Tbh I have a feeling the estat game will have changed quite a bit by 2038, but we shall see.
Stax SR-X9000
- Thread starter HBen
- Start date
Yeah but unless
I agree but unless Stax goes under I don’t see them not going over the top for a century in business. Just my assessment.
My bet would be that in 2026~ Stax will release a 2nd ver of the x9000 similar to the 009S.
Based on where I see some issues, I think they will "un-tilt" the guard mesh structure (the OG sr-omega was parallel and I believe this is superior) and find some way to improve the drivers to improve the low-end further.
@number1sixerfan owns the eksonic t2 and has heard the Grand Cayman
When Justin was asked over at head case about the power level of the Cayman he responded saying that it's closer to that of a megatron (so still a lot but less than the T2) and more designed for people who want the "DHT sound". We don't know the price yet, but rumor is it's going to be around 20k.
makan
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2015
- Posts
- 942
- Likes
- 524
Damn! This is one of the reasons I am reluctant to take the plunge into the X9000…these anecdotes on channel imbalance issues.
DougD
500+ Head-Fier
Stax is one venerable audio company I really hope hits the 100 year mark and keeps on going.
Because of the history.
But also, selfishly, if Stax were to close up their shop, I'm not sure there's anybody else really interested in filling the void that would create. Especially in terms of volume production of estat amps for the regular retail market, entry- and mid-level.
My money is on 2028. 7 years elapsed between the 009 to 009S and 009BK release. 7 years beyond the X9000 release would coincide with 90th. Would make a lot of sense to make 90 limited edition X9000 headphones to commemorate the 90th anniversary and roll out an S model at the same time.
Not exactly joking when I say, that based on the price Edifer bought Stax for, I would make a bid to buy them if they went under again.
And you better believe the sr-007 will get a proper update with detachable cables !
Last edited:
Heck I’d go in with ya! Stax run by a bunch of head-fi board members!! lol
DougD
500+ Head-Fier
Good. That's the current Contingent Emergency Plan B, unless/until we come up with some other ideas.
(Edit/Add) Let's hope it never gets to that. As you noted, Edifer owns Stax, and should be motivated to initiate course corrections or rescue interventions, if needed.
Last edited:
Out of curiosity do we know what the cause of the driver imbalance is for X9K? Is it a loosening/detachment of the metal mesh stators (hard to believe since they're thermally bonded to the chasis), or the diaphragm itself decreasing tension or something. Interested regardless.
SolarCetacean
500+ Head-Fier
Alright, I've collected my notes from yesterday's X9000 demo on the BHSE and Chord Hugo TT2. This post on the X9000's sound went on for way longer than I anticipated, so I've moved most of the head-to-head comparisons for a future post. I'm still going to mix X9000 sound descriptions and comparisons with other headphones here, because I think sound is easier to understand in terms of comparisons.
TLDR: I'm sold on the X9000. I went in expecting to pick apart the sound, and I did to an extent, but somehow I found the X9000 to be better than I remembered it from CAF. The top 3 notes I made for the X9K were "addicting, layered, SO COMFORTABLE". I think that captures what made it so compelling to me.
First, it's very, very comfortable. It required little adjustment to make it sit gently on my head. No hotspot on top, barely any clamp pressure, and the earpads didn't press on my cheekbones or anything else. It was not too large that it felt like my face was being swallowed up by the earcups (a la the HD800S). One thing I thought was a bit more difficult than expected to adjust was the notched adjustment sliders. Because they're mounted on the inside of that floating metal piece, that piece could make it a bit tricky to grab the sides of the slider. I had to push the top or bottom of the slider to move it around because it was tricky to hold the thin slider sides while holding the headphone in my hands.
