gordie
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2001
- Posts
- 193
- Likes
- 22
Someone made a great comment in a recent post where the sound of various headphones was being disputed. Paraphrasing, it was basically a plea to point out what's good about headphones you like, instead of crapping on headphones you don't like. I still think it is worthwhile to voice all opinions, even if negative, and I'm sure glad to read all sides of the story when checking out reviews and comments on headphones, but I think this was a great point. Don't be a hater 
- there's plenty of positive things to say about the great headphones currently being made, and in fact, much of the negative comments stem from personal preference anyway, so here's some love for the Stax 303s (and 313 amp) without mention of any other headphone, other than to describe my stash.
Before I get my engine revved up, though, I wanted to discuss a couple of observations about headphones in general. A few posters lamented that Stax (maybe all electrostatics) destroyed the illusion of listening to real music because they didn't sound like an actual performance - the headphones, despite all their detail, and nice sound, pulled them out of the moment and they felt they were listening to something reproducing sound, and not the actual canvas of the sound itself.
Well, I thought that was an interesting observation, but hey! All headphones do that to me! I mean, let's be real here - what headphones sound like a live concert? As well, what headphones sound like a nice phat set of speakers cranking out some techno beats? I've been to more than a few symphonic performances, jazz clubs, rock concerts, and played an instrument or two in each of those venues myself - and no tiny speakers sitting next to my ears anywhere anyhow anyway are going to sound like that! Similarly, I've got some nice big speakers, and been to many a house club (not lately, ha - getting too old), and I don't think headphones quite cover that same physical territory. <disclaimer> At least to me. YMMV. </disclaimer>
So I don't lose any points for the Stax in that regard, they sound as much like being at an actual performance as any other pair of headphones I've listened to. Which is to say, not that much. But damn good anyway - headphone listening has incredible detail, it can be lush and sweet, it can rock you just as hard as necessary to get the point of the music across - and that's where I put my bias. If I get the point of the music through the headphones, if the instruments (real or synthesized) are reproduced with a set of reasonable attributes I associate with the original (if not the impact, ambience, and room-full of sound), if quite simply the music just sounds good, than I'm happy.
Another interesting comment (remember a few years back towards the beginning of this post I mentioned I had a couple of observations?) is the question of whether or not you need more than one pair of headphones. Some have argued you find the right pair and stop there. Others argue for variety. I'm going to side with variety - I don't think one pair of headphones can do it all. And even if it could, viva le difference. Just as musicians enjoy the diversity playing in different venues, and we enjoy the different production and sonic techniques employed in different recordings, I truly enjoy the different renderings of sound from a variety of equipment. Thus, I have been led to try a lot of different headphones, and have kept a few, to capitalize on that variety of sonic perspective. Therefore, my enjoyment of the Stax is not an indictment of any other headphones per se - even if those headphones fall into a completely different spectrum of qualities than the Stax.
But to get back to the main point, here are some specific comments about the Stax 3030 system. I've always wanted a pair of Stax, after hearing them at a few dealers and friend's setups in the past, and I finally picked up the 3030 system recently. I actually liked these the moment I fired them up, but of course I needed to run them through a broad spectrum of music and listen in multiple sessions before I could make any kind of reasonable judgement. After a few days of listening in more than a few sessions, I am sold big time. I could wax poetic on the obvious, their awesome detail yet smooth presentation, their fatigue free staying power, wonderful soundstage, and the clear and deep bass. In fact, I just did (well perhaps not all that poetically, so I offer this: detail with soft feet, awesome stage without fatigue, deep bass will stay clear). But that ground's been covered repeatedly, so I won't go on much more about those aspects. Suffice to say I truly appreciate and enjoy their performance in that area.
So I'm going to tread into a different area discussing the Stax - Rock, Pop, and Techno (and related styles). I've read lots of reviews of the system, and I've seen some comments that the Stax Lambdas don't really rock out - many people seem to feel these are best suited for classical, acoustic, and ambient. I think the Stax excel at those styles, but I am loving them for rock as well, which really surprised me!
As point of reference, I have Grado RS-1s (through the original Grado HPA-1 amp and the newer RA-1 amp), and Senn 580s (through an Earmax Pro). I also use Sony MDR-V6 and Koss Sporta-Pro quite frequently for portable listening. My bias is this - I love playing and listening to music. That's where it starts, and that's where it ends. Audio equipment is a means to that end (although I am a sucker for well made and gorgeous looking equipment, aside from the obvious sonic advantages of good kit). I prefer using high end equipment, but I'll listen to music through anything if the alternative is no music. My Sonys and Koss do get a lot of use because they're convenient and get me through the night (and day) - the Sonys are indestructible for use with guitar effects rigs, and Koss are the least dorky looking headphones I can stand to use when wandering the campus.
As an aside, ever notice how you can say things like "this guy gets great guitar tone", or "killer drum sound", and "lovely piano" - even if the equipment you are using is awful? That's the kind of things my ears naturally listen for, rather than many of the things one might find to critically judge the audio rig itself. If I'm getting chills, detail, and a sense of coherence between instruments, without nasty sonic impositions by the equipment, I figure something must be right. That isn't to say I'm not disturbed by distortion or frequency aberrations or omissions, or that I don't enjoy the aspects imparted by good equipment - but my starting point and focus is listening to music, not listening to equipment. Balance making music sound good with revealing detail, and you're on my A list.
