[goldwerger]

the so called personal taste is a matter of sonic flaws and imperfections from the systems

Respectfully, I strongly disagree with this specific point.

In my opinion, the main reason people have personal tastes is, well, because they have personal tastes. Yes, a chef can have a more refined palate, but if I have simple tastes and I really like a cheeseburger, no one can tell me I am wrong or that I need to learn more about food. If I enjoy it, I enjoy it.

But, more improtantly, my tastes buds are not your tastes buds. And, in audio, this is where HRTF plays such a critical role - our brains are not wired identically, we don't all perceive sound waves the same way, and our pinnas are shaped differently to receive those sound waves - by definition, no matter how well optimized, you and I will hear the exact same system differently.

I do think there is tremendous value, like you, in optimizing systems and synergy - heck, that's what we're all doing here in these forums, exchanging ideas and impressions, dreaming, buying, debating, etc

But it all starts first with our tastes, to which we optimize. And someone's taste can never be flawed. It just IS.

Peace

 

[normie610]

Respectfully, I strongly disagree with this specific point.

In my opinion, the main reason people have personal tastes is, well, because they have personal tastes. Yes, a chef can have a more refined palate, but if I have simple tastes and I really like a cheeseburger, no one can tell me I am wrong or that I need to learn more about food. If I enjoy it, I enjoy it.

But, more improtantly, my tastes buds are not your tastes buds. And, in audio, this is where HRTF plays such a critical role - our brains are not wired identically, we don't all perceive sound waves the same way, and our pinnas are shaped differently to receive those sound waves - by definition, no matter how well optimized, you and I will hear the exact same system differently.

I do think there is tremendous value, like you, in optimizing systems and synergy - heck, that's what we're all doing here in these forums, exchanging ideas and impressions, dreaming, buying, debating, etc

But it all starts first with our tastes, to which we optimize. And someone's taste can never be flawed. It just IS.

Peace

A great point indeed. How can one tell that a system has “sonic flaws” and “imperfections”? and what does a “perfect” system sound like? What matters is that the sound we’re hearing is the sound that we like. And if I’m able to get that sound from my system, I call it my perfect system

 

[hifixman]

​

People ( Grammy wining musicians, scientists and professors) who listened to my CURRENT SUS system all agree it has TC like bass ( one said “ totally beat the bass of TC”) and R10 vocals ( without the drawbacks of its skewed and imbalanced mid centric tuning for the good and the wooden close-back textured reverbs for the bad) that are the reasons many previously dont prefer SUS; and after they actually heard my X9000 system, they agreed that it managed to fix the weak and soft extensions at both ends as well as to revolutionize the built in odd soundstage ( a result of joint effort of multiple isolation solutions as well as purposeful choice of master clock and PC) that many who previously dislike X9000 don’t prefer.

I stick to my stance, the existence of preference is due to the existing non-preference, which is largely due to the sonic caveat unaddressed causing such related subjective sound impression and non-preference. Preference exists due to Non preference as the binary Yin& Yang.

If you look at any threads, the reasons of people don’t prefer a certain headphone turned out to be more similar than different, proving that non preference is actually not one person’s willful and whimsical thought, but coming from the traits and caveats of headphone design. There is no perfect component, making system building crucial to address these non preferences, it is another story of how far It could go which is dependent on many factors such as the experience, know how, budget, and the commitment of time and practice from the owner.

On top of that, it is important to ensure the foundation and quality of components chosen to tweak in building the system are as ideal as possible.

The experience of superb system is peculiar in that it defies imagination until experienced. One can read innumerable descriptions of the performance of a stereo system or component but really understanding what is so significant is a necessarily empirical exercise. Such systems are hard to find at show settings where one station normally is just piled with components the sponsors provide to temporarily have a system for display. In this sense, theoretical it can be said that both preference and non-preference dont pre-exist in that our so called preference is largely inspired and given birth by great designs/ systems.

I am beyond privileged to know and learn from a few friends, gurus and true experts in the west and east investing tremendous time of years, energy, research, hard work and financial commitment and beyond to perfect one can -one source - one system to address the flaws and shortcomings, and thus of course they sounds more correct with more flaws fixed, it is just not everyone could get the chance to listen to or have the commitment and know how of building systems so they don’t believe it is possible. Less capable components and/or less system arrangement skills would both yield the result restricted by the stock tuning on the surface level, High end components are not high end sound without good systematic skills, marking the level of audiophile skills.