Build-wise, it felt solid in the hand and it wasn't too large to handle. The HD800S has earcups that are so large that it's a bit awkward to grab them to take them off my head; I had to hold the inner ring and cable connector bit otherwise my hand was stretched awkwardly if I tried to grab the earcup rims like I do with other headphones. That was not a problem with the X9000. The outer driver guard mesh has this moire effect if you turn the headphones, which I find cool. I didn't test out the detachable cables, but I'm familiar with the system from the L700mk2, and I'm glad Stax figured out how to do them. The angle to the connectors meant that the cable connectors didn't get in my way while listening.
Sound-wise, I think the first thing that stood out to me was the layering of sounds. On the X9K, I got the sense that some sounds were close, and other sounds were further away, and still others were even further. This is in contrast to the DCA Corina, where all sounds seemed like they were positioned along an arc in front of me, and confined to that bubble. The HD800S also had that single arc effect, but with the arc further away vs the Corina. The X9000 placed some things, like vocals, relatively forward, and backing instruments further away (sometimes even appearing behind the lead vocal), and then other background instruments and sounds even further away. This formed the illusion of sounds emanating from a space larger than the earcups. The X9000 uses the soundstage size better than other headphones. The HD800S has a slightly (just slightly) larger soundstage, mainly because vocals and mids are more recessed, but sounds seem more uniformly far away. It was not as engaging as the X9000's layered presentation of sounds. The layering is a big part of what I consider the "openness" of the X9000, where sounds seem to emanate into a space rather than being shot directly at me.
The downside of this layering is that the X9000 was less cohesive in its presentation of sounds vs the Susvara, Corina, and HD800S. This is partially dependent on the mastering of the track, but since most vocal tracks place vocals front and center, those vocals can be slightly too focused and emphasized. It's like the vocals were pulled out of the mix, placed front and center, and the rest of the track was reorganized to float around the vocals. I'd roughly compare it to those 3D movie effects where you wear those glasses and then elements in the movie pop out at you. That's sort of what's done to the vocals and lead instruments here. One song I noted where this effect was pronounced was 'Back To You' by Ekali. On that song, the vocals stood at as more central vs the electronic synths and bass. The other headphones had more cohesive presentations where vocals didn't stick out as much. The Susvara was the closest middle-ground option where there was good layering, but the mids were withdrawn so that they were just slightly in front of the backing instruments instead of being noticeably emphasized in position.
This emphasis on vocals was not as bad as I remembered it from CAF. In this demo, I was listening at significantly lower volumes and there was much less background noise. Hence, the vocals were lower in perceived loudness, and I did not find them as distractingly forward and shouty as I did last time. This improved the cohesiveness of the sound; I suspect that if one prefers loud listening, then the relative lack of cohesiveness would be a bigger problem. This cohesion issue was the main topic I wanted to analyze in this second demo, and I think the X9000 acquitted itself. The vocals at my normal volume were not as shouty or forward as when I needed to pump up the volume at CAF. They're still more emphasized than on a Susvara or my SGL Jr, but not shouty, and they don't have the "crystalline" timbre that I heard on my L700mk2 when I compared them. The vocals are richer, with less of the thin and breathy character that the Susvara or SGL Jr present. Yet they're also not as neutral as on the Corina, which can result in a "sweeter" character to vocals relative to the Dan Clark. I think it was the song 'Underneath My Skin' by HALIENE where her vocals came across as a bit "close-miked" on the Corina with a sort of roughness to the sound, which is probably more accurate to the track, but the X9000 renders those same vocals as slightly smoothed out, yet also slightly emphasized in the right places that they come across as more emotive.
Elsewhere in the mids, the decay and twang of strings was quite pronounced and detailed. Guitars and other strings were very engaging to listen to as I could hear the pluck and the decay and all of the small variations in the sound that occur during those processes. However, I can see how these mids can be fatiguing over time and a headphone with a more withdrawn midrange presentation could be a good complement to the X9000. Overall, I'd characterize the midrange as engaging. It's forward (but not too forward that it's shouty, at least at lower listening levels) and it's central to the overall sound image. I generally prefer more distant vocals, like on a Hifiman, but the X9000 does vocals with a "restrained forwardness" in contrast to the newer Audezes where vocals are just too intense and shouty for me. Even the Corina, while its midrange tonal balance is arguably better (at least more neutral), its overall midrange character too directed and dominant in the overall sound.
