Stax SR-X9000

[eskamobob1]

I heard the Viva Egoista STX briefly at Can Jam and enjoyed it (show conditions, of course). Beautiful looking amp too. However, for 20K, it needs to be beautiful on the inside as well and not have reliability concerns.

Unrelated to the quality of the amp, the "Egoista" name ("selfish" or "egoist" in English) also bothers me quite a lot.

I mean, to each their own. I personaly but gear off of sound and not name, but not like any audio purchase is particulalrly rational tbh

 

[VandyMan]

I mean, to each their own. I personaly but gear off of sound and not name, but not like any audio purchase is particulalrly rational tbh

I would feel kind of guilty spending 20K on an amp and the name would be a reminder of it. I understand that this is a me thing and most would not care.

 

[littlej0e]

Hello again, fellow audio nerds...

Is there anyone else out there that has compared the X9Ks to the RAAL SR1a/CA1 with the VM-1a that can provide some feedback? I did a cursory read through this thread, but only found one specific comparison that didn't include the SR1a.

Guessing Cigg or Sixer could chime in here

 

[TommehHiFi]

I just posted a mint one month old X9000 with their stand and dust cover in the classifieds, will add the modded Woo Wee for interested parties. Ping me for details.

What level would you put the Woo Wee out of curiosity? Fed by my cayin 300b or even your Riviera. Does it scale that high? Can it be in the same league as the $3-8k energizers? Or is it more of a stop gap for the x9000?

 

[orrman]

What level would you put the Woo Wee out of curiosity? Fed by my cayin 300b or even your Riviera. Does it scale that high? Can it be in the same league as the $3-8k energizers? Or is it more of a stop gap for the x9000?

I think it's hard to predict synergy between the Wee and other amps and that's a general statement with transformers not specific to the Wee. It's not working great with AIC but I know of people who used it with Viva 845 and Zahl HM1 and other amps with a lot of satisfaction. When I say not great I just mean I know X9K can sound even better (it still sounds plenty good in my setup).
Personally I look at it as a stop gap if you really want to dive deep into estats and with something capable like X9000 you really should invest or you should look elsewhere. It's one of the most capable headphones on the planet, one should feed it with the high end chain it deserves. Others may disagree but that is the reason I'm selling, I'm sticking to my conventional cans and speakers and don't have the spare cash and desire to keep a dedicated estat chain.

 

[draytonklammer]

Hello again, fellow audio nerds...

Is there anyone else out there that has compared the X9Ks to the RAAL SR1a/CA1 with the VM-1a that can provide some feedback? I did a cursory read through this thread, but only found one specific comparison that didn't include the SR1a.

Guessing Cigg or Sixer could chime in here

I'm also curious about this.

 

[Roasty]

anyone out there using the Woo ES8 with the X9k?

 

[number1sixerfan]

Hello again, fellow audio nerds...

Is there anyone else out there that has compared the X9Ks to the RAAL SR1a/CA1 with the VM-1a that can provide some feedback? I did a cursory read through this thread, but only found one specific comparison that didn't include the SR1a.

Guessing Cigg or Sixer could chime in here

I can't speak to a comparison considering the VM-1a, but the VM-1a seems like much more of a game changer for the Sr1a from general consensus. I've used the Raal with the T1-1b/c w/my EC Studio 300b (not enough juice) and EVO 400 and Hegel H120 (both excellent). I think the other thing I should mention is that I have the Star8 cable upgrade, but not the Mitch filters. On this point, while I respect everyone's opinion and also will absolutely be trying them, I've talked to a few people personally that didn't prefer them. I don't expect that they are revolutionary, rather very valuable in subtle ways depending on user preference--but more to come on that.

That said, I do think the x9000 is one slight step ahead overall than the CA-1a. It's far more open and holographic, with a very slight sense of improved detail/resolution. For reference, the x9000 to me is only one slight step overall technically behind the SGL Sr. (realism of timbre & vocals and overall larger than life sound mainly), despite the cost difference--although presentation wise for me it pushes that distance further. I say that to say this. The CA-1a shouldn't be competing with either of these if we're being honest lol. But for me, it's not a pricing thing to be clear, I do find the x9000 just a bit ahead overall--just depends for many if they prefer a more open, somewhat laid back presentation of the x9000, rather than the more traditionally standard positioning and presentation of the CA-1a. I can tell you if you have the latter, you won't miss too much from the former.