It is important to remember never say never. I admit there could be limitations regarding certain topology that might be impossible to transcend, making no end of game and/or joy, pushing the limits. I also believe there is a will, there are ways and better ways.

Peace out

 

[karlheinz147]

People who listened to my CURRENT SUS system all agree it has TC like bass and R10 Vocals that the reasons they previously dont prefer SUS;

What's your current SUS system?

 

[hifixman]

What's your current SUS system?

As you requested, enjoy I put more details on the comments and notes.

 

[Lee Junming]

reporting in another x9000 having channel imbalance on left driver after 1 week of use .

 

[MDR30]

If I need to be genuine, truthful, and honest to respond, it could be cringy, and irritating eliciting jealousy and hatred, even I did try to sound friendly and benign so please feel free to ignore as you wish and I won’t comment more on this philosophical topic to avoid further arguments, hallelujah


People ( Grammy wining musicians, scientists and professors) who listened to my CURRENT SUS system all agree it has TC like bass ( one said “ totally beat the bass of TC”) and R10 vocals ( without the drawbacks of its skewed and imbalanced mid centric tuning for the good and the wooden close-back textured reverbs for the bad) that are the reasons many previously dont prefer SUS; and after they actually heard my X9000 system, they agreed that it managed to fix the weak and soft extensions at both ends as well as to revolutionize the built in odd soundstage ( a result of joint effort of multiple isolation solutions as well as purposeful choice of master clock and PC) that many who previously dislike X9000 don’t prefer.

I stick to my stance, the existence of preference is due to the existing non-preference, which is largely due to the sonic caveat unaddressed causing such related subjective sound impression and non-preference. Preference exists due to Non preference as the binary Yin& Yang.

It is ok if you agree or disagree, I know what I heard and what I built. It is hard for one to imagine without ownership. know-how, technic common sense, and first hand experience with all due respect in that Hifi is not pure philosophy only for imaginary opinion exchange back and forward but empirical science requiring hands on practice hundreds and thousands of experiments, trials and errors. I remember the hyperbole words you said and wrote after listening to T2 ( with a sub 1k DIY DAC) and my power amp alone using my PC to control volume ( due to my years long of struggling to find a well matching Preamp), Honestly I was wondering what make you change your opinions so dramatically in the name of preferences plus my current setups are DAY and NIGHT with these systems you heard before way earlier in EVERY ASPECTS. I don’t have to prove to anyone cause I have proved to my ears. Yes there are rooms for update as my X9000 setup is still young and I’m glad end game doesn’t exist so there is no end for joy and fun, pushing the limits.

The experience of superb system is peculiar in that it defies imagination until experienced. One can read innumerable descriptions of the performance of a stereo system or component but really understanding what is so significant is a necessarily empirical exercise. Such systems are hard to find at show settings where one station normally is just piled with components the sponsors provide to temporarily have a system for display. In this sense, theoretical it can be said that both preference and non-preference dont pre-exist in that our so called preference is largely inspired and given birth by great designs.

I am beyond privileged to know and learn from a few friends, gurus and true experts in the west and east investing tremendous time of years, energy, research, hard work and financial commitment over 200k and beyond to perfect one can -one source - one system to address the flaws and shortcomings, these are the systems entitled to be called summit fi that won’t easily show up at show settings.

Peace out

"Wining musicians" says it all.

 

[kiling92]

instead what do you think of the 700s?
I ask because in the next few days I will receive the 9000 with the 700s, and before buying it I was able to compare it with the t8000, I definitely prefer the younger brother.
Instead, according to what you wrote, I mobilized to look for the novem, which however cannot be found; do you have any other valid alternative to drive the 9000 in the best possible way?

 

[thinker]

i had to do this....... wooden Novem

 

[CannedWheat]

Is there any actual benefit of me using a direct drive amplifier or boutique Adapter unit I just don't see how it could improve that drastically from The SRD-7mk2 plus I get to use all sorts of lovely vintage Amps to power them

 

[Chefguru]

Back in November @doyouknowSBmean and I conducted a little bit of a mini-meet among vintage flagships + sr9k. Off the Mjolnir Carbon, My findings were that while the x9k was a great headphone, I was preparing to buying an sr-omega
This time around, we had new amps at our disposal: 1) Mjolnir Novem 2) Stax T8000 3) Headamp Aristaeus.
And we listened to a broader range of genres, focused chiefly on the back-and-forth of the X9k/Omega without throwing in too many other variables.


