[amartignano]

Hallo everyone,

I have a Stax Lambda Nova Signature powered by a solid-state SRM-3 amplifier since a month ago.
I've bought it (used, of course) because I wanted to "discover" the world of electrostatic sound, that I've read many time to be "different", or, better said, to have some different abilities, compared to the "dynamic haedphones' sound".

Here they are, with some other stuff...

I have to admit that the sound of this system is really, really good.

Listening to symphonic, classical, and whatever acoustic, the sound balance is almost perfect IMHO, the frequency extension at both extremes seems infinite, the dynamic appropriate.
But what is really on another planet respect to the dynamic headphones I've owned is the ability to follow the smallest signal changes, the lowest detail with great speed and accuracy. Also the bigger signal changes are accomplished (in classical music) with no apparent problems.
The soundstage is really good, I've found it not to be so "out of head" as I read many times. But it has a great sense of air, a very good separation of the instruments and a perfect definition of the different planes in the 3rd dimension. Also the dimension's proportion between the instruments are very well rendered. Another thing that I've heard only in this "earspeaker", is what happened to violins and all the instruments which have fundamentals or their strongest harmonics in the region that goes from mid-highs to high-end: it's an ability to render these sounds, their extension that is really near to the reality, better than in any headphones I've listened to. The best of this Stax is the ability to reproduce the smallest details in a very natural way, giving however an equilibrated and "warm" sound ("warm" as the reality's "warm").

The only "problem" I've heard, is a somewhat slight graininess in the mid-highs, that sometimes tends to give a little "artificial electric sound" to some voices/instrument. But is really a little thing, and I'm not so sure that it's the earspeaker or the recording (infact this graininess is not present in all records).

But there's a "but"...

When it comes to rock etc... the Lambda seems to lack dynamic and "fun", especially in the bass region. They seem to "polite". Not a real problem, as I take my dynamic system for this genre of music, but I want to discuss with the head-fier community this feature. Why? Because it's very strange.

I explain...

Take the last movement of Saint-Saens 3rd symphony, the dynamic in the bass region here (organ + full orchestra + big drum) is really frightening, you are yet in a "fortissimo" and you ask your system to give another peak of power in the bass region, in the real first octave.
Here the Lambda sings, they seem to not have any limit. Full sound to the last Hz.

So... why with Massive Attack they are so "polite"? And... can't stand with "too" loud volumes?

IMHO there is not a problem of extension (the basses are all here), it's more probably a lack of "dynamic" in the first octaves. But it seems to lack dynamics in rock where the dynamic is not really that much, and seems to have no problems in great symphonic where the dynamics are truly "frightening" for any hi-fi system.

Are the earspeaker "perfect" and many rock recordings bad? Or are the earspeaker a tad shy in the bass region? If so... why they are shy with rock and not with symphonic (which is the most power demanding music genre)?!?

Discussion open...

bye
Andrea

Ps. anyway, I "love" this earspeakers.

But they are not better than my DT880. They are different points of view in music listening. I can't choose the best between them.
PPs. I hope my english was clear enough...

 

[Snake]

It is probably a lack of midbass warmth, the area that in most popular music recordings is emphasized and actually represents the greatest apparent "bass" in the recording.

What you are noticing in acoustic recordings is Stax' generally flat, and somewhat extended (for a headphone), bass response. As these recordings are acoustic the bass in not being 'artificially' emphasized nor synthetically created.

For rock you actually do not want extension for apparent 'punch', you want midbass thump. Significantly different, and if you look at the responses of speakers most popular for rock reproduction you will see that midbass hump - 80 to 200 hz - more apparent. Remove the midbass hump, get a flat response, and many people consider that - during pop music reproduction - as "dull".

I have proven this many times. With old B&W show someone a DM xxx series, with midbass warmth, playing rock and they love it. Same manufacturer, B&W, show them a upper-end 8xx series with the midbass hump removed and they consider it "dull", "thin", "no bass, man!".

In rock recordings the bass does not truly extend very deeply - drum and bass guitar are the two greatest sources. As a bass drum's greatest apparent frequencies are in the midbass region, not the deep bass

http://www.tabla.com/tablaph1.html

, and these are the regions that audio engineers emphasize in the mixdown

http://www.prosoundweb.com/live/labbest/chest/chsl.php

, removing a boosting emphasis from the reproduction system of those frequencies leads to a reduction in the "feel", and therefore a belief that the system is not accurately reflecting the original sound. Of course, technically, the opposite is true - the system is 'flat', relatively - but without the double boost of the rock-important 80-200Hz range (boost by engineer in mixdown, boost by playback system) many people deem it 'dull'.

 

[TheSloth]

Which Sony's MDR-SAXXXX are they in the picture? How do they compare with your electrostat system and 880's?

Edit: Great post, Snake. When equalising for greatest bass impact, one accentuates the 80-200 region, and reduces the level from 80 down. Those lower frequencies are felt far more than they are heard, and have much slower propogation and decay.

 

[amartignano]

They are the SA5000.

The listening was partly very good, partly not.