That segues into the treble. I think the X9000 has superb treble. It's elevated for sure, but I don't hear any glare or notable treble peaks. It's enough treble to give the sound sparkle and air as well as an emphasized attack in percussion, but it doesn't pollute the attack of notes like the treble on the Susvara or the L700mk2. On the Susvara, the leading edges of notes can sometimes have this slight sharpness or sibilance which can be a bit distracting. I did not notice such distractions when listening to the X9K even though the attack of drums has an engaging emphasis and "snap". Compared to the Corina, the X9K is much livelier. The Corina sounds dull in comparison with its overwhelming mids and bass character. It's not that the Corina is less detailed, as the Corina still has all of the note detail that is needed in the treble, but there's no spark, no excitement with its treble. I think that recessed treble is what contributes to my dislike of the Corina midrange; there's no treble to balance out the midrange and bass. That kills the reverb and air and dulls the impact, so what's left is like you're listening to music being performed in a sound-dampened chamber. Having spent a bit of time in such chambers for fan noise testing, vocals get this intense quality when inside those rooms, similar to what I hear on the Corina and other DCA headphones, and I find that strange and unwanted in my music. The other lovely part of the X9000 treble is the air and decay that it adds. I think it's part of that rich decay I hear with strings. It also makes drums pleasing to me; there's that emphasized and snappy attack (unlike the dulled yet heavy attack on the Corina), less sustain, but more pronounced air in the decay. It reminds me of the drums I've heard in real life with their sharp impact when the drumstick hits, then this "ghost" of the note suspended in the air as the sound reverberates around the room. Note that most of my real-life experiences with instruments have been in large, open venues that are designed to have reverberations, so this affects my perception of what's natural.
The treble is definitely an area where perceptions are going to differ. I suspect that many people would find the treble fatiguing over time. I did not feel any fatigue during the 3-hour demo session, but there were times when my eyes felt a bit sore, which I have found is one of the symptoms of listening fatigue for me. But I was also listening to other bright headphones then, so perhaps one of the others was causing this issue. In the last half hour when I was basically just listening to the X9K, I did not notice discomfort. I think the Sus is sus. But I'm blessed with an HRTF or a neurological bias towards interpreting elevated treble as sparkle and air rather than painful sharpness. [As an aside, MRI scans have shown that different people's brains activate different pathways even when the same sound is encountered. Of note, there was research that our perception of pitch changes differs with which side of the Heschl's gyrus sees greater activation.] Other people not so blessed will likely find the X9K irritating in the treble. Your mileage may vary
Finally, I'll cover bass. I've already covered the decay of percussion instruments when discussing treble (as I think a lot of what people perceive in drums and percussive instruments is actually a function of treble behavior). I think the actual bass is good and well balanced. It's certainly present, at least when driven by the BHSE. I find that it has good attack, with an emphasis on the "snap" in the leading edge. That makes percussion very engaging to me. The Corina has much more perceived bass quantity, so that the bass there has that "woom-woom" characteristic of bass-heavy headphones which to me robs the bass of its "drive" and energy in the transients. But I find the X9K to have that satisfying and energetic snap and crack to bass notes. And you can hear all of the detail in bass notes from attack to decay while on the Corina I find bass to have a bit of a droning character due to how omnipresent it is. I think there is good bass impact, going along with the emphasized attack. I think there's a drop-off in the lowest sub-bass, as I can hear more of that sub-bass "whump" when I listen to the same bass notes on the Susvara driven by the CFA3. But the vast majority of my music doesn't heavily lean on the sub-bass below 40 Hz, even the EDM. The X9000 sounded very impressive even on the EDM that I usually listen to. I find that it renders the beat, which is driven by percussion transients, so well that the music is energetic and engaging even without the deepest sub-bass rumble.