And on a related subject - some complain that too much detail can expose flaws in a recording. This is true, to an extent - there are some recordings that just sound too bad to enjoy on revealing gear. (That's what Sony MDR-V6s are for. That's not an insult to the Sonys. Really). However, all recordings have their warts (well, most do), and in the spirit of love not hate, I always try to focus on the good, not the bad. Again, the most important thing to me is the music - the writing, the performance, the ideas. I appreciate, and hope for, good engineering and production to boot, but I'll cut some slack in that department if the former is on the money. Anyway, a lot of my favorite recordings can sound strident if you turn them too loud, or sound weak if too soft, or sacrifice soundstage for imaging (or the opposite), or have amazing vocals yet the drums are lost in the ether, and so on. I think one needs to get over it and find what's good. Because there's lots of good. And while great equipment can expose the bad, it also highlights the good too. And I have to say that as incredibly well recorded as they are, I have never heard a Chesky recording worth actually listening to. There I've said it. OK, now I'm being a hater, so I'll get back on topic...
When I received the Stax, I set up a playlist to get familiar with them, with a lot of orchestral, ambient, jazz, and some lighter rock. Out of curiousity, I stuck a variety of rock and heavier jazz at the end of the list too, but I half expected I'd take a break before I got there and possibly have the Grados plugged in for the latter half. I hoped the Stax would shine on the first half, and lo and behold, they did. Big time. Now, although I love a good slam session with a cranked set of Grados, or some rocking speakers, or dare I say within an actual band context, I find the presentation of the Stax to be magnificent as well.
For my listening, I was coming out the line stage of my trusty Sony Pro DAT player (earning its keep as a D/A and line stage since the sad, but unfortunately not so uncommon death of its tape transport). This pumps out a decent amount of juice, so I started off with the Stax amp set on about 3 (roughly 10 o'clock on the dial) with occasional forays up to 3.5 (and once to 4 just for a recording at a lower level).
What I didn't expect was how much I would like the Stax when some punchier, rockier tunes came on. First off, these cans are so fatigue free I made it a lot further into the playlist without taking a break than I expected, and all of a sudden, Steely Dan's Jack of Speed comes on. Punchy bass drum. Done well. Yeah, we're not into the thrash metal yet, but we're stepping into an area I didn't expect to be the Stax's forte. So I'm thinking, oh yeah, I'm digging this, let's see what else you got. So on to some Van Halen, Zeppelin, Radiohead, Orbital, Crystal Method. Orbital? Crystal Method? Heck yeah. Well, now's probably a good time for a break, so I don't completely waste my ears, so off to lunch and a few hours off the cans.
When I came back, I kept up with the heavier stuff. At this point, I'm listening around 3.5 on the dial - not too cranked, but definitely moving some air. Here's the rub - the Stax are pretty loud at that setting, but they don't seem all that head banging, since they don't really slam you into the back of your seat like the Grados, or even the Senns (in comparison to the Stax). But they still rock. Drum hits sound great, the kick drum is clear, the guitars are rich, the bass is ever present, and the whole thing just works. Now OK Computer comes on - something I would not have sat at the same table with the Stax at a wedding, much less sent through their tender electrostatic delicates, but here it is. Radiohead just happens to balance this incredible combination of heavy and ambient, at times bordering on a lighter presentation, and then smacking you into your seat - and I could not believe how much I dug listening to OK Computer through the Stax.
Regarding detail, I find these have a ton of it - OK for me, all headphones actually have a ton of detail (except totally crap headphones, or headphones suffering the indignity of a weak output) - but I think these have more detail than usual, probably because, oh heck I have theories, hypotheses, but to be honest I got nothing I can prove here. Is it a characteristic of the electrostatic design? Is it their balanced frequency presentation which doesn't seem to cause anything to get congested? Or is it simply the fact that I'm listening for it? In any case, the thing that really sells me on these is that the detail doesn't get in the way of enjoying the music. I'm hearing the music first, but little nuances jump out at me without getting in the way of the musical presentation (such as the tail end of reverb on a drum hit, an acoustic guitar strummed lightly and down in the mix, detail on keyboard pads, ambient effects, and the like). I can focus on the detail or ignore it and just focus on the music, and both approaches to listening are vastly rewarding.
So is this just new toy syndrome? Perhaps to a degree, I know its always a blast to get a good set of new kit and run through the old music collection again, and hearing it with a new twist on the presentation is always a kick. But I think these cans have legs. Please, nobody give me the opportunity to listen to Omegas or the Orpheus, I don't think I could stand it.
Here's the rock playlist (in no particular order) I ran through - in more than a few sessions - which sent me to find a piece of scrap paper and an evil scientist to concoct a master plan to get a spare pair of these cans, JUST IN CASE:
Steely Dan - Jack of Speed
Cold storage - Canada (from the incredibly awesome Wipeout Pure video game)
Pretenders - Saving Grace
Porcupine Tree - Tinto Brass, Blackest Eyes, Halo
Yes - Siberian Khatru, South Side of the Sky
ZZ Top - Cheap Sunglasses, La Grange
Owsley - Rise
Orbital - Tunnel Vision, Technologicque Park
Crystal Method - Blowout, Broken Glass
Foo Fighters - My Hero
Lee Coombs and Andy Gardner - Obsessional Rhythm (Lee Coombs Remix)
Collective Soul - Gel
Van Halen - Runnin' With the Devil
Radiohead - Airbag, Paranoid Android
Future Sound of London - We Have Explosive, My Kingdom
For completeness, here's the first half of the playlist, which also sounded great on my new best friends:
GRP Big Band - Blue Train
Eagles Hell Freezes Over - Hotel California (dig that kick drum)
Al Dimeola (Kiss my Axe) - The Embrace
Waterlillies - Supersonic
Michael Brook - Urbana
Future Sound of London - Yage, High Tide on the Sea of Flesh, (yeah, they're in both sides!)