The good is almost everything, dynamic, ability to render details in a way that resembles the electrostatic way, extensions at both extremes (although I've noticed some problems in the finale of the 3rd symphony of Saint-Saens: where the DT880 or the Lambda give you that "tunderous" feeling of the big drum, the SA5000 surprisingly doesn't), very good headstage, quickness, clear bass, impact.

But there was a thing that I can not listen to: it's a resonance in the mid-highs, that almost "killed" the real timbre of violins and voices. I know many people does not pay much attention to this, but for me the mids are too badly colored. A sound too artificial for my tastes, doesn't hold a candle to the Dt880 neither to the Stax. And... I prefer listening to the good old K240M than with the Sa5000, only because of the mids and the correctness of the timbre, which is "mandatory" in my idea of reproduction (in which I want at least that the timbre of the real acoustic instruments are faithfully respected)

bye
Andrea

 

[amartignano]

Hi snake, your post is very interesting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake It is probably a lack of midbass warmth, the area that in most popular music recordings is emphasized and actually represents the greatest apparent "bass" in the recording.

Yes, the mid-bass of the Lambda is very very correct, maybe a little "too much". But with symphonic is just perfect.

Quote:

For rock you actually do not want extension for apparent 'punch', you want midbass thump. Significantly different, and if you look at the responses of speakers most popular for rock reproduction you will see that midbass hump - 80 to 200 hz - more apparent. Remove the midbass hump, get a flat response, and many people consider that - during pop music reproduction - as "dull".

Yes, that's probably a reason.


I'm always more convinced that the best in headphone is to have at least two systems, complementary in some ways.

Anyway, I have to admit that the DT880 does all good for my tastes, from classical to rock.
Now I'm very happy with both systems, but if I have to choose between them, I'll chose the dynamic one. (...with great regrets for the electrostat...)

bye
Andrea

 

[philodox]

Hybrids all the way...

 

[amartignano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by philodox Hybrids all the way...

Hi Philodox! I've to admit that your posts always give me a strong will to search and buy a K340. Once I was very near to buy one on ebay, but at the very last minute somone beat me for only 1 euro!

They are very interesting headphones, it's a pity that AKG does not produce them anymore.

Andrea

 

[philodox]

Quote:

Originally Posted by amartignano They are very interesting headphones, it's a pity that AKG does not produce them anymore.

I know... you would think that if anything they would be able to improve on the design and make them more consistant... my only gripe with the K340 is the 'two versions' that sound very different. Both good though.

 

[ephemere]

Quote:

Originally Posted by amartignano I prefer listening to the good old K240M than with the Sa5000, only because of the mids and the correctness of the timbre,

I own both the K240M and the SA5000. For midrange and correctness of timbre, they aren't even in the same league. The K240M is warm, velvety, and easy to listen to, but does not have the accuracy and transparency of the SA5000. The SA5000 is definitely not for everyone. I've been hearing many recording edits that I've never heard before. I think a lot of folks would rather not have recording discontinuities thrust into their ears. Artificial reverb added to older classical and jazz remasters becomes even more obvious. Things like these can give the illusion that the SA5000 is "wrong" or "artificial", when it is often the recording that's artificial. A headphone like the K240M or DT880 will hide much of this and can sound more effortlessly enjoyable as a result. I think this is why the HD600 is so popular.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake For rock you actually do not want extension for apparent 'punch', you want midbass thump.

This aspect is really something to consider, but I don't think it's the main cause for electrostats' somewhat soft bass attacks. The DT 880 has a fairly flat and extended bass response without midbass hump as well and doesn't sound anywhere close to an electrostatic bass in this respect. Nor does the ER-4 which possibly has the flattest bass response of all headphones I've heard. Nevertheless its bass doesn't lack this attack and control that's slightly missing with electrostats. Still its characteristic may not be seen as the ideal match for rock by some, but that doesn't apply to me, whereas I find that electrostatics don't do harder music entirely justice, BTW not just when it comes to the bass. I'd even say Etys and electrostats are farther away from each other than electrostats and dynamic headphones such as the DT 880 when it comes to impulse control and attack.

 

[Snake]

The electrostats have more control, far far more bass impact control than almost any dynamic will achieve. Lower mass with less excursion of the diaphragm for any given reproduced frequency.

However what you are feeling is a culmination of those 2 aspects - less 'impact'. As the diaphragm is larger, but the excursion significantly less, than a dynamic driver the electrostat will never move the volume of air that the dynamic is capable of. You sense this as a lack of "impact" - but the 'impact', the acoustic change of volumes and dynamics of the music are there, fully. What you miss is the auxiliary sensory input - the sensation on the skin's receptors - of the same volume of air movement.

When it comes to low frequencies the skin, sensing air volume or resonance, adds an extra dimension to the sound. Indeed at very low frequencies sensory feel can outweigh sensory sound detection. Listening to electrostats requires one to readjust their own detection systems.

If you examine yourself carefully while listening to a powerful bass reproduction experience, while using electrostats, you will sense a vibration (assuming that the headphone is properly situated on the head) through the pads into your jaw line. For many dynamic can listeners this occurrence goes completely unnoticed due to the focus of the dynamic can listener to attempt to experience the sensation of air movement across the skin surface, as they sense that missing from the electrostat experience.

