[dannyandelyse]

I think you will find the 011 Omegas a very special phone. Robust full presentation with detail and snap. Long term listenability without fatigue! The better the signal, the higher the Omegas excell. The Omegas are sublime. I might suggest a very strong SS amp like the Headamp KGSS with the biggest blackgate caps will drive the phones with an iron grip. Tube units also work as long as they can push some big voltage swings.
Other headphones might showoff when first worn. The Omegas are showing off better, the longer they are played.

 

[bangraman]

Very true that, wow phones they are not.

 

[spritzer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dannyandelyse I think you will find the 011 Omegas a very special phone. Robust full presentation with detail and snap. Long term listenability without fatigue! The better the signal, the higher the Omegas excell. The Omegas are sublime. I might suggest a very strong SS amp like the Headamp KGSS with the biggest blackgate caps will drive the phones with an iron grip. Tube units also work as long as they can push some big voltage swings. Other headphones might showoff when first worn. The Omegas are showing off better, the longer they are played.

Few truer words have been said...

 

[mingde10467]

This thread is of interest because I've been thinking of buying Omega 2s/KGSS.

I'm one of those who find the Senn 650s "veiled," "dark," and imparting a quality that sometimes masks the differences between recordings (my system = Arcam FMJ CD-23; Taddeo Digital Antidote II; Samuels HR-2 amp; Senns, before I sold them, with Cardas cable). (Senn lovers: please don't hit me over the head with this - - for all I know, it's my ageing ears and brain, not the phones!)

I'm concerned that negative descriptions of the Omegas use language that's in the same ballpark as negative descriptions of the Senn 650s.

I listen to classical music and find a lot of of digital recordings too harsh and/or closely miked.

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spritzer First off Stax has always made integrated amps for headphones starting with SRA-4S and 6S in 1960. Stax doesn't assume that the amps are better then the transformers, they simply are better. Well not better if you don't like clarity, bass control and extension but transformers are always a bad option. Every designer of an electrostatic speaker has the dream of driving them direct. The transformers are a compromise.

And the Stax amps are not just a compromise. They are an abomination.

Just forget the theory for a moment and compare any Stax phone through (1) a transformer hooked up to something like a Nuforce RF9 and (2) hooked up to a dedicated Stax headphone amp. Have you actually done so or are you just going on what your theoretical preconceptions are telling you?

I've been doing extensive comparisons and (1) is so much better than (2).....

To give you an idea of the difference, when I've heard the X-III phones through the transformer/Nuforce and returned to the 404/Stax 006t I've thought that there was something wrong with the latter, it sounded so murky, dank, and shut-in.

And when I tried the 404 through the same transformer/amp combo most of my reservations about the phone disappeared.

 

[spritzer]

I owned a SRD-7 mk2 and tried it with a number of amps including a CAT JL1. It was good but the Blue Hawaii is so much better. All tests done with the O2’s,

I have the SRM-T1 since I modded it a bit the darkness of the sound has eased but is still soft around the edges. Tube rolling it changes this though quite a bit. I still wouldn't call the lambdas ever dark and murky. If the SR-X is beating the lambdas then something is wrong since the SR-X is very dark, soft and shut in.

 

[Tachikoma]

Well, to add my 2 cents to the discussion... I had a short (an hour about) audition at a friend's audio store which featured amplifiers well out of my price range (maybe $1000-2000, none of them class-D), using my stax transformer. To be honest, they did not impress me very much at all; the improvement they brought compared to my much, much cheaper CMT-EX1 "mini hifi" were rather marginal. (better soundstage, a little more oomph on the bottom, but no eargasms here :<)

My point here being... I need to listen to that Nuforce Reference 9 xD </greedy>

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spritzer I owned a SRD-7 mk2 and tried it with a number of amps including a CAT JL1. It was good but the Blue Hawaii is so much better. All tests done with the O2’s, I have the SRM-T1 since I modded it a bit the darkness of the sound has eased but is still soft around the edges. Tube rolling it changes this though quite a bit. I still wouldn't call the lambdas ever dark and murky. If the SR-X is beating the lambdas then something is wrong since the SR-X is very dark, soft and shut in.

Pardon?!!!!!!!!!!!!!! How anybody could describe the SR-X as "dark" and "soft" is one of the great mysteries..........."Shut in" is understandable. With the 006t the soundstage certainly doesn't open up but I find it rivals the Lambda 404 for holographic 3D through the Nuforce RF9/SRD7.

 

[spritzer]

Well they simply are compared to the better phones I have at hand. They have nothing on the newer designs and are really showing their age.