Porcupine Tree - "Light, Mass, Prayers", Lazarus (them too)
Fragile State - Paper Tiger
Rpwl - Everything Was Not Enough
Horowitz plays Mozart - Concerto 23, Allegro
Hans Brugen Orchestra of the 18th Century - Mozart Symphony No. 40, Beethoven Symphony No. 2
Torch Song - Toward the Unknown Region (this is WIlliam Orbit under a different name for some reason)
Malcolm Arnold London Philharmonic - A Sussex Overture
Daniel Barenboim Chicago Symphony - Tchaikovsky Capriccio Italien
Interior - Hot Beach
Martin Taylor solo guitar - True
[Edit Jan 1, 2006 around midnight - adding a lot more comments, impressions, and some comparison with other headphones]
I've put a few more days of listening into the Stax 3030 setup, and I'm still digging it big time. I've got some other impressions, and identified some areas where I give credit to some other competitive headphones as compared to the Stax. In the end, the Stax are still tops for me, but I'm glad to have some other headphone choices to strut their stuff in the areas where they excel.
I also have some more comments about the level detail from the Stax. As a quick aside, I have a theory on "detailed" equipment. All of my high end equipment has lots of detail (particularly headphones, as I mentioned further up), and heck, compared to the junk I listened to when I was growing up, pretty much all the equipment I have has decent detail. The thing is, with speakers and headphones, they have such diverse sets of frequency curves, they all accentuate different areas of detail. So when I get a new pair of headphones that have a different set of accentuated frequencies (compare Senns to Grados to Stax to Sony 5000s for instance), I start noticing the specific details in those accentuated areas more than I had in the past. If I then get a different pair of headphones and listen to the same music (which I might not have heard on those other headphones before), I'll notice different details, or at least different details will jump out at me, due to the different set of accentuated frequencies.
Related to this, whenever I am seriously comparing equipment (as I spent some time doing with the Stax vs. my other kit), I just naturally hone in on a few things I hadn't noticed before - I was wondering "how does the bass hold up" and "how bright is the treble" and "how do strings sound", "how do vocals sound", "how's the image of the main vocal", "how do instruments separate in space", and all the other favorite concepts we explore when auditioning equipment. When I listen like that, I start finding things I might never have noticed before (of course once that happens I can never ignore them again). That said, on a scale of 1 to 10 for detail, the Stax score an 11 (I wanted to make a Spinal Tap "they go up to 11" joke here, but it didn't quite work). The good news is I get to hear all kinds of cool nuance and interesting and gorgeous details I hadn't picked up before. It also means I started hearing some warts I hadn't ever noticed before, even on recordings I've listened to for years. I heard some very subtle tape fuzz at the end of a song's introduction on an old analog recording, some hissy noise on top of some synth tracks I never noticed, a burp where a guitar track must have been inadvertently punched in and out for a few seconds without any guitar playing (I could equate the track noise with noise riding on top of the actual guitar track when it was playing), and so on.
Usually I don't give much credit to the phrase "these have a lot of detail", attributing such effects to other factors. In fact, I once read a review touting the detail of some incredible headphone amp because the reviewer heard Stevie Ray Vaughan shout a "yeah!" during a solo, but I had heard that before I ever read the review listening on my trashy work stereo with AR powered desktop speakers - I think he just never noticed it before and coincidentally heard it when auditioning this amp. However, in this case, I gotta say I was surprised with the things I was hearing, things I know hear with my other headphones, but noticed first with the Stax (possibly due to the frequency effect I mentioned a few paragraphs up, but surprising details nonetheless).
Anyway, on to some comparisons with my other headphones (Grado RS-1, and Senn 580) - I hope to compare them to Sony SA5000s and AKG 701s before long as well (although it is hard enough comparing between two pairs of headphones, more less 4 or 5) - I think ear fatigue would be a significant barrier to doing any reasonable comparative review of that many headphones unless you spent the better part of a month.
I am also lucky enough to have scored some Grado HP-2s when they first came out, and still use them fairly frequently. I find them to be extremely well balanced, very very accurate through the mids, and a pleasure to listen to. I haven't done a lot of direct comparison to the Stax, but in some areas the Stax are all that and more, but with more brightness on top, more bass extension, and less midbass. The Stax have many of the great characteristics of the Grado HP-2 - smooth, luscious mids, detailed, clean bass - but there's more of it (smoother, a more wonderful midrange, incredible detail, awesome clear and well resolved bass with more extension to boot).
This isn't to say that they sound the same - they sound fairly different, with the Grados having a heavier presentation (more midbass), and a smaller soundstage, and the Stax having more on the bottom and top end. That said, though, they are both very clear and sweet, and I enjoy the Stax for many of the same reasons I like the HP-2s. The Stax can rock out (in terms of volume) a bit more than the HP-2s, although the HP-2s are no slouch - they just require a powerful amp and the bass always sounds a bit pinched to me when I get into the heavier rock at high volume with the HP-2s. In any case, these are preliminary judgments and not based on a lot of direct comparison, so my advice to you is to forget what you just read concerning the HP-2s as soon as humanly possible.
Now on to the other headphones, where I did spend some quality time doing head to head comparisons with the same music (both during the songs, switching back and forth, and also playing the same playlists through all three and comparing impressions).