All in all, I found the SR-X9000 to be an extremely engaging, energetic, and open-sounding headphone. It offers a compelling spatial presentation of sounds that creates a convincing illusion of space between sounds. It has an emphasized and forward midrange that gives great clarity to vocals and strings in particular, but manages to mostly avoid the intensity and shoutiness of other mid-forward headphones. While bass isn't the star of the show, it plays the supporting role well with sharp, emphasized leading edges of bass note transients that prevents bass from feeling dull despite its lack of overall bass extension. I found the sound to be very addicting and very engaging. While I can see myself and others wanting a complementary headphone with a more relaxed presentation, I think that for those like me who value openness, layering, sparkle, and energy in sound, it would be difficult to find anything better at a sane price.
Last edited:
Great read, thanks. I think what you mention here might be my favorite thing about the X9000, strings are just magical on it. They're sharp but also have all the resonance you'd expect from a string vibrating in the air. I made a lil drawing of how strings feel to me on the X9000.
Basically the X9000 is detailed enough to get the vibrato in the string and not just the string if that makes sense. Strings just feel so "vibrationally full" on the X9000 and I don't mean full in the sense that the sound is muddled/bloated, I mean full in that it has texture and body.
Attachments
Last edited:
SolarCetacean
500+ Head-Fier
On to the comparisons. I'll link two comparisons I made with the SR-L700mk2 and the DCA Corina last night. I'll just briefly cover them here and write more about comparisons vs the Susvara and HD800S.
X9K vs L700mk2
X9K vs Corina
First off, I tried to give as much benefit as possible to the other headphones. At CAF, I heard the X9000 first, and spent the rest of the show comparing everything else to the X9K and seeing if they would measure up. I don't think that allowed me to fully appreciate the other headphones, especially the Corina, so at HeadAmp, I listened to the Corina first, then the HD800S, then the Susvara, and finally the X9K.
Unfortunately, while I could maintain that sort of evaluative mindset for much of the demo, once I got to the X9K, I couldn't keep myself in that mode. I just enjoyed the X9K too much to start immediately evaluating its sound. I've always thought the "I got lost in the music and forgot to take notes" to be such audiophile writer fluff, but it actually happened to me. Maybe I've become an audiophile writer. But I'm not even paid to write this! It's often hard to put into words what exactly a headphone sounds like, and the X9000 fit my overall sound preferences so well that it was difficult to characterize its sound at first other than "addicting", which isn't helpful to anyone else.
I'll briefly cover the X9000 vs L700mk2 comparison. I had brought my L700 along to see if the pricier Stax was worth the upgrade. Yes, yes it is. But the L700 brings a set of characteristics that is different enough to the X9000 to warrant a place in my collection. The L700 is noticeably warmer, with more upper bass and generally less treble compared to the X9K. This will probably appeal to many people. The soundstage on the L700 is smaller, but has a triangular shape (think of a pie slice, with you at the crust and looking towards the point, and sounds distributed along the filling) that creates more of a defined stage rather than the open sphere projected by the X9000. The X9000 is more spacious, and the L700's interesting shape can sometimes break panning or spiraling elements in songs (e.g. the spiraling synth at 3:39 in 'Warrior's Vigil' by Satellite Empire). The X9000 has more overall treble, which may be irritating to some, but the L700 has a treble spike around 11.5 KHz, which may be more irritating to some people.