The CA-1a is vv close resolution wise. Has slightly better bass (impact wise, not subbass, accuracy or quality) than both of them imo. Nearly close resolution wise, with a very balanced overall presentation. At times, the overall tonality is striking me as a bit less natural in tone than both of them, but I'm still trying to sort that out. For reference here, I've compared the CA-1a to the Expanse numerous times, and while I think the CA-1a is better overall for sure and more complete, the Expanse has a bit better natural tone overall--especially in the midrange and vocals. I'm still trying to sort through this part across all of these headphones.

 

[draytonklammer]

I can't speak to a comparison considering the VM-1a, but the VM-1a seems like much more of a game changer for the Sr1a from general consensus. I've used the Raal with the T1-1b/c w/my EC Studio 300b (not enough juice) and EVO 400 and Hegel H120 (both excellent). I think the other thing I should mention is that I have the Star8 cable upgrade, but not the Mitch filters. On this point, while I respect everyone's opinion and also will absolutely be trying them, I've talked to a few people personally that didn't prefer them. I don't expect that they are revolutionary, rather very valuable in subtle ways depending on user preference--but more to come on that.

That said, I do think the x9000 is one slight step ahead overall than the CA-1a. It's far more open and holographic, with a very slight sense of improved detail/resolution. For reference, the x9000 to me is only one slight step overall technically behind the SGL Sr. (realism of timbre & vocals and overall larger than life sound mainly), despite the cost difference--although presentation wise for me it pushes that distance further. I say that to say this. The CA-1a shouldn't be competing with either of these if we're being honest lol. But for me, it's not a pricing thing to be clear, I do find the x9000 just a bit ahead overall--just depends for many if they prefer a more open, somewhat laid back presentation of the x9000, rather than the more traditionally standard positioning and presentation of the CA-1a. I can tell you if you have the latter, you won't miss too much from the former.

The CA-1a is vv close resolution wise. Has slightly better bass (impact wise, not subbass, accuracy or quality) than both of them imo. Nearly close resolution wise, with a very balanced overall presentation. At times, the overall tonality is striking me as a bit less natural in tone than both of them, but I'm still trying to sort them out. For reference here, I've compared the CA-1a to the Expanse numerous times, and while I think the CA-1a is better overall for sure and more complete, the Expanse has a bit better natural tone overall--especially in the midrange and vocals. I'm still trying to sort through this part across all of these headphones.

It's a true testament to the CA-1a that it is even sitting at this table.
I appreciate your thoughts and this makes me glad I ordered one.

Now to decide if I am going to buy the X9000, too...

 

[normie610]

I can't speak to a comparison considering the VM-1a, but the VM-1a seems like much more of a game changer for the Sr1a from general consensus. I've used the Raal with the T1-1b/c w/my EC Studio 300b (not enough juice) and EVO 400 and Hegel H120 (both excellent). I think the other thing I should mention is that I have the Star8 cable upgrade, but not the Mitch filters. On this point, while I respect everyone's opinion and also will absolutely be trying them, I've talked to a few people personally that didn't prefer them. I don't expect that they are revolutionary, rather very valuable in subtle ways depending on user preference--but more to come on that.

That said, I do think the x9000 is one slight step ahead overall than the CA-1a. It's far more open and holographic, with a very slight sense of improved detail/resolution. For reference, the x9000 to me is only one slight step overall technically behind the SGL Sr. (realism of timbre & vocals and overall larger than life sound mainly), despite the cost difference--although presentation wise for me it pushes that distance further. I say that to say this. The CA-1a shouldn't be competing with either of these if we're being honest lol. But for me, it's not a pricing thing to be clear, I do find the x9000 just a bit ahead overall--just depends for many if they prefer a more open, somewhat laid back presentation of the x9000, rather than the more traditionally standard positioning and presentation of the CA-1a. I can tell you if you have the latter, you won't miss too much from the former.

The CA-1a is vv close resolution wise. Has slightly better bass (impact wise, not subbass, accuracy or quality) than both of them imo. Nearly close resolution wise, with a very balanced overall presentation. At times, the overall tonality is striking me as a bit less natural in tone than both of them, but I'm still trying to sort that out. For reference here, I've compared the CA-1a to the Expanse numerous times, and while I think the CA-1a is better overall for sure and more complete, the Expanse has a bit better natural tone overall--especially in the midrange and vocals. I'm still trying to sort through this part across all of these headphones.