First off - punchy kick drum oriented rock. While the Stax have great bass response (they extend low, and have very clean and clear bass), on tunes with a really punchy kick drum and bass combination, the Grado RS-1 has a more satisfying slam. For example, Thomas Dolby's "Pulp Culture" from Aliens Ate my Buick, the big drum hits on Dream Academy's "Life in a Northern Town", and Future Sound of London "Herd Killing" from Dead Cities. This doesn't come without cost, though - I find the Grados to be pretty fatiguing, and in general the bass can be loose and wallow a bit compared to the Stax. The Grados can kick out the jams though and have a very rich (if bright) response (I just wish they were more comfortable). And I actually prefer the Stax on many other recordings with well represented bass, such as Daft Punk "Da Funk", ZZ Top's Recycler and Rhythmeen albums, vintage Yes and Pink Floyd, and on all the songs I just mentioned the the Grados excel at, the Stax still hold their own - however the Grado gets the nod in the punch department as expressed in those cuts.
Similarly, listening at loud levels to rock or techno that is pushing a lot of continuous bass energy (and/or is extremely compressed), the Grados and Senns will sometimes get the nod over the Stax (i.e. on a recording level meter they tend to stay close to pegged, rather than bounce between roughly -6DB and 0 DB on the kick/snare hits). As examples, Porcupine Tree's "In Absentia", Rammstein's "Du Hast", and Crystal Method's "Tweekend". I typically prefer a less compressed mixdown anyway, such that suits the Stax (which is coincident with my preference for the Stax in general too), but much of my favorite stuff is also pretty compressed (Porcupine Tree and Crystal Method being among my favorite bands), and the Grados and Senn 580s seem to deal with it better.
The Stax might be a bit more honest about the reproduction, but when really cranking stuff like this, the idea is to simulate a big room with sound bouncing all over, and the Stax don't seem to hold it all together (for this type of recording) at really high sound levels in the same sense the other headphones can manage. At more moderate levels, however, the Stax sound great with techno/compressed recordings, and I am never disappointed while listening to the Stax when this type of music comes on as long as I don't have them running at the redline. Probably better for my ears to keep the volume more reasonable anyway, but on many other styles of music you can crank the Stax pretty high without realizing it and without getting fatigued, so you can end up with some pretty high levels when something heavy and compressed comes on (life is random, so I often live by the shuffle). If I've got the Stax cranked too much, and Crystal Method or PTree come on, I'll need to turn them down, whereas with the Grado RS-1s I'll just rock out (but then have to take a break from the pounding!)
I want to reiterate that at more moderate levels, the Stax are great for this kind of stuff since they have a nice full bass even at low level, and lots of detail so you still get plenty of excitement even without pushing it. The Grados are smooth and rich at high volume (which is probably bad news for my ears anyway), and the Senns, with their midbass hump, also seem to accentuate the frequencies that make these types of recordings work. The Stax are still fine for these, we're not talking "mini-monitor" syndrome, but for cranking it up, I'll give it to the dynamic cans on this stuff. Also note that for cranking up other types of music (rock that isn't overly compressed, more ambient techno, orchestral and big band jazz), the Stax are my favorites - they can do cranked, they can do big, I'm just being fair to point out which types of tunes one might prefer to crank with something else.
As a more general observation, I've noticed that when pushed, the Stax can sound a bit "steely" on some recordings. Not all recordings, just some that seem to tickle the lower treble. This seems to happen with recordings that are already fairly bright, I think the bias of the Stax up high is perhaps to slightly accentuate the frequencies that make a steel string guitar sound different than a nylon string. This effect is not extremely significant, and only present on a few recordings. Perhaps you could describe it as a slight glare. This might actually be the Stax presenting the mid-highs (the bright region) with more accuracy - since they don't do it on most recordings, it isn't a sonic footprint the Stax impose, it is just something they bring out if present on the recording.
I've found every headphone I've used to accentuate some portion of the bright spectrum when pushed too hard, Grados sound steely too, although they seem to accentuate the upper mids which also make them sound rich. The lush sound of the Sennheiser gets snappy and becomes sibiliant when they are pushed - the snare drum starts to thin out and snap, and strings and vocals get thin and harsh. All of these effects are most noticeable when the headphones are pushed too loudly for reasonable listening, but I will sometimes creep the volume up and end up with some serious volume towards the end of a listening session.
All the issues I'm mentioning are minor, but definitely show the great strengths of some of the other excellent headphones out there. I haven't heard the "new kid on the block" SA5000s or 701s yet - but I plan to get a good listen into some of those soon (SA500s are actually on the way, and I plan to try and audition 701s at home once they are more readily available), but I'm sure those headphones have lots of strengths too, based on the very positive reviews. The Stax, however, really hit the sweet spot for me - they are a pleasure to use with everything I've thrown at them, and really excel in so many areas I just love listening to them. Their ability to span the range of delicate acoustic to majestic orchestral to big rock/fusion and even techno beats just astounds me. Their liabilities, for me, are relatively minor, and while bested by some other headphones in some areas, I prefer the Stax in more cases than not.
There is one final thing to mention, something I didn't notice until tonight - if you get hot and sweat at all, the Stax can get fairly uncomfortable, as you have this huge area of synthetic leather pressing on your face. In the summer when its hot, I'll probably have to blow a fan at my face if I do any extended listening with the Stax. At least it will help preserve my ears, as it encourages you to take breaks every once in a while when the heat builds up.
At this point, the Stax is definitely my main system, and my favorite overall setup. Sometimes, for pragmatic reasons (such as the workplace), or for variety, or to get some extra punch, I'll turn to a different headphone system, but for now I'll be doing the bulk of my home listening with the Stax - I am extremely satisfied and thrilled to have the Stax system as my current workhorse.