Round 2 : Omega vs Sr-X9k
Sr-omega [Note this is an early model that is easier to drive than the later models]

• At least on this style of listening impressions, for amplification, I may prefer the Sr-omega off the Carbon Mjolnir (based off our round 1), then maybe the Novem, then the t8000. I did not hear it off the Aristaeus. That said, it sounds fairly similar on all amps. I have stronger thoughts on the x9k because I've been able to do closer a/b comparisons. DoyouknowSBmean used to own the carbon and said he prefers the Aristaeus and/or T8000 for the sr-omega.
• The soundstage of the Omega feels smaller to the x9k, but the mid-range takes up a bigger portion of it (or at least commands attention more so)
• The timber of the Omega was much better than the x9k, regardless of the other parts of the chain.
• Omega seems to have better detail on individual instruments/voices - but it doesn't do as well as keep them separate. So often, things happening in the background blended/ sound diffused.
  • At times this adds a layer of believability because it creates the illusion of depth better (items further way are more muffled); , on some songs, it just sounds worse.
• Regardless if I went from x9k-to-omega or omega-to-x9k, immediate reaction was that the sound of the Omega seemed more "correct" and magical ... but occasionally, as the song developed, I began to pick out things where the x9k had been better. More or less... the Omega sounds right, but the X9K has technical prowess.
• Bass has more physical air but less detail, control, and tone (can be 1 note at times)
• Overall it felt more neutral-tuned of the two.

Sr-X9000

• For amplification, my preference is Novem > Carbon > Aristaeus. Did not try the x9k/T8000.
  • Despite being the beauty pageant winner, the Aristaeus is too colored for the x9k and I needed to put the volume at almost complete max for a quiet Jazz song. The Novem, at least with the jj tubes, isn't as warm and has plenty of headspace for juice without distortion.
  • The carbon on first impression might impress some people with the x9k because it does step-up the detail/staging, but I personally can't live with the combo - super sterile and without fun.
• Mid can be more recessed on some tracks but partly fixed off the Novem, and the overall soundstage of the x9k is bigger and capable of making items siloed from one another...
  • But in those isolations, it can feel duller, with less textured/weight from each sound.
• X9000 has the better lower end of the two

Conclusions:

• We mostly preferred the X9000/Novem for the classic rock and pop we sampled
• Omega on any amp was better for classical music.
• Jazz mostly favors the Omega but could go either way, depending on the type
• The Omega is probably the superior headphone, but might not be worth the cost/risks/chase for everyone.

 

[BenF]

When I saw this listing on HeadAmp, I was almost sure I will add another electrostat to my collection...

Bargain of the century

 

[yaluen]

snip

Good stuff may I ask what kinda volume you guys were listening at when comparing?

 

[jlbrach]

When I saw this listing on HeadAmp, I was almost sure I will add another electrostat to my collection...


Bargain of the century

put me down for one as well lol

 

[doyouknowSBmean]

Good stuff may I ask what kinda volume you guys were listening at when comparing?

I have a habit to record the volume when I listen (either listening to speaker, headphones, playing instruments, or liver concerts). My listening level for headphone use is usually around 75-85 dB A-weighted on average (classical music), which is a little bit lower than real concerts I have ever recorded (80-93 dBA average). I remember we were probably in similar volume range yesterday when we listened to most of the classical pieces.

Go back to the discussion on X9000 vs Omega. Omega is better in classical music due to better micro/macro dynamic and timbre presentation. X9000 has more polished sound that make them sound better controlled. But maybe due to the same reason, X9000s sound more compressed. This is not a big problem (and most of the time unnoticeable) for heavily compressed music. But for classical, it definitely makes the sound less engaging.

The summary from Chefguru definitely nail it, albeit, I maybe a little bit like the x9000 more than Chefguru think: ) as these days I listen a lot more pop music. At some point, I might pull the trigger to buy a pair of x9000 again (it the would be my third x9000 if I do so). But one problem for me is, for pop music, I can not justify the improvemen from my Airpods pro to hiend headphones, whereas I feel the improvement is huge for classical music. Maybe this is because I listen to a lot of metal (at the pop music side). Or maybe the Airpods pro is just too good.