[Nomax]

But what can the HE1 do here that the X9K cannot? (more details?)

Though I am not sure this is the best recording for stating something like that... too ethereal, compressed and no body indeed, with any headphones... (tried about 6).
Which makes me think, how often the musical source and musical preferences are not mentioned when people are comparing headphones, but we are taking opinions as they were relevant to our musical sources and preferences?

(in this case the source and preference were mentioned, which helped me estimate the relevance for me)

The X9000 can not really move enough air mass....its to open constructed

NOMAX

PS.only the mids and highs from the Stax that sounds great...but for bass/low end you need enough moving air mass that it can reach the ears
And this model can't do that because its to open
Give the Warwick Aperio a try (has a bit more as CRBN)....he can do it too although not to the extent of my He1

 

[musicman59]

The X9000 can not really move enough air mass....its to open constructed

NOMAX

PS.only the mids and highs from the Stax that sounds great...but for bass/low end you need enough moving air mass that it can reach the ears
And this model can't do that because its to open

Isn’t the 1266 TC also open?

 

[Trance_Gott]

@Nomax you never heared it with a Carbon

 

[Trance_Gott]

When I get the same air mass with X9000 over Carbon then with Susvara over Niimbus it's more then enough for me.

 

[Nomax]

I said everything from my vantage point to the X9000
(Was my last post)

NOMAX

Ps.I wish everyone a lot of joy with the model of their choice

 

[eee1111]

You are a owner of the 1266 TC and X9000?
Compared it side by side this track

Which one moves more air mass?
Which one makes more air pressure?
X9000 or TC?

NOMAX

PS.everbody knows the answer

Tc has better low end that the X9000 Cant touch
X9000 has mids and treble that the TC cant touch.

The TC has recessed mids. And when compared side by side with the X9000 I pick the X9000 *most* times in a head to head battle. Not all. Because chain to chain source to source SONG TO SONG amps to amps stuff can sound different.

Blanket statements like yours about 1/3 of the sound being missing are absolutely absurd.

 

[number1sixerfan]

Had a really amazing stat session last night. Forced myself to pick up the CRBN and 009, which just haven't been getting use as of late due to the x9000 and SGL. Enjoyed both quite a bit. Finished this evening with the x9000 and SGL.. and man. They just do things the others.. and the rest of my headphone collection simply cannot, from a refinement and performance standpoint.

It's pretty clear to me that the SGL is a bit better to my ears, but the thing that really stands out to me over and over is that I can't believe the x9000 comes that close for such a far lower price. I do a ton of listening with them back to back, not because I want to compare, but because I really like how they contrast each other while both performing at really high levels. They're definitely in the same league, and I would assume this is the case with the HE-1 as well given all the reading and conversations I've had around the SGL/HE-1. But I should be able to demo the HE-1 before I move from California later this year. Outside of the amp combo being an issue for me, the main reason I went with the SGL Sr. over it is because I saw very consistent feedback about it being significantly more closed in, which goes against my preferences. The openness and staging (and separation within it) of the x9000 and SGL is surreal.

Lastly, the open question I now have is how/when will planars, ribbons, etc. catch up (and I know they will, that's how technology works). Before the new stat releases, the 009 was essentially the only headphone that kept up with the TC/Susvara/Sr1a etc. It will be interesting to see how things play out in the future. Also, all of those headphones are good, not knocking them at all, it's just really good to see an improved level of performance, as for a while it seemed unfathomable at an accessible price.

 

[BassicScience]

Had a really amazing stat session last night. Forced myself to pick up the CRBN and 009, which just haven't been getting use as of late due to the x9000 and SGL. Enjoyed both quite a bit. Finished this evening with the x9000 and SGL.. and man. They just do things the others.. and the rest of my headphone collection simply cannot, from a refinement and performance standpoint.

It's pretty clear to me that the SGL is a bit better to my ears, but the thing that really stands out to me over and over is that I can't believe the x9000 comes that close for such a far lower price. I do a ton of listening with them back to back, not because I want to compare, but because I really like how they contrast each other while both performing at really high levels. They're definitely in the same league, and I would assume this is the case with the HE-1 as well given all the reading and conversations I've had around the SGL/HE-1. But I should be able to demo the HE-1 before I move from California later this year. Outside of the amp combo being an issue for me, the main reason I went with the SGL Sr. over it is because I saw very consistent feedback about it being significantly more closed in, which goes against my preferences. The openness and staging (and separation within it) of the x9000 and SGL is surreal.