I'll check back in after I've had these a few weeks and put a final update into this post - many people have pointed out that you have to live with equipment for a few weeks before you can rally have accurate impressions that withstand the test of time, and I think that's true. However, I've accelerated a lot of time into 5 days since I was on holiday break, so I've definitely put in more than my normal share of listening over that period. Even at that, though, a few more weeks will really be telling, and I look forward to those next few weeks!
- there's plenty of positive things to say about the great headphones currently being made, and in fact, much of the negative comments stem from personal preference anyway, so here's some love for the Stax 303s (and 313 amp) without mention of any other headphone, other than to describe my stash.Before I get my engine revved up, though, I wanted to discuss a couple of observations about headphones in general. A few posters lamented that Stax (maybe all electrostatics) destroyed the illusion of listening to real music because they didn't sound like an actual performance - the headphones, despite all their detail, and nice sound, pulled them out of the moment and they felt they were listening to something reproducing sound, and not the actual canvas of the sound itself.
Well, I thought that was an interesting observation, but hey! All headphones do that to me! I mean, let's be real here - what headphones sound like a live concert? As well, what headphones sound like a nice phat set of speakers cranking out some techno beats? I've been to more than a few symphonic performances, jazz clubs, rock concerts, and played an instrument or two in each of those venues myself - and no tiny speakers sitting next to my ears anywhere anyhow anyway are going to sound like that! Similarly, I've got some nice big speakers, and been to many a house club (not lately, ha - getting too old), and I don't think headphones quite cover that same physical territory. <disclaimer> At least to me. YMMV. </disclaimer>
So I don't lose any points for the Stax in that regard, they sound as much like being at an actual performance as any other pair of headphones I've listened to. Which is to say, not that much. But damn good anyway - headphone listening has incredible detail, it can be lush and sweet, it can rock you just as hard as necessary to get the point of the music across - and that's where I put my bias. If I get the point of the music through the headphones, if the instruments (real or synthesized) are reproduced with a set of reasonable attributes I associate with the original (if not the impact, ambience, and room-full of sound), if quite simply the music just sounds good, than I'm happy.
Another interesting comment (remember a few years back towards the beginning of this post I mentioned I had a couple of observations?) is the question of whether or not you need more than one pair of headphones. Some have argued you find the right pair and stop there. Others argue for variety. I'm going to side with variety - I don't think one pair of headphones can do it all. And even if it could, viva le difference. Just as musicians enjoy the diversity playing in different venues, and we enjoy the different production and sonic techniques employed in different recordings, I truly enjoy the different renderings of sound from a variety of equipment. Thus, I have been led to try a lot of different headphones, and have kept a few, to capitalize on that variety of sonic perspective. Therefore, my enjoyment of the Stax is not an indictment of any other headphones per se - even if those headphones fall into a completely different spectrum of qualities than the Stax.
But to get back to the main point, here are some specific comments about the Stax 3030 system. I've always wanted a pair of Stax, after hearing them at a few dealers and friend's setups in the past, and I finally picked up the 3030 system recently. I actually liked these the moment I fired them up, but of course I needed to run them through a broad spectrum of music and listen in multiple sessions before I could make any kind of reasonable judgement. After a few days of listening in more than a few sessions, I am sold big time. I could wax poetic on the obvious, their awesome detail yet smooth presentation, their fatigue free staying power, wonderful soundstage, and the clear and deep bass. In fact, I just did (well perhaps not all that poetically, so I offer this: detail with soft feet, awesome stage without fatigue, deep bass will stay clear). But that ground's been covered repeatedly, so I won't go on much more about those aspects. Suffice to say I truly appreciate and enjoy their performance in that area.
So I'm going to tread into a different area discussing the Stax - Rock, Pop, and Techno (and related styles). I've read lots of reviews of the system, and I've seen some comments that the Stax Lambdas don't really rock out - many people seem to feel these are best suited for classical, acoustic, and ambient. I think the Stax excel at those styles, but I am loving them for rock as well, which really surprised me!
As point of reference, I have Grado RS-1s (through the original Grado HPA-1 amp and the newer RA-1 amp), and Senn 580s (through an Earmax Pro). I also use Sony MDR-V6 and Koss Sporta-Pro quite frequently for portable listening. My bias is this - I love playing and listening to music. That's where it starts, and that's where it ends. Audio equipment is a means to that end (although I am a sucker for well made and gorgeous looking equipment, aside from the obvious sonic advantages of good kit). I prefer using high end equipment, but I'll listen to music through anything if the alternative is no music. My Sonys and Koss do get a lot of use because they're convenient and get me through the night (and day) - the Sonys are indestructible for use with guitar effects rigs, and Koss are the least dorky looking headphones I can stand to use when wandering the campus.
As an aside, ever notice how you can say things like "this guy gets great guitar tone", or "killer drum sound", and "lovely piano" - even if the equipment you are using is awful? That's the kind of things my ears naturally listen for, rather than many of the things one might find to critically judge the audio rig itself. If I'm getting chills, detail, and a sense of coherence between instruments, without nasty sonic impositions by the equipment, I figure something must be right. That isn't to say I'm not disturbed by distortion or frequency aberrations or omissions, or that I don't enjoy the aspects imparted by good equipment - but my starting point and focus is listening to music, not listening to equipment. Balance making music sound good with revealing detail, and you're on my A list.