Can't wait for your updated impressions once you've tried Mitch filters

 

[draytonklammer]

You're all horrible influences.
I purchased an X9000...

Hoping to be impressed.

 

[oneguy]

But on the flip side, a side-by-side comparison is the only way to truly know what you like.

At least that’s how I rationalize my addiction

 

[number1sixerfan]

Can't wait for your updated impressions once you've tried Mitch filters

You all really never stop LOL.

 

[littlej0e]

I can't speak to a comparison considering the VM-1a, but the VM-1a seems like much more of a game changer for the Sr1a from general consensus. I've used the Raal with the T1-1b/c w/my EC Studio 300b (not enough juice) and EVO 400 and Hegel H120 (both excellent). I think the other thing I should mention is that I have the Star8 cable upgrade, but not the Mitch filters. On this point, while I respect everyone's opinion and also will absolutely be trying them, I've talked to a few people personally that didn't prefer them. I don't expect that they are revolutionary, rather very valuable in subtle ways depending on user preference--but more to come on that.

That said, I do think the x9000 is one slight step ahead overall than the CA-1a. It's far more open and holographic, with a very slight sense of improved detail/resolution. For reference, the x9000 to me is only one slight step overall technically behind the SGL Sr. (realism of timbre & vocals and overall larger than life sound mainly), despite the cost difference--although presentation wise for me it pushes that distance further. I say that to say this. The CA-1a shouldn't be competing with either of these if we're being honest lol. But for me, it's not a pricing thing to be clear, I do find the x9000 just a bit ahead overall--just depends for many if they prefer a more open, somewhat laid back presentation of the x9000, rather than the more traditionally standard positioning and presentation of the CA-1a. I can tell you if you have the latter, you won't miss too much from the former.

The CA-1a is vv close resolution wise. Has slightly better bass (impact wise, not subbass, accuracy or quality) than both of them imo. Nearly close resolution wise, with a very balanced overall presentation. At times, the overall tonality is striking me as a bit less natural in tone than both of them, but I'm still trying to sort that out. For reference here, I've compared the CA-1a to the Expanse numerous times, and while I think the CA-1a is better overall for sure and more complete, the Expanse has a bit better natural tone overall--especially in the midrange and vocals. I'm still trying to sort through this part across all of these headphones.

Thanks for the the write up and impressions - very much appreciated. I might stick with my RAALs for now and keep building around them. I don't care much for the "in your head" staging on the CAs, but the SRs are a completely different story. The reason the X9Ks were so intriguing is they seem quite similar to ribbons in that you can dramatically adjust the signature and presentation based on what components you put around them. For example, I've tried a bunch of different amps with the CA1a, but nothing I've heard comes close to an old Pass Labs X250.5. The detail is a bit lacking, but the musicality and overall experience is off the friggin' charts and becomes transcendent. Sadly, the same isn't true with the SRs, but the VM-1a will hopefully take care of that.

I guess the last question is...how well do the X9Ks perform with transformer boxes? The RAALs do quite well, though you are almost certainly leaving some degree of performance on the table. I mean, If you are stuck using direct drive amps with the X9Ks because the transformers are dogsh!t, then you are beholden to using DSP to adjust the signature and presentation...which I would rather avoid. Speaking of DSP, I would recommend using HQPlayer to implement Mitch's RAAL filters. I had rather poor results using Roon's DSP engine (Muse), but they were vastly better with HQPlayer. Seems to depend heavily on your rig, especially the server/source.

 

[lsantista]

Hello again, fellow audio nerds...

Is there anyone else out there that has compared the X9Ks to the RAAL SR1a/CA1 with the VM-1a that can provide some feedback? I did a cursory read through this thread, but only found one specific comparison that didn't include the SR1a.

Guessing Cigg or Sixer could chime in here

I had/have the X9k and SR1a, but with carbon and HSA1b, so two "comparable" (at least pricewise) SS amps.
I can honestly say I love both but they are obviously quite different presentations, only thing in common is the absolute resolution. I will soon be able to hear the SR1a with a pair of tube monoblocks 100w class A1 speaker amplifier and the speaker interface..
What are your preferences? maybe this can help , if you are asking because you'd like to get one or the other before trying.. edit: just saw that you already own the SR1..