Lastly, the open question I now have is how/when will planars, ribbons, etc. catch up (and I know they will, that's how technology works). Before the new stat releases, the 009 was essentially the only headphone that kept up with the TC/Susvara/Sr1a etc. It will be interesting to see how things play out in the future. Also, all of those headphones are good, not knocking them at all, it's just really good to see an improved level of performance, as for a while it seemed unfathomable at an accessible price.

Planars may never catch up to estats in terms of sheer resolution, in the same way that SUVs will never compete with 2-seater sports cars for navigating curvy mountain roads, at least while still being affordable and mass produceable. It simply comes down to the differential in mass in either case.

BTW, I definitely agree with you that the X9000 gets much closer to the SGL in terms of overall performance than the price difference would suggest, and I actually preferred the X9000 on some music, as detailed in my recent "E-stat Summit" thread.

 

[Chefguru]

Had a really amazing stat session last night. Forced myself to pick up the CRBN and 009, which just haven't been getting use as of late due to the x9000 and SGL. Enjoyed both quite a bit. Finished this evening with the x9000 and SGL.. and man. They just do things the others.. and the rest of my headphone collection simply cannot, from a refinement and performance standpoint.

It's pretty clear to me that the SGL is a bit better to my ears, but the thing that really stands out to me over and over is that I can't believe the x9000 comes that close for such a far lower price. I do a ton of listening with them back to back, not because I want to compare, but because I really like how they contrast each other while both performing at really high levels. They're definitely in the same league, and I would assume this is the case with the HE-1 as well given all the reading and conversations I've had around the SGL/HE-1. But I should be able to demo the HE-1 before I move from California later this year. Outside of the amp combo being an issue for me, the main reason I went with the SGL Sr. over it is because I saw very consistent feedback about it being significantly more closed in, which goes against my preferences. The openness and staging (and separation within it) of the x9000 and SGL is surreal.

Lastly, the open question I now have is how/when will planars, ribbons, etc. catch up (and I know they will, that's how technology works). Before the new stat releases, the 009 was essentially the only headphone that kept up with the TC/Susvara/Sr1a etc. It will be interesting to see how things play out in the future. Also, all of those headphones are good, not knocking them at all, it's just really good to see an improved level of performance, as for a while it seemed unfathomable at an accessible price.

It shouldn't surprise you that the "value" of the srx9000 is so close. The SGL probably only costs at most 1k to build.

I think your assumption about this sort of back and forth battle between Estats and other tech going back and forth on who is on top is historically incorrect. E-stats have always been "this much" ahead in those areas than the pack.
The SR-X9000 is on the same tier a the Sr-Omega. I can confirm that now since I used to own the Sr-Omega and auditioned the SR-X9000 two weeks ago. The SR-Omega is probably imo preferred over the SR-X9 because I like how big it's soundstage is/slightly darker sounding, etc etc - but from a technically standpoint they're very similar. So if you consider that, it actually took the other tech about 30~ years to even get close outside of a few very expectational headphones like the Sony MDR-r10, Sony Qualia, Grado Hp-1000, and a few other legends.
The HE90/hev90 and the SR007mk1/T2 combos are also examples of extremely strong flagships, that are arguably still on top 20-30 years later.
Even before the 90s, Estats also obliterated the market with headphones like the Sigma flagship and various other on-the-ear Stax offerings that would honestly surprise you if you heard them today.

My thesis (which I wrote about in my 30-years of change thread), is that both the CRBN and the new Stax offerings are actually just new flavors, but more of the same sonically. No true sonic innovation occurring at all with E-Stats.

 

[number1sixerfan]

Planars may never catch up to estats in terms of sheer resolution, in the same way that SUVs will never compete with 2-seater sports cars for navigating curvy mountain roads, at least while still being affordable and mass produceable. It simply comes down to the differential in mass in either case.

BTW, I definitely agree with you that the X9000 gets much closer to the SGL in terms of overall performance than the price difference would suggest, and I actually preferred the X9000 on some music, as detailed in my recent "E-stat Summit" thread.