And on a related subject - some complain that too much detail can expose flaws in a recording. This is true, to an extent - there are some recordings that just sound too bad to enjoy on revealing gear. (That's what Sony MDR-V6s are for. That's not an insult to the Sonys. Really). However, all recordings have their warts (well, most do), and in the spirit of love not hate, I always try to focus on the good, not the bad. Again, the most important thing to me is the music - the writing, the performance, the ideas. I appreciate, and hope for, good engineering and production to boot, but I'll cut some slack in that department if the former is on the money. Anyway, a lot of my favorite recordings can sound strident if you turn them too loud, or sound weak if too soft, or sacrifice soundstage for imaging (or the opposite), or have amazing vocals yet the drums are lost in the ether, and so on. I think one needs to get over it and find what's good. Because there's lots of good. And while great equipment can expose the bad, it also highlights the good too. And I have to say that as incredibly well recorded as they are, I have never heard a Chesky recording worth actually listening to. There I've said it. OK, now I'm being a hater, so I'll get back on topic...
When I received the Stax, I set up a playlist to get familiar with them, with a lot of orchestral, ambient, jazz, and some lighter rock. Out of curiousity, I stuck a variety of rock and heavier jazz at the end of the list too, but I half expected I'd take a break before I got there and possibly have the Grados plugged in for the latter half. I hoped the Stax would shine on the first half, and lo and behold, they did. Big time. Now, although I love a good slam session with a cranked set of Grados, or some rocking speakers, or dare I say within an actual band context, I find the presentation of the Stax to be magnificent as well.
For my listening, I was coming out the line stage of my trusty Sony Pro DAT player (earning its keep as a D/A and line stage since the sad, but unfortunately not so uncommon death of its tape transport). This pumps out a decent amount of juice, so I started off with the Stax amp set on about 3 (roughly 10 o'clock on the dial) with occasional forays up to 3.5 (and once to 4 just for a recording at a lower level).
What I didn't expect was how much I would like the Stax when some punchier, rockier tunes came on. First off, these cans are so fatigue free I made it a lot further into the playlist without taking a break than I expected, and all of a sudden, Steely Dan's Jack of Speed comes on. Punchy bass drum. Done well. Yeah, we're not into the thrash metal yet, but we're stepping into an area I didn't expect to be the Stax's forte. So I'm thinking, oh yeah, I'm digging this, let's see what else you got. So on to some Van Halen, Zeppelin, Radiohead, Orbital, Crystal Method. Orbital? Crystal Method? Heck yeah. Well, now's probably a good time for a break, so I don't completely waste my ears, so off to lunch and a few hours off the cans.
When I came back, I kept up with the heavier stuff. At this point, I'm listening around 3.5 on the dial - not too cranked, but definitely moving some air. Here's the rub - the Stax are pretty loud at that setting, but they don't seem all that head banging, since they don't really slam you into the back of your seat like the Grados, or even the Senns (in comparison to the Stax). But they still rock. Drum hits sound great, the kick drum is clear, the guitars are rich, the bass is ever present, and the whole thing just works. Now OK Computer comes on - something I would not have sat at the same table with the Stax at a wedding, much less sent through their tender electrostatic delicates, but here it is. Radiohead just happens to balance this incredible combination of heavy and ambient, at times bordering on a lighter presentation, and then smacking you into your seat - and I could not believe how much I dug listening to OK Computer through the Stax.
Regarding detail, I find these have a ton of it - OK for me, all headphones actually have a ton of detail (except totally crap headphones, or headphones suffering the indignity of a weak output) - but I think these have more detail than usual, probably because, oh heck I have theories, hypotheses, but to be honest I got nothing I can prove here. Is it a characteristic of the electrostatic design? Is it their balanced frequency presentation which doesn't seem to cause anything to get congested? Or is it simply the fact that I'm listening for it? In any case, the thing that really sells me on these is that the detail doesn't get in the way of enjoying the music. I'm hearing the music first, but little nuances jump out at me without getting in the way of the musical presentation (such as the tail end of reverb on a drum hit, an acoustic guitar strummed lightly and down in the mix, detail on keyboard pads, ambient effects, and the like). I can focus on the detail or ignore it and just focus on the music, and both approaches to listening are vastly rewarding.
So is this just new toy syndrome? Perhaps to a degree, I know its always a blast to get a good set of new kit and run through the old music collection again, and hearing it with a new twist on the presentation is always a kick. But I think these cans have legs. Please, nobody give me the opportunity to listen to Omegas or the Orpheus, I don't think I could stand it.
Here's the rock playlist (in no particular order) I ran through - in more than a few sessions - which sent me to find a piece of scrap paper and an evil scientist to concoct a master plan to get a spare pair of these cans, JUST IN CASE:
Steely Dan - Jack of Speed
Cold storage - Canada (from the incredibly awesome Wipeout Pure video game)
Pretenders - Saving Grace
Porcupine Tree - Tinto Brass, Blackest Eyes, Halo
Yes - Siberian Khatru, South Side of the Sky
ZZ Top - Cheap Sunglasses, La Grange
Owsley - Rise
Orbital - Tunnel Vision, Technologicque Park
Crystal Method - Blowout, Broken Glass
Foo Fighters - My Hero
Lee Coombs and Andy Gardner - Obsessional Rhythm (Lee Coombs Remix)
Collective Soul - Gel
Van Halen - Runnin' With the Devil
Radiohead - Airbag, Paranoid Android
Future Sound of London - We Have Explosive, My Kingdom
For completeness, here's the first half of the playlist, which also sounded great on my new best friends:
GRP Big Band - Blue Train
Eagles Hell Freezes Over - Hotel California (dig that kick drum)
Al Dimeola (Kiss my Axe) - The Embrace
Waterlillies - Supersonic
Michael Brook - Urbana
Future Sound of London - Yage, High Tide on the Sea of Flesh, (yeah, they're in both sides!)
