Stax and Dynamic Rig Owners: How much head-time on each rig?

[DefQon]

Wow learnt something today they always gave me the impression that they were half dynamic and stat like the K340's. Eager to hear one now.

 

[spritzer]

They are just large dome mic transducers with a notch filter in each "speaker". 

 

[rudi0504]

I have electrostatic headphone like follow
Sr 007 mk2 and sr 009
My dynamic driver headphone as follow :
HD 800 , T1 , TH 900
My orthos like follow
LCD 2 rev 3 and LCD 3

For serious listening I use my Stax sr 007 mk 2 and sr 008
And dynamic driver TH 900

For night listening I hear more dynamic headphone : Like ultrasine sig DJ or pro

That's why I keep all dynamic and stats and ortho for my collection
Because sometimes I miss each headphone the SQ

 

[CybDev]

Is that the SR-009 or the HD800 you mean?

What do you use for amping the SR-007mk2? I tried comparing one to HD800 and SR-009 and I really couldn't get myself to like the SR-007mk2

Meh... I only reach for my HD800 if the track has some particularly detailed sub-bass...
And that might change once I get a LLmk2 for the SR-009

 

[Rossliew]

Sorry if this is off-topic, would the Stax be good for metal? Or the HD800? I've listened to the HD800 via  Lehmann Black Cube Linear and with metal tunes, its oh, so bright!

 

[K_19]

I currently have my 007/717 as my main rig and planned to build a secondary rig around the LCD-2, but LCD-2's honestly didn't get too much head time, thus I put it on the FS forum.  One major advantage with my stat rig is that they are the first rig which I find to be COMPLETELY unfatiguing no matter how long I listen to it... could be because of the relaxed highs, completely grainless stat sound, etc... but I never experienced this with my other dynamic rigs.
 
My ESW10JPN's will stay around as my on-ear closed back headphone but only for late night listening. Other than that the 007's will continue to get most of my head time.

 

[CybDev]

Sorry if this is off-topic, would the Stax be good for metal? Or the HD800? I've listened to the HD800 via  Lehmann Black Cube Linear and with metal tunes, its oh, so bright!

I think maybe the 007? I found the HD800 6k peak to be somewhat annoying with the cymbals but I didn't notice anything like that on the 009. Then again, the 009 is not exactly recessed in the highs so I guess it comes down to personal preference and source...

Find one to audition yourself

 

[purk]

I current own the SR009 + SRM-717 and I do like it a great deal.  Still, my R10 and Qualia see more head time as I can power these two off a stellar portable amp likes the Pico Power.  Since I mostly listen at work these days, the R10 has the most head time due to its semi closed nature and its wonderful and fatigue-free sound.  I listen to the R10 & Qualia out of my modified AT-DHA3000 amplifier at work on a daily basis.

 

[MacedonianHero]

I use my HeadAmp KGSS/SR-009 about 65% of the time and everything else (LCD-3/HD800/TH-900) shares the remaining 35%.

 

[MohawkUS]

Sorry if this is off-topic, would the Stax be good for metal? Or the HD800? I've listened to the HD800 via  Lehmann Black Cube Linear and with metal tunes, its oh, so bright!

STAX is good for metal IMO. I listen to Stax 95% of the time and listen mainly too metal. I've found the dynamics I've tried(most of the popular options <$600) to be either too slow and warm, or too bright and unforgiving. While all of the dynamics I tried had an obvious flaw or weakness I just don't hear that with my Stax.

 

[Operakid]

Quote:

Sorry if this is off-topic, would the Stax be good for metal? Or the HD800? I've listened to the HD800 via  Lehmann Black Cube Linear and with metal tunes, its oh, so bright!

I would expect you to find the HD800 to sound this way with metal if you have hearing that is at all sensitive.  You can try all you want to tame down with soft amps, but this is the nature of the sound, so better to start somewhere else, good as the HD800 are in many ways.
 
The Stax 009 would be much easier for me to listen with on metal, though for my ears I would pick LCD-3.  I feel they have more "substance" in sound, rather than a more ethereal representation of the sound of the 009.  You have to spend a good amount of time with the 009 to get over the initial phase of being mesmerized by the "light as a cloud" sound.  It is hard for me to explain.  It's as if I wanted a chocolate bar and I was given a chocolate bar made of mousse.  I might find it dreamy, so light and fluffy, and rave it.  However, after a while I might say "wait, I'm not able to really bite into anything, I was expecting a chocolate bar that I could really feel, really bite into, something solid."  That solidity of real music, the body of the sound of a sax, the hardness of a stick beating on a cymbal, I find that lacking on the 009 relative to the HD800 or LCD-3.  I'm not trying to denigrate the 009, this is just what I hear.  I also hear this from several electrostatic speakers.  I thought the 009 would be the end for me, the reputation, the top Stax, the price (which makes most of us expect great things).  But I want that solidity of sound and on metal you may really want it too. 

 

[Amarphael]

Quote:

Ain't the K1000 also based on some form of stat transducers?

Yup, based on the Floats, this was confirmed by one of it's designers (hrklg) quite recently.
Quote:

They are just large dome mic transducers with a notch filter in each "speaker". 

