A first impression on Thinker's X9000.
The source was a
Luxman D10x CD player (16K eur, I assume state of the art), connected to the
SRM-700S energizer via various interconnects (a bit suspicious, but I trust Thinker's judgement in general).
I brought along my Phenomenon Libratums, V3 and V5, for setting a known baseline, against which I have well established mental comparisons to other headphones of interest (009, 007 Mk2, 007 Mk1, Voce, HE90, etc). It looks like unfortunately you cannot buy Phenomenon headphones any more, so it's not a relevant comparison, just for that mental baseline.
I resisted the temptation to bring along my measurement rig: on the first encounter I just wanted subjective impressions, without the cognitive disturbance of measurements
. This means I can fall on my face with this opinion when measurements come, but I take that risk.
The first touch: wow, it's so light and solid, it screams quality wherever you look or touch. The attention to detail is amazing, every part looks so carefully designed and optimized... the metallic headband, with ringing attenuator (unlike with the 007), the headband design, etc. The ear pads design changed, like they would have listened to my comments, it has larger inner diameter, thinner walls, height is about the same, slightly firmer than the 009 and 007 pads.
Fitting on the head is very important with Stax headphones. This is helped by the bendable metallic headbands - obviously I didn't mess with the default settings, as it wasn't mine. The Phenomenon head bands are unique in adjustability, using screws and springs - something I have not seen with any other headphones.
The X9K ear pads seal is slightly firmer than with the 009, it takes more time to achieve a good seal and best positioning on the head.
It's time to put on some music. Mostly jazz, acoustic music, some pop, for about 1.5 hours.
First impression: completely natural sound in a huge sphere of sound stage, with a lot of air, but sounding integral.
No frequency stands out, I could not detect the slightest brightness or shoutiness or boominess.
The "lot of air" is something that sticks to mind, is this the X9K way to present things, is that around with everything?
At the same time, the notes come across with extreme clarity, without any edginess, very immediate and direct sound, well formed notes, full harmonic structure, with body/meat and bottomless bass extension, without sounding boomy. I think Thinker's impressions were very accurate, even slightly understated.
In comparison the Libratum V3 sounds somewhat darker (at least less "air"), more dense, and more constrained in sound stage. Resolution is about the same, but you might need to pay attention, whereas with the X9K it just comes to you naturally. I reached out to the V5 which sounds more open, and yes, it was closer. Yet the X9000 plays at a different level. I changed the V3 pads, using the V5 pads - okay, now this is getting closer, much closer, but the X9000 is still more open and has a bigger, deeper sound stage.
As I mentioned, the opening on the X9K ear pads is larger than with the 009 and the walls are thinner. That explains the huge sound stage. However, it's tricky to get that much opening work with e-stats without raising distortion and becoming diffuse and ill-defined. The drivers have to be designed with that in mind. There comes all the fine-tuning or the front- and back airflow control via the mesh. I am not sure the X9000 pads would work on other headphones. FWIW they are like smaller or more shallow Voce pads, also higher quality, with softer seal.
Changing over a range of music, I noticed a hint of roughness with the voices on the X9K, which were more fluid on the V3. I made a note about it, Thinker changed the interconnects to full silver ones (I prefer good copper, but good silver is fine). Oh man, here we go: a huge difference just by changing the interconnects. The roughness in the voices are 99% gone, the rest might be due to the energizer? or the recording?
Also, the "lot of air" type of airiness is gone as well, leaving a more integral, organic, still airy and natural sound, somewhat smaller sound stage, but more musical IMHO. Now all notes are more round, fully and effortlessly fleshed out of a black background. I love it now! Now the difference between the X9K and V3 is quite much smaller, they are more alike than different, but the Stax retains the lead in preference, mainly because of the spatial presentation and sound stage depth. Tonality-wise, the V3 has an added weight or slam, making it more dense, more velvety, I won't say syrup'y, but that's the direction. Warmth is about the same with both, but the X9K is more open and more effortless. I think the pads make a lot of difference, since even the V5 vs V3 pads made a noticeable difference (same pads, the V5 with 1.5 mm thinner internal foam), and the internal opening on the V5 pads is smaller than on the X9K pads.
I started having the feeling that the V3 might not be driven well by the SRM-700S. It should sound more open than this, with these well known recordings. If that is true, that makes the X9K look relatively easy to drive. I think this is an important point, as someone could buy the X9K and use it even with a modded T1 or an Erik Konka amp, still resulting in better sound than a 009 with the BHSE. So buying the X9K and later scaling the upstream seems like a working idea, but needs checking.
I think this is where we left off, agreeing in a future session as well.
Short first-impression summary:
- The X9K seems to be easy to drive. Great news, if true (to be checked).
- Very open and transparent, but also full sounding, it has flesh and body and it's not ethereal or hollow like the Lambdas or the Voce.
- It not only sounds like a headphone, but it re-creates sonic images in a lifelike manner, more like speakers than headphones, yet not like speakers.
- It's not in-your-head, neither out-of-head experience, it is its own type of sound stage, but extremely enjoyable, with good placement and separation between instruments and notes. Something the HD800 and HD820 got close to, but didn't manage to pull off at this level.
- Bass extension, like power with a Rolls Royce, is (more than) adequate. In other words, bottomless. It has all the bass there can be. But no bloat either, perhaps a bit more spatial (not saying diffuse) than others. The V3 is linear down to 20 Hz, and the X9K doesn't miss anything in comparison. Until measurements come, in my books it's perfect, at least not an issue. IMHO you can also rock with the X9K.
- Upper mids are not over-emphasized like with the 009, and treble attenuation is more graceful, with no spikes to be noted.
- It is like an open window to the upstream and recording, it will inherit the sonic characteristics of the playback chain, including cables, so when you hear something, it might not be the X9K sound at all, but what you play and through what you play. This means it will scale well, actually quite the opposite, it will relentlessly show the deficiencies in your upstream. If you hear something you don't like, first suspect your equipment, not the X9000.
Mental comparisons (from memory, all subjective):
- Compared to the SR-Omega, the X9K has a larger and more defined sound stage, slightly more focused sound, better definition, and slightly more transparent, basically similar, just better. The overall impression is that actually it's quite much better than the SR-Omega. The King is dead, long live the King!
- Compared to the HE90, they are more similar than not, but the X9K sound stage, immediacy, intimacy and naturalness sets it apart. The HE90 is actually closer to the Libratum V3 (probably slightly better, but in the same ballpark).
- Compared to the 009, the X9K has a larger and more enjoyable sound stage, a fuller sound with more body, with better background. The 009 sounds thin and brittle in comparison.
- Compared to the 007 Mk2, the X9K has far better bass extension, less bass boom around 40-50 Hz, but still similar bass impact. Midrange, treble is far smoother, completely different level.
- Compared to the 007 Mk1, they are kind of similar, the X9K is better in every aspect, and sounds as open as the 009, without its problem. The 007 Mk1 is outclassed, too.
- Compared to the Voce, which also has a big sound stage, the X9K has yet better stage, and sounds smoother, more refined, more musical.
- Compared to the Utopia, the X9K has better extension in all directions, not as focused sound, slightly more diffuse, but still with excellent definition. The X9K sounds more musical IMHO, the Utopia has a somewhat harder sound in comparison (don't confuse that with definition).
- Compared to the LCD-4, well, no comparison.
I have (very) high hopes about the CRBN, though. Time will tell.
Again, keep in mind these are all subjective impressions. Don't take any of these statements as a definitive or objective (even relatively objective) judgement.
Congratulations, Stax! And thank you, thank you.