[vid]

Touché?
 
From the couple of studies I've browsed, it seems that when people are asked to evaluate the subjective quality of x headphones, the results tend to cluster towards certain manifestations of objective performance. This would seem to validate measurements as indicators of the subjective experience more than you'd allow.

 

[bracko]

Touché?

From the couple of studies I've browsed, it seems that when people are asked to evaluate the subjective quality of x headphones, the results tend to cluster towards certain manifestations of objective performance. This would seem to validate measurements as indicators of the subjective experience more than you'd allow.

Could you share those studies?

 

[vid]

Tyll made a summary article of some of the latest studies, so look on InnerFidelity for links to those; a study by a guy working for Harman I think found a preference for a certain type of sound signature. A study from a while back on subjective vs. objective performance, whose name I always forget but which I'm sure someone else or perhaps Google can give you as it's relatively well-known and carries the keywords STAX Lambda, found a correlation between frequency response and subjective rating of sound quality so that when the frequency response of previously low-rated headphones was EQd towards the response of higher-rated headphones, these previously low-rated phones were then unknowingly rated close to the previously high-rated ones.

 

[vid]

.

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

 

The answer to gaining the best out of the SR-5 is a dedicated Stax amp or a better energizer SRD-7sb/7sb MK2. The SRD-6 is a piss poor performer (despite them all doing the same thing acting as transformer coupled energizers).

 

[vid]

The SRD-6 does seem flimsy in construction, at least on the outside, but to be honest, the SR-5 feel flimsy as well. The sound you get when you tap the back of the cup is pretty scary.
 
I don't buy the SRD-7 being better without some evidence, though. I did a quick search and the first comparison I found was our old friend facelvega saying the SRD-6/SB sounded either the same or better than the SRD-7.

 

[DefQon]

The SR-5 is indeed bit flimsy feeling but it is quite strong as all are Stax products. The SRD-6 is rubbish, throw it out.
 
I haven't heard of a SRD-7 only SRD-7sb and SRD-7sb mk2 which I prefer greatly over the other energizers. Coupled this through my Marantz PM-32 amp my SR-5 sings. Very nice mids and as you said voice imaging. Sound improves if you install O2 pads on them.

 

[vid]

The SR-5 driver looks pretty solid - no wonder Stax wanted to redo the frame.
 
I might end up with a variant of the SRD-7 if I go for some old Lambdas next year when the budget revives. Could do some pad experiments on the SR-5 in the meantime.

 

[NamelessPFG]

Quote:

Unipolar's are not planars? 
 
But have you heard all planar's though? I've heard a majority of everything the market has to offer plus some vintage/unobtanium stuff and there is a reason why one should not jump on the gun and disregard what dynamic transducers can do. Not to mention, once you hit the high end planars they lose to the high end dynamics in a lot sound aspects.
 
But I do agree due to the construction nature of planars, they are more responsive to mods than dynamic headphones. But I'd blame 70/80's flawed construction design when manufacturers put most of there efforts in the transducer technology itself. 

 
Strictly speaking, all electrostatics and electrets are planar drivers in structure, a diaphragm sandwiched between two plates that apply force to move said diaphragm. They just don't use magnetic force to move that diaphragm.
 
One thing's for sure-there's more to a headphone's sound than the basic driver structure. I don't know what Stax did to downgrade the Lambda frame's midrange reproduction in the SR-202 and coincidentally share similar flaws to the HE-400, but my ears aren't lying to me.
 
Quote:

The SR-5 is indeed bit flimsy feeling but it is quite strong as all are Stax products. The SRD-6 is rubbish, throw it out.
 
I haven't heard of a SRD-7 only SRD-7sb and SRD-7sb mk2 which I prefer greatly over the other energizers. Coupled this through my Marantz PM-32 amp my SR-5 sings. Very nice mids and as you said voice imaging. Sound improves if you install O2 pads on them.

 
There is a "plain" SRD-7. Silver faceplate, old Stax logo, AC input (not self-biasing), dual Normal bias jacks. Very commonly found with the SR-X/Mk3 on eBay, at least.

 

[vid]

.

 

[DefQon]

The SR-5 measures pretty impressive for a 40 year old electrostat.

 

[vid]

They sound modern enough, for sure. Both the SR-5 and modded Unipolar are appreciably better than the average 'good' dynamic.

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

They sound modern enough, for sure. Both the SR-5 and modded Unipolar are appreciably better than the average 'good' dynamic.

I'll 

 to that statement. But some average good dynamics can also sound good to superb as well but that's where you would need to start dropping money on proper and synergizing amplification to reach that level. 

 

[vid]

.

 

[DefQon]

Yeah that guy won't ship out of Europe.