 
You imply that they've simply "ported" an exsiting transducer to do exactly the oppsite function? Based in which model?

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

I would expect you to find the HD800 to sound this way with metal if you have hearing that is at all sensitive.  You can try all you want to tame down with soft amps, but this is the nature of the sound, so better to start somewhere else, good as the HD800 are in many ways.
 
The Stax 009 would be much easier for me to listen with on metal, though for my ears I would pick LCD-3.  I feel they have more "substance" in sound, rather than a more ethereal representation of the sound of the 009.  You have to spend a good amount of time with the 009 to get over the initial phase of being mesmerized by the "light as a cloud" sound.  It is hard for me to explain.  It's as if I wanted a chocolate bar and I was given a chocolate bar made of mousse.  I might find it dreamy, so light and fluffy, and rave it.  However, after a while I might say "wait, I'm not able to really bite into anything, I was expecting a chocolate bar that I could really feel, really bite into, something solid."  That solidity of real music, the body of the sound of a sax, the hardness of a stick beating on a cymbal, I find that lacking on the 009 relative to the HD800 or LCD-3.  I'm not trying to denigrate the 009, this is just what I hear.  I also hear this from several electrostatic speakers.  I thought the 009 would be the end for me, the reputation, the top Stax, the price (which makes most of us expect great things).  But I want that solidity of sound and on metal you may really want it too. 

It's the body (or lack thereof) that kept me from getting the SR-007s (MKII), but the SR-009s bring that in spades. I happen to own all three (SR-009, LCD-3, and HD-800s) and they are the "realest" sounding of the bunch and easily get the vast majority of head time. What they do, no other headphone can replicate. Quick, uber detailed while still musical and solidity to the music with outstanding imaging. If you found anything lacking, I'd suggest it might have been due to meet circumstances or upstream gear (amp/dac). But when you get that sorted out, the SR-009s will reward you in spades. 
 
I've had my SR-009s for about 7 months and I have come to know them quite well and in the end I have to force myself to listen to my other gear they are that damn good!

 

[Operakid]

No way it was the upstream gear, super high end turntable/tonearm/cartridge combo, I use all the headphones with the same front end.  I just find the 009 wispy, more "ethereal" than the LCD3.  It is an effect that grabs a great many people.  It just does not grab me.  I hear a HARD stick on cymbal in live music.  I hear a drive from a trumpet that the 009 don't give.  A SNAP of the snare that has FORCE.  I'm not shouting, I'm using caps to indicate big amplitudes in loudness.  Now the Stax are fast, no 2 ways about it.  Instant.  Airy.  Ethereal.  Transparent.  Instant, just to say it again.  Clear.  But they don't bring me the substance, the body that I want.  It's like comparing a Martin Logan CLX to a powerful refined dynamic speaker.  The CLX has something the great dynamic speaker does not.  But the great dynamic speaker has something the CLX does not.  Well, no headphone has everything.  And what the 009 don't have is an important thing to me.  Hey, I expected greatness or I would not have gone that way.  And they are great in some ways.  They may be the realest sounding to you, but not me.  LCD reminds me more of live music.  I go many, many times a year, jazz, classical, vocal, and record, I know what I am looking for.   

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

No way it was the upstream gear, super high end turntable/tonearm/cartridge combo, I use all the headphones with the same front end.  I just find the 009 wispy, more "ethereal" than the LCD3.  It is an effect that grabs a great many people.  It just does not grab me.  I hear a HARD stick on cymbal in live music.  I hear a drive from a trumpet that the 009 don't give.  A SNAP of the snare that has FORCE.  I'm not shouting, I'm using caps to indicate big amplitudes in loudness.  Now the Stax are fast, no 2 ways about it.  Instant.  Airy.  Ethereal.  Transparent.  Instant, just to say it again.  Clear.  But they don't bring me the substance, the body that I want.  It's like comparing a Martin Logan CLX to a powerful refined dynamic speaker.  The CLX has something the great dynamic speaker does not.  But the great dynamic speaker has something the CLX does not.  Well, no headphone has everything.  And what the 009 don't have is an important thing to me.  Hey, I expected greatness or I would not have gone that way.  And they are great in some ways.  They may be the realest sounding to you, but not me.  LCD reminds me more of live music.  I go many, many times a year, jazz, classical, vocal, and record, I know what I am looking for.   

Could be amp then or simply meet conditions. 

 But no headphone is as "ethereal" sounding (especially down low) as the LCD-3s. But it is certainly more ethereal across the board when compared to the HD800s. Sometimes with very quick classical, the LCD-3s can be too "ethereal" and glance over the details. The SR-009s do pretty much everything for me and the music I listen to (rock, metal, jazz, classical) and are as perfect (if I may use that word) that I've heard to date. I'm a big fan of Audeze headphones. I've owned the LCD-2 r.1, r.2 and LCD-3s and I've published a few comparative reviews of them all:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/a/comparisons-of-lcd-2-rev-1-and-rev-2
and
http://www.head-fi.org/a/comparisons-of-the-lcd-3-and-the-lcd-2-rev-2
 
So, yeah, I'm a big fan of Audeze headphones. But that said, they aren't in the same league as the SR-009s. The LCD-3s and HD-800s are the closest though IMO of the remaining headphones out there.