I've already made many comparisons with the Corina in my main impressions post above (as another purpose of the HeadAmp trip was to demo the Corina on a powerful amp), but going from the X9K to the Corina was like boosting the bass and turning down the treble, then pulling everything closer to me. I don't think the graphs really capture how loud and prominent the bass gets on the Corina when you volume match around the midrange. The upper harmonics on the Corina are so attenuated that they're hard to hear over the mids and bass, yet both elements sound off when you suppress those harmonics. Bass sounds dulled, like snare drums hitting with a "thud" instead of the X9K's sharp "snap". The decay of notes is also suppressed on the Corina, so there's no air following the impact. Instead, the note is sustained for slightly longer, but the decay is truncated. It sounds like music played in a heavily damped recording room, and I don't find that presentation engaging or even convincing vs the music I've heard in real life. The mids get too intense and directed, without the openness that I enjoy in sound. The layering of sounds disappears, with everything being roughly the same distance away. Ultimately, the Corina just isn't for me. I know other people love that sort of mid-centric, more damped sound, but I want energy, air, and openness. I concur with those who believe that for the expense of an electrostatic chain, it's better to lean into the characteristics that electrostatics do well. If I wanted that sort of mid-centric, closed-in sound, I'd just get the Expanse.
In the clearest sign yet that I've gone insane, I requested to demo the HD800S. I keep trying out the HD800S expecting that this time, I'll really click with its sound and find it interesting and compelling. I've never felt compelled by the HD800S in all of my previous demoes, but this time, it will be different.
It was not.
To my ears, the HD800S provides great soundstage size, and that's about it. The 800 is a little bit wider and deeper than the X9000, but only just. It's not a huge difference, and much of the increase in depth is likely attributed to the thinner midrange. That has the effect of making vocals sound withdrawn, and our brains interpreting that as distance. And the 800 does not have the layering that the X9000 has. As I mentioned before, sounds are distributed in an arc in front of me. The arc is slightly further away, but is flatter in depth. Like imagine you're in the middle of a circular pizza pie, and all of the toppings are placed on the crust. The X9K scatters the toppings across the pie. Of course, this is a great exaggeration, as the 800 isn't all that wide in the grand scheme of things, nothing like speakers, but I didn't find the 800's spatial presentation to be worth much vs the X9000. You're giving up a lot of layering to gain a little bit of size. Now I'll say that the lack of layering does give the 800 a more cohesive presentation, so it avoids what can be an overly focused spatial presentation.
The bass on the HD800S is softer in impact and has a more "rounded" attack/decay compared to the sharp attack and airy decay on the X9000. I think some people like that rounded rendering, but I generally don't like it as much. The 800 is both rounded in timbre and soft in quantity, which I find makes the bass neither incisive nor powerful. If I wanted incisive bass, the X9000 (and Susvara and Shangri-La Jr) does that very well. If I wanted rounded but powerful and hard-hitting bass, either the Sony MDR-Z1R or the Yamaha YH-5000 fits that bill. If I wanted lots of softer-hitting bass, the DCA Expanse would fill that niche. The HD800, to my ears, does none of the above. It's just soft.
Also, some notes, whether percussion or vocals or instruments, can be sharp or tinny. I suspect it's the treble spike making itself known. Now, I didn't find the HD800S to be sharp, sibilant, or grating. I'm apparently not too bothered by the treble peak. I found the treble presentation on the HD800 to sound a bit "crinkly" sometimes, like the sound when you're crinkling aluminum foil. To me, the overall tonal balance was neutral-bright with nothing really standing out other than the occasional sharpness. But it offers nothing that a Hifiman couldn't do well either. I find my Shangri-La Jr to have a more engaging vocal performance despite a similar midrange dip as the HD800S. The Sennheiser unfortunately didn't have engaging vocals; they just sounded withdrawn and muffled rather than "breathy".
The Susvara was the only headphone that could compete with the SR-X9000 in its traditional strengths. It had both soundstage size and layering, more similar to the Stax, and while it didn't have the vocal emphasis and central positioning, being more similar to the thinner and distant vocals of the HD800S, those vocals were more cohesive with the rest of the sounds in the presentation, not sticking out in front as much. The Susvara had noticeably more sub-bass than the X9000, and bass notes had more heft in their impact and leading edges, though slightly less snap. I thought the Susvara was a slight bit more sibilant than the X9000, with "scratchier" vocals. And notably, there was something up with the treble where the leading edges of many transients had this treble sheen to them. I could hear it on snare drums, cymbals, some guitar plucks, and maybe some vocals too. It's like the edges were too "crispy" in sound, like some treble component of the transient was over-emphasized. I did not find this to be a discomforting sharpness, just a distracting sharpness. This is something that I've heard others mention, and I didn't understand before, but now with more listening time I can see where they're coming from. But generally, I found the Susvara to be a more relaxed take on the same overall sort of sound as the X9000, with more bass, a less prominent midrange, and more spatial cohesion while retaining the layering and most of the treble performance of the Stax.