The interesting thing is that prior to the x9000, I felt them all nearly equal from a detail and refinement standpoint. The TC and Sr1a specifically are really impressive with detail, Susvara right behind or nearly right there. I would have to assume that at some point ceiling will be raised, but who knows, we'll see.

It shouldn't surprise you that the "value" of the srx9000 is so close. The SGL probably only costs at most 1k to build.

I think your assumption about this sort of back and forth battle between Estats and other tech going back and forth on who is on top is historically incorrect. E-stats have always been "this much" ahead in those areas than the pack.
The SR-X9000 is on the same tier a the Sr-Omega. I can confirm that now since I used to own the Sr-Omega and auditioned the SR-X9000 two weeks ago. The SR-Omega is probably imo preferred over the SR-X9 because I like how big it's soundstage is/slightly darker sounding, etc etc - but from a technically standpoint they're very similar. So if you consider that, it actually took the other tech about 30~ years to even get close outside of a few very expectational headphones like the Sony MDR-r10, Sony Qualia, Grado Hp-1000, and a few other legends.
The HE90/hev90 and the SR007mk1/T2 combos are also examples of extremely strong flagships, that are arguably still on top 20-30 years later.
Even before the 90s, Estats also obliterated the market with headphones like the Sigma flagship and various other on-the-ear Stax offerings that would honestly surprise you if you heard them today.

My thesis (which I wrote about in my 30-years of change thread), is that both the CRBN and the new Stax offerings are actually just new flavors, but more of the same sonically. No true sonic innovation occurring at all with E-Stats.

I know the SGL is obviously overpriced. I was more so surprised at the level of performance at the price of the x9000 given current market prices. I'm not aware of anything else that performs at its level at anywhere near the cost. From a technology standpoint, I'm strictly talking about the current market. By and large, the headphones that are out now, outperform most of the old TOTL cans technically (although the Euphoria invoking sound and natural tone that a lot of them have is certainly something lacking in today's TOTL cans). I've had multiple HP-1000s, K1000s, L3000s, etc.--but I cannot speak to the Omega/HE90 which is likely more relevant here.

I have to respectfully disagree on the CRBNs performance. I do like the easy listening tonality and the slight bass impact over some of the other stats, but its performance isn't even in the same category of the TC/Susvara/Sr1a/009. It just doesn't have the same capabilities. There's a clear lack of separation, the music is presented in a wall like fashion and doesn't have the traditional stat layering and holographic nature, and it lacks the detail and refinement of everything in that category. The x9000 in my opinion is a step above that same group. Not by much, but it certainly is. So with that said, there's a pretty sizable gap between the x9000 and the CRBNs performance. What I do get is people loving and even preferring its presentation: a bit more forward, less relaxed, with amazing tonality and decent punch that a lot of stats don't have. But for me, that's where it stops. From a performance standpoint, it certainly extends beyond just flavors.

 

[Chefguru]

I have to respectfully disagree on the CRBNs performance. I do like the easy listening tonality and the slight bass impact over some of the other stats, but its performance isn't even in the same category of the TC/Susvara/Sr1a/009. It just doesn't have the same capabilities. There's a clear lack of separation, the music is presented in a wall like fashion and doesn't have the traditional stat layering and holographic nature, and it lacks the detail and refinement of everything in that category. The x9000 in my opinion is a step above that same group. Not by much, but it certainly is. So with that said, there's a pretty sizable gap between the x9000 and the CRBNs performance. What I do get is people loving and even preferring its presentation: a bit more forward, less relaxed, with amazing tonality and decent punch that a lot of stats don't have. But for me, that's where it stops. From a performance standpoint, it certainly extends beyond just flavors.

That's not what I'm getting at. The new e-stats that have just come out, the CRBN included since it just came out last winter, the SGL, and the Sr-X9000, are NOT technical improvements over much older (20+ years) e-stats. The Sr-X9000 is not to my ears better than the Sr-omega; it represents a different take/flavor on the original 30-year old design.

Suggesting that the TC/Susvars/SR1a (non e-stats) never caught up to the He90/Sr-Omega and also maybe to the Sr-x mk3pro/Sr-Sigma Pro. There was never a back-and-forth. E-stat's have always been ahead from a technical standpoint. I also don't think that the new TOTL non-estats are that much better, if at all, from the MDR-r10 or MDR-010. The improved version of the HP-1000, is also superior in many ways. I enjoyed the L3000 when I had them, but they released 15 years after the R10 and were unanimously inferior to the R10.

