage quite a bit so its far from being as linear as the KGSS.  There is also the PSU (well lack there of really) to consider. 
 
KGSS to KGSSHV was just futher refinement of the design, better circuit board layout and most importantly, a very, very good PSU. 
 

 
Based on the Headwize link, shouldn't it say "The KGSS is indeed a 717 built under a license" MH? Are you aware of such license?

 

[purk]

Quote:

 
From what I've read, I was also under the impression that the SRM-717 amp was a Stax design and not Kevin's. Dunno know who the original designer(s) is(are).
 
Seems the KGSS is heavily based on the original SRM-717 design. I wonder if the KGSS amps are built under Stax license? Are Stax amp designs open source?

It is the other way around.  KG came up with the design and licensed out to Stax.  Stax however reworked the output stage resulting in warmer and slightly darker tonality.  Parts on the SRM-717 are also cheaper hence a better overall sound on the KGSS.  Yes, the BHSE is significantly better than the 717 as it should be given its price.  The BHSE is an awesome amplifier.

 

[Radio_head]

That would make sense, but it doesn't mesh with what Kevin said in the intro to the headwize article, which seems to imply he came up with the KGSS after the 717 was already out due to not wanting to spend what the 717 cost at the time.

 

[MacedonianHero]

No. Did you?


Based on the Headwize link, shouldn't it say "The KGSS is indeed a 717 built under a license" MH? Are you aware of such license?

How would I know? I'm just taking Birgir at his word.

 

[arnaud]

Depending on who you talk to the order chances. A bit of a chicken and egg thing...

 

[ultrabike]

Quote:

Depending on who you talk to the order chances. A bit of a chicken and egg thing...

 
Since you were on the Stax Interview and Factory Tour, do you know if Stax had a position in this? Are they licensing the SRM-717 from Kevin?
 
All I know from the interwebs is that Stax released the SRM-717 around 2000... and the Headwize article has "c. 2000" at the bottom... The intro to the article at Headwize is fairly misleading.

 

[purrin]

Quote:

Depending on who you talk to the order chances. A bit of a chicken and egg thing...

 
Or time travel.