The main problem that the Susvara faces is that I already have the Shangri-La Jr. And they're quite similar. I wrote a comparison here. I think the SGL Jr is more relaxed and smoother compared to the Susvara, so if I wanted a complement to the Stax with those qualities, I would rather have the SGL Jr. Then I also wouldn't need to invest in a Susvara chain.
To conclude these comparisons, I want to make it clear that none of these headphones that I listened to are bad in any absolute sense. I know I roasted the HD800S here, but I'm not saying that it's a bad headphone; it's a fine headphone that doesn't do anything to meaningfully elevate it over any other high-end headphone that I've heard. I find it boring and unengaging, but that's just me, comparing it against my set of reference points. I hope I explained in my comparison what makes the HD800S sound boring to me in comparison against the SR-X9000, but I hope no one comes away thinking that the HD800S is a terrible headphone. It just falls short of my desires and preferences in sound. All of the headphones here are very good in multiple dimensions and they're mainly different flavors of sound, and at this high level, it's the small things that make all the difference. And for me, the X9000 came out on top subjectively by a significant margin.
To end with an analogy, all of the headphones here are world-class gymnasts. My wife is interested in gymnastics, so I had this analogy on my mind. Every Olympic/World gymnast is far, far better than the average person at their events. Most people would probably never even get on the apparatus, but these athletes are doing all sorts of flips and acrobatics. You'll never see one gymnast score a 15 while another one scores a 3 in the same event. Medals are often decided on tenths of a point. It's the same with these headphones. All of them score highly, but one has too much treble. The other has too little impact. The third has too much bass. That's just like those gymnastics deductions where one athlete took a half step forward in the landing and another one didn't do three full rotations in their spin. For me, the SR-X9000 is akin to Simone Biles. She's won the most medals, but she's not flawless in her performance. My wife says that Biles sometimes makes more mistakes in her execution than her competitors in an event. But she wins medals because her moves are so difficult that even if she doesn't stick the landing, she still gets among the highest scores. The X9000 is similar; it's not a perfect headphone, and I've pointed out some issues and potential issues with its sound presentation and cohesion, but it is so interesting and enjoyable that it still wins gold in my book.
X9K vs L700mk2
X9K vs Corina
First off, I tried to give as much benefit as possible to the other headphones. At CAF, I heard the X9000 first, and spent the rest of the show comparing everything else to the X9K and seeing if they would measure up. I don't think that allowed me to fully appreciate the other headphones, especially the Corina, so at HeadAmp, I listened to the Corina first, then the HD800S, then the Susvara, and finally the X9K.
Unfortunately, while I could maintain that sort of evaluative mindset for much of the demo, once I got to the X9K, I couldn't keep myself in that mode. I just enjoyed the X9K too much to start immediately evaluating its sound. I've always thought the "I got lost in the music and forgot to take notes" to be such audiophile writer fluff, but it actually happened to me. Maybe I've become an audiophile writer. But I'm not even paid to write this! It's often hard to put into words what exactly a headphone sounds like, and the X9000 fit my overall sound preferences so well that it was difficult to characterize its sound at first other than "addicting", which isn't helpful to anyone else.