My real point is that we have entered the "luxury" period of headphone hi-fi were the level of innovation is low and the differences between models is a balancing act between achievable attributes for slightly different consumers. This explains why much of these summit-fi threads devolve so quickly. Things are very stagnant here in head-fi world despite the MSRP creep.
I have hope that the biggest advantage of the CRBN, SGL and SR-X9000 is their long-term durability.

 

[number1sixerfan]

That's not what I'm getting at. I said that the new e-stats that have just come out, the CRBN included since it just came out last winter, the SGL, and the Sr-X9000, are NOT technical improvements over much older (20+ years) e-stats. The Sr-X9000 is not to my ears better than the Sr-omega; it represents a different take/flavor on the original 30-year old design.

My real point is that we have entered the "luxury" period of headphone hi-fi were the level of innovation is low and the differences between models is a balancing act between achievable attributes for slightly different consumers. This explains why much of these summit-fi threads devolve so quickly. Things are very stagnant here in head-fi world despite the MSRP creep.

Gotcha, I misinterpreted that last statement--definitely my bad there. And I think this is more relevant to stats than non-stats. The x9000 is obviously a reincarnation of the Omega and again I haven't heard the HE90, but from a lot of ppl's impressions it seems like it may not have been eclipsed either. But in general, outside of stats, I think the technology and performance has certainly improved, and I think a lot of companies would tell us just that (although obviously, bias).

On your last point, I certainly agree. It will always be low and slow innovation/improvement. My only point is that it does happen, and that's how we end up with the TC/Suvara/Sr1a, which perform better than most of the OG TOTLs that aren't stats.

 

[Chefguru]

Gotcha, I misinterpreted that last statement--definitely my bad there. And I think this is more relevant to stats than non-stats. The x9000 is obviously a reincarnation of the Omega and again I haven't heard the HE90, but from a lot of ppl's impressions it seems like it may not have been eclipsed either. But in general, outside of stats, I think the technology and performance has certainly improved, and I think a lot of companies would tell us just that (although obviously, bias).

On your last point, I certainly agree. It will always be low and slow innovation/improvement. My only point is that it does happen, and that's how we end up with the TC/Suvara/Sr1a, which perform better than most of the OG TOTLs that aren't stats.

 

[BassicScience]

That's not what I'm getting at. The new e-stats that have just come out, the CRBN included since it just came out last winter, the SGL, and the Sr-X9000, are NOT technical improvements over much older (20+ years) e-stats. The Sr-X9000 is not to my ears better than the Sr-omega; it represents a different take/flavor on the original 30-year old design.

Suggesting that the TC/Susvars/SR1a (non e-stats) never caught up to the He90/Sr-Omega and also maybe to the Sr-x mk3pro/Sr-Sigma Pro. There was never a back-and-forth. E-stat's have always been ahead from a technical standpoint. I also don't think that the new TOTL non-estats are that much better, if at all, from the MDR-r10 or MDR-010. The improved version of the HP-1000, is also superior in many ways. I enjoyed the L3000 when I had them, but they released 15 years after the R10 and were unanimously inferior to the R10.

My real point is that we have entered the "luxury" period of headphone hi-fi were the level of innovation is low and the differences between models is a balancing act between achievable attributes for slightly different consumers. This explains why much of these summit-fi threads devolve so quickly. Things are very stagnant here in head-fi world despite the MSRP creep.
I have hope that the biggest advantage of the CRBN, SGL and SR-X9000 is their long-term durability.

We can argue over personal preferences in sound signatures, but to suggest that there hasn't been much innovation in estats and other headphone technology over the last twenty years is insane. Note that I'm not suggesting that every new expensive headphone that's released improves on its predecessors technically, or that some older headphones weren't great, but there have been a lot of significant technological advancements in all classes of headphones over the last twenty years. That's just undeniable in my opinion.

 

[number1sixerfan]

LOL! Seriously. There's a certain euphoria and naturalness of tone that the R10, HP-1000 and others have that the new TOTLs just don't have to my ears. It's really hard to describe. So that, in addition to their already high performance across the board, I get having them as "better" despite whatever technical improvements.