Porcupine Tree - "Light, Mass, Prayers", Lazarus (them too)
Fragile State - Paper Tiger
Rpwl - Everything Was Not Enough
Horowitz plays Mozart - Concerto 23, Allegro
Hans Brugen Orchestra of the 18th Century - Mozart Symphony No. 40, Beethoven Symphony No. 2
Torch Song - Toward the Unknown Region (this is WIlliam Orbit under a different name for some reason)
Malcolm Arnold London Philharmonic - A Sussex Overture
Daniel Barenboim Chicago Symphony - Tchaikovsky Capriccio Italien
Interior - Hot Beach
Martin Taylor solo guitar - True
[Edit Jan 1, 2006 around midnight - adding a lot more comments, impressions, and some comparison with other headphones]
I've put a few more days of listening into the Stax 3030 setup, and I'm still digging it big time. I've got some other impressions, and identified some areas where I give credit to some other competitive headphones as compared to the Stax. In the end, the Stax are still tops for me, but I'm glad to have some other headphone choices to strut their stuff in the areas where they excel.
I also have some more comments about the level detail from the Stax. As a quick aside, I have a theory on "detailed" equipment. All of my high end equipment has lots of detail (particularly headphones, as I mentioned further up), and heck, compared to the junk I listened to when I was growing up, pretty much all the equipment I have has decent detail. The thing is, with speakers and headphones, they have such diverse sets of frequency curves, they all accentuate different areas of detail. So when I get a new pair of headphones that have a different set of accentuated frequencies (compare Senns to Grados to Stax to Sony 5000s for instance), I start noticing the specific details in those accentuated areas more than I had in the past. If I then get a different pair of headphones and listen to the same music (which I might not have heard on those other headphones before), I'll notice different details, or at least different details will jump out at me, due to the different set of accentuated frequencies.
Related to this, whenever I am seriously comparing equipment (as I spent some time doing with the Stax vs. my other kit), I just naturally hone in on a few things I hadn't noticed before - I was wondering "how does the bass hold up" and "how bright is the treble" and "how do strings sound", "how do vocals sound", "how's the image of the main vocal", "how do instruments separate in space", and all the other favorite concepts we explore when auditioning equipment. When I listen like that, I start finding things I might never have noticed before (of course once that happens I can never ignore them again). That said, on a scale of 1 to 10 for detail, the Stax score an 11 (I wanted to make a Spinal Tap "they go up to 11" joke here, but it didn't quite work). The good news is I get to hear all kinds of cool nuance and interesting and gorgeous details I hadn't picked up before. It also means I started hearing some warts I hadn't ever noticed before, even on recordings I've listened to for years. I heard some very subtle tape fuzz at the end of a song's introduction on an old analog recording, some hissy noise on top of some synth tracks I never noticed, a burp where a guitar track must have been inadvertently punched in and out for a few seconds without any guitar playing (I could equate the track noise with noise riding on top of the actual guitar track when it was playing), and so on.
Usually I don't give much credit to the phrase "these have a lot of detail", attributing such effects to other factors. In fact, I once read a review touting the detail of some incredible headphone amp because the reviewer heard Stevie Ray Vaughan shout a "yeah!" during a solo, but I had heard that before I ever read the review listening on my trashy work stereo with AR powered desktop speakers - I think he just never noticed it before and coincidentally heard it when auditioning this amp. However, in this case, I gotta say I was surprised with the things I was hearing, things I know hear with my other headphones, but noticed first with the Stax (possibly due to the frequency effect I mentioned a few paragraphs up, but surprising details nonetheless).
Anyway, on to some comparisons with my other headphones (Grado RS-1, and Senn 580) - I hope to compare them to Sony SA5000s and AKG 701s before long as well (although it is hard enough comparing between two pairs of headphones, more less 4 or 5) - I think ear fatigue would be a significant barrier to doing any reasonable comparative review of that many headphones unless you spent the better part of a month.
I am also lucky enough to have scored some Grado HP-2s when they first came out, and still use them fairly frequently. I find them to be extremely well balanced, very very accurate through the mids, and a pleasure to listen to. I haven't done a lot of direct comparison to the Stax, but in some areas the Stax are all that and more, but with more brightness on top, more bass extension, and less midbass. The Stax have many of the great characteristics of the Grado HP-2 - smooth, luscious mids, detailed, clean bass - but there's more of it (smoother, a more wonderful midrange, incredible detail, awesome clear and well resolved bass with more extension to boot).
This isn't to say that they sound the same - they sound fairly different, with the Grados having a heavier presentation (more midbass), and a smaller soundstage, and the Stax having more on the bottom and top end. That said, though, they are both very clear and sweet, and I enjoy the Stax for many of the same reasons I like the HP-2s. The Stax can rock out (in terms of volume) a bit more than the HP-2s, although the HP-2s are no slouch - they just require a powerful amp and the bass always sounds a bit pinched to me when I get into the heavier rock at high volume with the HP-2s. In any case, these are preliminary judgments and not based on a lot of direct comparison, so my advice to you is to forget what you just read concerning the HP-2s as soon as humanly possible.
Now on to the other headphones, where I did spend some quality time doing head to head comparisons with the same music (both during the songs, switching back and forth, and also playing the same playlists through all three and comparing impressions).
First off - punchy kick drum oriented rock. While the Stax have great bass response (they extend low, and have very clean and clear bass), on tunes with a really punchy kick drum and bass combination, the Grado RS-1 has a more satisfying slam. For example, Thomas Dolby's "Pulp Culture" from Aliens Ate my Buick, the big drum hits on Dream Academy's "Life in a Northern Town", and Future Sound of London "Herd Killing" from Dead Cities. This doesn't come without cost, though - I find the Grados to be pretty fatiguing, and in general the bass can be loose and wallow a bit compared to the Stax. The Grados can kick out the jams though and have a very rich (if bright) response (I just wish they were more comfortable). And I actually prefer the Stax on many other recordings with well represented bass, such as Daft Punk "Da Funk", ZZ Top's Recycler and Rhythmeen albums, vintage Yes and Pink Floyd, and on all the songs I just mentioned the the Grados excel at, the Stax still hold their own - however the Grado gets the nod in the punch department as expressed in those cuts.