This manifestation is where many first-time electrostat headphone listeners gain the impression of "music from nowhere - the music simply exists". The electrostatic diaphragm does not stimulate the skin's responses, as a pair of dynamic headphones does, and with a lack of physical bodily stimulation the brain imagines "music from nothingness".

The electrostat is reproducing the same (approximate) level of acoustic “impact” – the audible sensation of changing dynamics at the proper, required volume levels – but the electrostat will lack the physical feedback across the body’s secondary receptors – skin and surface hair. The sound is correct – timbre, dynamics, impact, volume - but the secondary cues are different. This is why electrostats are a bit of an “acquired taste”.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake The electrostats have more control, far far more bass impact control than almost any dynamic will achieve. Lower mass with less excursion of the diaphragm for any given reproduced frequency.

Theoretically, yes. But in the real world it doesn't sound like this. To my ears electrostats do lack control in some way -- maybe the decay is too much delayed? The measurements in the German magazines «Hobby HiFi» and «Stereoplay» indicate this: although theoretically inferior, dynamic speaker drivers have clearly better transient control than electrostats.

You've missed that I've thrown in the Etys. They certainly have no visceral impact at all and cause no sensual perception of sound waves on the skin that could be mixed up with control -- in your scenario. But to me they have much better impulse control than electrostats, also better than circumaural dynamic headphones.

To my ears electrostats have higher resolution and detail, but lower control. Obviously that's not the same.

 

[Snake]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ But to me they have much better impulse control than electrostats, also better than circumaural dynamic headphones.

Possibly a question of driving force versus driven area?

The Ety's when driven by any amplifier in question should presents a lower mass and lower inertia to balance the amp's damping factor. Any good amp should be able to throw around a Ety driver in comparison to any other dynamic can.

I wonder if that is a reasonable assumption. It is the similar version of why a 4 inch midrange, all things being equal, will be more accurate in transients than a 6.

What electrostatic systems did the mags measure? Maybe what they tested could be explained using this issue??

Also, we all discount what is most likely the greatest issue - personality. The Stax are Japanese design. They probably simply are tuned to reflect the "classic" Japanese high-end sound - up front. That is not a "drawback", but a conscious choice.

 

[amartignano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ephemere I own both the K240M and the SA5000. For midrange and correctness of timbre, they aren't even in the same league. The K240M is warm, velvety, and easy to listen to, but does not have the accuracy and transparency of the SA5000. The SA5000 is definitely not for everyone. I've been hearing many recording edits that I've never heard before. I think a lot of folks would rather not have recording discontinuities thrust into their ears. Artificial reverb added to older classical and jazz remasters becomes even more obvious. Things like these can give the illusion that the SA5000 is "wrong" or "artificial", when it is often the recording that's artificial. A headphone like the K240M or DT880 will hide much of this and can sound more effortlessly enjoyable as a result. I think this is why the HD600 is so popular.

I know that SA5000 and K240M are on very different leagues. But in a so high price league as the SA5000 are I expect and want correctness in the mid region, that is IMHO wrong in the SA5000 (which will be a wonderful headphone without this "defect").

You're assuming that the SA5000 are flat and correct and DT880 or HD600/650 not and are more recording-firgiving.

Sorry, but my opinion is the exact contrary: anyway, the most of the "modern" recording of classical music are at least correct in the balance of the sounds and the timbre of the instruments. So I think that are the Sa5000 to be very very colored (and in a bad way). And I can hear this "resonance" in every recording.

I think that for everyone who know very well the real sound of a real orchestra the Sa5k will be colored.

However, de gustibus...

bye
Andrea

PS. I'm OT in a thread started by me... interesting...

 

[amartignano]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snake This manifestation is where many first-time electrostat headphone listeners gain the impression of "music from nowhere - the music simply exists". The electrostatic diaphragm does not stimulate the skin's responses, as a pair of dynamic headphones does, and with a lack of physical bodily stimulation the brain imagines "music from nothingness". The electrostat is reproducing the same (approximate) level of acoustic “impact” – the audible sensation of changing dynamics at the proper, required volume levels – but the electrostat will lack the physical feedback across the body’s secondary receptors – skin and surface hair. The sound is correct – timbre, dynamics, impact, volume - but the secondary cues are different. This is why electrostats are a bit of an “acquired taste”.

Yes, I agree, but not in all aspects.

When there is bass, real deep bass (like an organ or big orchestra drum - what's the english name...), the Lambda give a sense of feeling of the bass that's really good, I think that is beacause the electrostatic diaphragm moves a big amount of air on a wide surface (respect to a typical dynamic speaker).

Anyway, that sense of the sound coming from outside/nowhere/not the earpads (it's not the direction from the sounds arrive, it's really a feature of the sound itself) is a very good and fatigue-free feature of electrostats.

The only dynamic cans I've heard that achieve that way of "breathing of the sound outside the cups" is the AKG K501 (that... lack sometimes impact

they are really similar to an electrostat in some aspects, but they are not as quick and linear).

bye
Andrea