I'll briefly cover the X9000 vs L700mk2 comparison. I had brought my L700 along to see if the pricier Stax was worth the upgrade. Yes, yes it is. But the L700 brings a set of characteristics that is different enough to the X9000 to warrant a place in my collection. The L700 is noticeably warmer, with more upper bass and generally less treble compared to the X9K. This will probably appeal to many people. The soundstage on the L700 is smaller, but has a triangular shape (think of a pie slice, with you at the crust and looking towards the point, and sounds distributed along the filling) that creates more of a defined stage rather than the open sphere projected by the X9000. The X9000 is more spacious, and the L700's interesting shape can sometimes break panning or spiraling elements in songs (e.g. the spiraling synth at 3:39 in 'Warrior's Vigil' by Satellite Empire). The X9000 has more overall treble, which may be irritating to some, but the L700 has a treble spike around 11.5 KHz, which may be more irritating to some people.
I've already made many comparisons with the Corina in my main impressions post above (as another purpose of the HeadAmp trip was to demo the Corina on a powerful amp), but going from the X9K to the Corina was like boosting the bass and turning down the treble, then pulling everything closer to me. I don't think the graphs really capture how loud and prominent the bass gets on the Corina when you volume match around the midrange. The upper harmonics on the Corina are so attenuated that they're hard to hear over the mids and bass, yet both elements sound off when you suppress those harmonics. Bass sounds dulled, like snare drums hitting with a "thud" instead of the X9K's sharp "snap". The decay of notes is also suppressed on the Corina, so there's no air following the impact. Instead, the note is sustained for slightly longer, but the decay is truncated. It sounds like music played in a heavily damped recording room, and I don't find that presentation engaging or even convincing vs the music I've heard in real life. The mids get too intense and directed, without the openness that I enjoy in sound. The layering of sounds disappears, with everything being roughly the same distance away. Ultimately, the Corina just isn't for me. I know other people love that sort of mid-centric, more damped sound, but I want energy, air, and openness. I concur with those who believe that for the expense of an electrostatic chain, it's better to lean into the characteristics that electrostatics do well. If I wanted that sort of mid-centric, closed-in sound, I'd just get the Expanse.
In the clearest sign yet that I've gone insane, I requested to demo the HD800S. I keep trying out the HD800S expecting that this time, I'll really click with its sound and find it interesting and compelling. I've never felt compelled by the HD800S in all of my previous demoes, but this time, it will be different.
It was not.
To my ears, the HD800S provides great soundstage size, and that's about it. The 800 is a little bit wider and deeper than the X9000, but only just. It's not a huge difference, and much of the increase in depth is likely attributed to the thinner midrange. That has the effect of making vocals sound withdrawn, and our brains interpreting that as distance. And the 800 does not have the layering that the X9000 has. As I mentioned before, sounds are distributed in an arc in front of me. The arc is slightly further away, but is flatter in depth. Like imagine you're in the middle of a circular pizza pie, and all of the toppings are placed on the crust. The X9K scatters the toppings across the pie. Of course, this is a great exaggeration, as the 800 isn't all that wide in the grand scheme of things, nothing like speakers, but I didn't find the 800's spatial presentation to be worth much vs the X9000. You're giving up a lot of layering to gain a little bit of size. Now I'll say that the lack of layering does give the 800 a more cohesive presentation, so it avoids what can be an overly focused spatial presentation.
The bass on the HD800S is softer in impact and has a more "rounded" attack/decay compared to the sharp attack and airy decay on the X9000. I think some people like that rounded rendering, but I generally don't like it as much. The 800 is both rounded in timbre and soft in quantity, which I find makes the bass neither incisive nor powerful. If I wanted incisive bass, the X9000 (and Susvara and Shangri-La Jr) does that very well. If I wanted rounded but powerful and hard-hitting bass, either the Sony MDR-Z1R or the Yamaha YH-5000 fits that bill. If I wanted lots of softer-hitting bass, the DCA Expanse would fill that niche. The HD800, to my ears, does none of the above. It's just soft.
