[johnmatrix]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lloyd297 What amp were you driving them with?

I was wondering the same thing because I don't find the bass to be lacking in the Sr-x. Also, you can purchase new pads from audiocubes for about 27 USD delivered, I had to replace my pads as well. Congrats on the new purchase!

Edit: This thread won't die will it?

 

[Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmatrix Edit: This thread won't die will it?

It's nice to have a dependable thread in which to discuss our Stax craziness in. Well, at least I think so.

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lloyd297 What amp were you driving them with?

The SRM-1 Mk2 Pro.

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmatrix Edit: This thread won't die will it?

You stay out of this, Original Poster johnmatrix! This is our thread now! Ha ha! This thread will last as long as there are old SR-X series 'phones being unbubblewrapped in kitchens all over the world. And heck, if they're still popular after 30 years, this thread might well be immortal.

 

[Snake]

I have not read the thread but have heard both the SR-X and SR-5, which are warmer than any Lamdba series.

If your SR-X / SR-5 has a bit of top end tip-up try a different amp. The SRM-1 [Mk2] is a touch up in the response curve at the top and other Stax amps will negate that "issue", if it is one that appears in your system synergy. When using pure analog the SRM-1 Mk-2 seemed quite flat but with digital's all too-easy emphasis of top end it sometimes can appear. A darker IC can, of course, help negate this as well but with Stax dark IC usually also equals a bit of top-end "grain", which the SRM-1 can resolve quite easily.

 

[johnmatrix]

I just thing it is funny the thread has lasted so long. Everytime I think the thread dies, someone resurrects with a new post.

Wualta are you going to buy the replacement pads? I know mine when I got them flaked all over me.

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmatrix Wualta are you going to buy the replacement pads?

Oh, all right. You talked me into it. It'll keep the ear mite population now in residence in the old pads from developing colonies.

Quote:

I know mine when I got them flaked all over me.

Are you sure it was actually earpad material?

 

[johnmatrix]

The pads were so old that the pleather was flaking off and all over my clothes and ears. Are you enjoying your new phones?

 

[BluePhone]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmatrix Edit: This thread won't die will it?

In the words of another great man "good threads about great things never die, they just fade away"

 

[wualta]

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnmatrix The pads were so old that the pleather was flaking off and all over my clothes and ears.

It's odd that in the Age of Plastics, so many forward-reaching polymer products of the '70s came to such grief. The sculptural foam speaker grilles that promised total acoustic transparency and the foam woofer surrounds.. the hygroscopic binder of superperforming Ampex 456 magnetic tape.. the vulnerable superpliable PVC (I assume it's PVC) that had the feel of real leather (or even better than leather).. my Slip'N'Slide...

Quote:

Are you enjoying your new phones?

Oh, yes. It's like being reunited with old friends. I've learned a lot about headphones in the years since, so I know things about my old friends that would embarrass them if I said them out loud, so I just enjoy them for what they are.

 

[Lloyd297]

The SRM-1 Mk2 Pro.

Hmm, I'll just say you haven't really heard the X-III then. The Stax amps do a pretty poor job compared to the best power amps. I used to have a SRM-I Mk2 Pro and now have a 006t and they just don't compare to something like a Nuforce RF9.

To give you an idea of the difference, I compared my X-III to the 404 through the 006t and found them different but comparable. They had different strengths and weaknesses but overall it was difficult to say which I preferred.

Then I switched to comparing the X-III through the Nuforce to the 404/006t combo. I hate hyperbole but will just say that after listening to the X-III/RF9 I thought there was something wrong with the 404's on switching to them. They sounded positively murky, veiled, and coloured. And the soundstage, which I'd previously preferred on the 404, was now considerably more open and 3-D with the X-III/RF9. The 404/006t sounded shut-in and enclosed by comparison.

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta The SRM-1 Mk2 Pro.

Hmm, I'll just say you haven't really heard the X-III then. The Stax amps do a pretty poor job compared to the best power amps. I used to have a SRM-I Mk2 Pro and now have a 006t and they just don't compare to something like a Nuforce RF9.

To give you an idea of the difference, I compared my X-III to the 404 through the 006t and found them different but comparable. They had different strengths and weaknesses but overall it was difficult to say which I preferred.

Then I switched to comparing the X-III through the Nuforce to the 404/006t combo. I hate hyperbole but will just say that after listening to the X-III/RF9 I thought there was something wrong with the 404's on switching to them. They sounded positively murky, veiled, and coloured. And the soundstage, which I'd previously preferred on the 404, was now considerably more open and 3-D with the X-III/RF9. The 404/006t sounded shut-in and enclosed by comparison.

 

[johnmatrix]

The SRM-1 Mk2 Pro. Quote:

Hmm, I'll just say you haven't really heard the X-III then. The Stax amps do a pretty poor job compared to the best power amps. I used to have a SRM-I Mk2 Pro and now have a 006t and they just don't compare to something like a Nuforce RF9. To give you an idea of the difference, I compared my X-III to the 404 through the 006t and found them different but comparable. They had different strengths and weaknesses but overall it was difficult to say which I preferred. Then I switched to comparing the X-III through the Nuforce to the 404/006t combo. I hate hyperbole but will just say that after listening to the X-III/RF9 I thought there was something wrong with the 404's on switching to them. They sounded positively murky, veiled, and coloured. And the soundstage, which I'd previously preferred on the 404, was now considerably more open and 3-D with the X-III/RF9. The 404/006t sounded shut-in and enclosed by comparison.

I am surprised you find this is the case. I would think the stax amp would be better. That adapter box has a transformer right in the audio signal. That is definately going to affect the sound. In addition, there a electrolytic capacitors all over the place. Which adaptor box are you using?

 

[Carl]

The Audio Note Ongaku also has a number of transformers and capacitors in the signal path.



I'm considering going the amp + transformer route myself, to give myself more freedom with respect to tube and topology selection.

 

[Lloyd297]

Quote:

Originally Posted by wualta The SRM-1 Mk2 Pro. I am surprised you find this is the case. I would think the stax amp would be better. That adapter box has a transformer right in the audio signal. That is definately going to affect the sound. In addition, there a electrolytic capacitors all over the place. Which adaptor box are you using?

The same as yours. However, use your ears and forget about the theory about transformers, caps, blah blah blah. The improvement with a top power amp over the Stax amps is not a small one.

 

[wualta]

We've got a few related threads on old Staxen going simultaneously here, but in one of the other threads, who knows which one, I put in my vote in favor of trying the old approach of using one's own high-power audiophile-quality (or not!) speaker amp with one of the Stax transformer boxes. The problem is the rarity of the high-bias versions. The advantage is simple: more power and the resulting better dynamics.