Similarly, listening at loud levels to rock or techno that is pushing a lot of continuous bass energy (and/or is extremely compressed), the Grados and Senns will sometimes get the nod over the Stax (i.e. on a recording level meter they tend to stay close to pegged, rather than bounce between roughly -6DB and 0 DB on the kick/snare hits). As examples, Porcupine Tree's "In Absentia", Rammstein's "Du Hast", and Crystal Method's "Tweekend". I typically prefer a less compressed mixdown anyway, such that suits the Stax (which is coincident with my preference for the Stax in general too), but much of my favorite stuff is also pretty compressed (Porcupine Tree and Crystal Method being among my favorite bands), and the Grados and Senn 580s seem to deal with it better.
The Stax might be a bit more honest about the reproduction, but when really cranking stuff like this, the idea is to simulate a big room with sound bouncing all over, and the Stax don't seem to hold it all together (for this type of recording) at really high sound levels in the same sense the other headphones can manage. At more moderate levels, however, the Stax sound great with techno/compressed recordings, and I am never disappointed while listening to the Stax when this type of music comes on as long as I don't have them running at the redline. Probably better for my ears to keep the volume more reasonable anyway, but on many other styles of music you can crank the Stax pretty high without realizing it and without getting fatigued, so you can end up with some pretty high levels when something heavy and compressed comes on (life is random, so I often live by the shuffle). If I've got the Stax cranked too much, and Crystal Method or PTree come on, I'll need to turn them down, whereas with the Grado RS-1s I'll just rock out (but then have to take a break from the pounding!)
I want to reiterate that at more moderate levels, the Stax are great for this kind of stuff since they have a nice full bass even at low level, and lots of detail so you still get plenty of excitement even without pushing it. The Grados are smooth and rich at high volume (which is probably bad news for my ears anyway), and the Senns, with their midbass hump, also seem to accentuate the frequencies that make these types of recordings work. The Stax are still fine for these, we're not talking "mini-monitor" syndrome, but for cranking it up, I'll give it to the dynamic cans on this stuff. Also note that for cranking up other types of music (rock that isn't overly compressed, more ambient techno, orchestral and big band jazz), the Stax are my favorites - they can do cranked, they can do big, I'm just being fair to point out which types of tunes one might prefer to crank with something else.
As a more general observation, I've noticed that when pushed, the Stax can sound a bit "steely" on some recordings. Not all recordings, just some that seem to tickle the lower treble. This seems to happen with recordings that are already fairly bright, I think the bias of the Stax up high is perhaps to slightly accentuate the frequencies that make a steel string guitar sound different than a nylon string. This effect is not extremely significant, and only present on a few recordings. Perhaps you could describe it as a slight glare. This might actually be the Stax presenting the mid-highs (the bright region) with more accuracy - since they don't do it on most recordings, it isn't a sonic footprint the Stax impose, it is just something they bring out if present on the recording.
I've found every headphone I've used to accentuate some portion of the bright spectrum when pushed too hard, Grados sound steely too, although they seem to accentuate the upper mids which also make them sound rich. The lush sound of the Sennheiser gets snappy and becomes sibiliant when they are pushed - the snare drum starts to thin out and snap, and strings and vocals get thin and harsh. All of these effects are most noticeable when the headphones are pushed too loudly for reasonable listening, but I will sometimes creep the volume up and end up with some serious volume towards the end of a listening session.
All the issues I'm mentioning are minor, but definitely show the great strengths of some of the other excellent headphones out there. I haven't heard the "new kid on the block" SA5000s or 701s yet - but I plan to get a good listen into some of those soon (SA500s are actually on the way, and I plan to try and audition 701s at home once they are more readily available), but I'm sure those headphones have lots of strengths too, based on the very positive reviews. The Stax, however, really hit the sweet spot for me - they are a pleasure to use with everything I've thrown at them, and really excel in so many areas I just love listening to them. Their ability to span the range of delicate acoustic to majestic orchestral to big rock/fusion and even techno beats just astounds me. Their liabilities, for me, are relatively minor, and while bested by some other headphones in some areas, I prefer the Stax in more cases than not.
There is one final thing to mention, something I didn't notice until tonight - if you get hot and sweat at all, the Stax can get fairly uncomfortable, as you have this huge area of synthetic leather pressing on your face. In the summer when its hot, I'll probably have to blow a fan at my face if I do any extended listening with the Stax. At least it will help preserve my ears, as it encourages you to take breaks every once in a while when the heat builds up.
At this point, the Stax is definitely my main system, and my favorite overall setup. Sometimes, for pragmatic reasons (such as the workplace), or for variety, or to get some extra punch, I'll turn to a different headphone system, but for now I'll be doing the bulk of my home listening with the Stax - I am extremely satisfied and thrilled to have the Stax system as my current workhorse.
I'll check back in after I've had these a few weeks and put a final update into this post - many people have pointed out that you have to live with equipment for a few weeks before you can rally have accurate impressions that withstand the test of time, and I think that's true. However, I've accelerated a lot of time into 5 days since I was on holiday break, so I've definitely put in more than my normal share of listening over that period. Even at that, though, a few more weeks will really be telling, and I look forward to those next few weeks!