Also, some notes, whether percussion or vocals or instruments, can be sharp or tinny. I suspect it's the treble spike making itself known. Now, I didn't find the HD800S to be sharp, sibilant, or grating. I'm apparently not too bothered by the treble peak. I found the treble presentation on the HD800 to sound a bit "crinkly" sometimes, like the sound when you're crinkling aluminum foil. To me, the overall tonal balance was neutral-bright with nothing really standing out other than the occasional sharpness. But it offers nothing that a Hifiman couldn't do well either. I find my Shangri-La Jr to have a more engaging vocal performance despite a similar midrange dip as the HD800S. The Sennheiser unfortunately didn't have engaging vocals; they just sounded withdrawn and muffled rather than "breathy".
The Susvara was the only headphone that could compete with the SR-X9000 in its traditional strengths. It had both soundstage size and layering, more similar to the Stax, and while it didn't have the vocal emphasis and central positioning, being more similar to the thinner and distant vocals of the HD800S, those vocals were more cohesive with the rest of the sounds in the presentation, not sticking out in front as much. The Susvara had noticeably more sub-bass than the X9000, and bass notes had more heft in their impact and leading edges, though slightly less snap. I thought the Susvara was a slight bit more sibilant than the X9000, with "scratchier" vocals. And notably, there was something up with the treble where the leading edges of many transients had this treble sheen to them. I could hear it on snare drums, cymbals, some guitar plucks, and maybe some vocals too. It's like the edges were too "crispy" in sound, like some treble component of the transient was over-emphasized. I did not find this to be a discomforting sharpness, just a distracting sharpness. This is something that I've heard others mention, and I didn't understand before, but now with more listening time I can see where they're coming from. But generally, I found the Susvara to be a more relaxed take on the same overall sort of sound as the X9000, with more bass, a less prominent midrange, and more spatial cohesion while retaining the layering and most of the treble performance of the Stax.
The main problem that the Susvara faces is that I already have the Shangri-La Jr. And they're quite similar. I wrote a comparison here. I think the SGL Jr is more relaxed and smoother compared to the Susvara, so if I wanted a complement to the Stax with those qualities, I would rather have the SGL Jr. Then I also wouldn't need to invest in a Susvara chain.
To conclude these comparisons, I want to make it clear that none of these headphones that I listened to are bad in any absolute sense. I know I roasted the HD800S here, but I'm not saying that it's a bad headphone; it's a fine headphone that doesn't do anything to meaningfully elevate it over any other high-end headphone that I've heard. I find it boring and unengaging, but that's just me, comparing it against my set of reference points. I hope I explained in my comparison what makes the HD800S sound boring to me in comparison against the SR-X9000, but I hope no one comes away thinking that the HD800S is a terrible headphone. It just falls short of my desires and preferences in sound. All of the headphones here are very good in multiple dimensions and they're mainly different flavors of sound, and at this high level, it's the small things that make all the difference. And for me, the X9000 came out on top subjectively by a significant margin.
To end with an analogy, all of the headphones here are world-class gymnasts. My wife is interested in gymnastics, so I had this analogy on my mind. Every Olympic/World gymnast is far, far better than the average person at their events. Most people would probably never even get on the apparatus, but these athletes are doing all sorts of flips and acrobatics. You'll never see one gymnast score a 15 while another one scores a 3 in the same event. Medals are often decided on tenths of a point. It's the same with these headphones. All of them score highly, but one has too much treble. The other has too little impact. The third has too much bass. That's just like those gymnastics deductions where one athlete took a half step forward in the landing and another one didn't do three full rotations in their spin. For me, the SR-X9000 is akin to Simone Biles. She's won the most medals, but she's not flawless in her performance. My wife says that Biles sometimes makes more mistakes in her execution than her competitors in an event. But she wins medals because her moves are so difficult that even if she doesn't stick the landing, she still gets among the highest scores. The X9000 is similar; it's not a perfect headphone, and I've pointed out some issues and potential issues with its sound presentation and cohesion, but it is so interesting and enjoyable that it still wins gold in my book.
Last edited:
reading these recent posts about the X9K.. realizing it's the only stat which I really like, and wondering to myself why I haven't pulled the trigger yet.
I can think of about 6000 reasons why you're hesitating
Users who are viewing this thread