 

[Carl]

The SR-X/mk3 cost 23,000 en, and the SR-007 costs 185,000 en. Horses for courses.


The transformer boxes simply adapt an amp in all their strengths and weaknesses to work with electrostatic headphones, bar a slight degradation from the transformers and electrolytics added to the signal path. They're totally dependant on the quality and synergy of the amp.

 

[spritzer]

Sure the O2's are much more expensive in yen's but there is this thing called inflation... but I wasn't comparing them too the O2's. The Sigma Pro's are a closer match. The SR-X mk3's do really nothing much wrong but they also don't excel at anything. This is how they were designed, as a pro headphone. They are very rugged and their back wave is partially blocked off which will decrease fidelity and kill the soundstage. They are also not that amp dependant

The transformer boxes are nasty things with cheap parts. They are a relic from the past and should best be left there.

 

[Lloyd297]

juhgg

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spritzer Sure the O2's are much more expensive in yen's but there is this thing called inflation... but I wasn't comparing them too the O2's. The Sigma Pro's are a closer match. The SR-X mk3's do really nothing much wrong but they also don't excel at anything. This is how they were designed, as a pro headphone. They are very rugged and their back wave is partially blocked off which will decrease fidelity and kill the soundstage. They are also not that amp dependant

Interesting analysis! The X-III's were selected by John Nork in "The Absolute Sound" as the best-ever Hi-fi component (includes amps, speakers, etc) in the mid-80's. True, that was some time ago but the Lambda Pro and Stax headphone amps had been around for a few years and still hadn't changed John's mind.

Here are a few excerpts from a review of the Martin-Logan CLS that Nork did around this time:

Some time ago, the members of the TAS reviewing staff were asked to select a single audio product they would take with them to the proverbial desert island........I mentally scanned the distinguished products I have used over the years, feeling that the choice would be a prolonged, tortuous one. With surprising alacrity, however, I settled on the component alluded to in the paragraph above: the Stax SRX electrostatic headphones. The headphones have offered such a high degree of neutrality that they have easily kept pace with the substantial advances in the other areas of my system. Whenever I discover a significantly improved component (be it a cartidge, a preamplifier, or whatever), the improved sound was immediately evident through the SRX phones..........they offer exemplary transparency, clarity, purity, and definition.........they are deficient in deep bass, have little of the chesty, resonant warmth that adds a spurious appeal to many speakers, and are mercilessly revealing of anything and everything in the audio signal path.....the SRX headphones...painstakingly revealed every little change I made to the system."

And all this through "nasty things with cheap parts"!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Lloyd297]

Discussion on usenet in 1994 on headphones by audio engineers Bob Katz and Gabe Wiener:

Katz: "If you're mixing anything pop (e.g. multi-miked), then you can't
effectively use headphones, period. Have to use speakers. For classical
music, I have learned to adapt to Stax SRD-5's (yes, the SRX were great).
None of the Stax so-called "Pro" or "Lambda" are suitable for recording,
while they may be good for home listeners, the coloration caused by the
cavity bounce makes them unsuitable for recording. "

Wiener:"I was at one of the high-end audio dealers a while ago and they were
trying to hard-sell the Stax Lambda phones, rambling on about how
accurate they are, and how Dorian uses them, etc etc. I put on one of
my CDs, listened for two minutes, and then resolved never to listen to
them again. I don't know _what_ they were doing to my recording, but
the result was far from accurate.

Another frightening phenomenon is the Grado HP-1 phones, which have a
bizarre habit of making anything sound pretty good. The danger here
is that if you rely on these phones, they will make you think that
things are okay when they really are not. More than one engineer has
ruined a recording by depending on these phones.

The 7506 is fairly standard for live concerts inasmuch as it is closed
ear, which is important if you're in the same room as the musicians.
In separate control room situations, I've used the Sennheiser 540s for
quite a few recordings and have been reasonably pleased. The 560s
have always been too bright for me to take seriously. The 580s are my
current choice for phones.

Anyone want to try to talk Stax into bringing the SR-X back? "

 

[Jahn]

Based on the above review, as a consumer, I would run out ASAP and grab both a STAX Lambda Pro and an HP2 to enjoy at home.

*looks at sig*


Err, nevermind.

But to answer Ruppin's original question, yes, an Omega II and 007t will most likely give you an awesome new flavor to your system. As will a great dynamic rig (many choices of can/amp combos there!). I think one great electrostatic rig and one great dynamic rig should bring the best balance to a system that has headphones as a luxury addition. That way, you never get bored - you go back and forth between the endlessly interesting different approaches, both rigs sound amazing in their own way, and you avoid cluttering your system with endless other cans (like most of us fall into).