[VandyMan]

.

 

[SeaWo|f]

Speaking of Psvane, how is their EL34? Guessing not on the same level as great NOS models?

I can't compare to nos types but at 90ish per tube they are not on that cost level. For a new production tube I am happy with them. They look pretty to fwiw.

And yes I agree @Whitigir is a broken record !!

 

[SeaWo|f]

I have no idea how the quote system screwed up that post but It wont let me fix it either ... argh

Edit :: NM I found it. I guess about 8 shots of Vodka gives me clarity.

 

[weasel1979]

Sorry I wanted to quote someone who asked about what I meant by "thinner" but I wasnt able to quote that person somehow.:

One difference between planars and electrostates is that the latter sound less meaty, they sound thinner. Planars sound meaty and kind of liquid, whereas electrostates sound airy, thin and weightless, bouncy. Planars tend to have more weight and density in their sound, whereas electrostates sound more transparent. There are mamy other differences of course (f.e. best treble goes to electrostates for sure) but I only wanted to explain what I meant by "thinner". No matter the amp, an electrostat cannot compete with the thickness of a top planar nor does it try to.

 

[Whitigir]

That is not what I hear and I am hearing Stax

 

[weasel1979]

I didnt know this is even up for debate. Stax fans think of it as a strength I thought. Well everything is subjective..

 

[Whitigir]

The strength of Stax is that nothing is overly emphasized or bumped up, and that is different than “lacking behind”, airiness and open, yes, very natural and realistic

 

[Rhamnetin]

I think part of that thickness isn't only heavy mid bass presence (SR-007 has lots, more than many planars) and bass impact (SR-009 has more than most planars), but as weasel1979 indicated the wide open airiness and lightning quick decay of Stax just creates a different sound than the slower decay and thinner treble of a non electrostat that can put more emphasis on the lower end, and the sound lingering for longer (due to slower decay and less openness) makes for that "meaty" sound.

Calling Stax "thin" though is misleading since that sounds like a negative attribute (e.g. small thin sounding instruments when in reality Stax has the most full bodied impactful instruments by far).

 

[Whitigir]

I think part of that thickness isn't only heavy mid bass presence (SR-007 has lots, more than many planars) and bass impact (SR-009 has more than most planars), but as weasel1979 indicated the wide open airiness and lightning quick decay of Stax just creates a different sound than the slower decay and thinner treble of a non electrostat that can put more emphasis on the lower end.

Spot on! Every dynamic headphones I have come across will have either emphasized this sections or that sections. Never seen them being so balanced (Compare to ES). Even sound pressures distributions within the housing itself can be measured this way too. Especially dynamic headphones are heavily influenced by the housing, the standing waves, and the resonances. Stax by design and technicality has the “least” effects of those said above, and also moving at the speed that would surpass anything dynamic or planar. That is technicality.

When you have the correct system, the Stax just sound unbelievable, and only Stax of different kinds will bring alternated sound signatures.

Why do we have Planar again ? Right! Inspired by ElectroStat ! Why did Sennheiser come out with Orpheus ? Right! Inspired by Stax ! LoL. Not to say that Stax is the best or untouchable, but to think Dynamic have anything better than Stax is just personal preferences, and I do not criticize that. However, I am not comfortable when people call Stax “Lacks” this or that . The only thing your Stax is lacking is the depth of your pocket

**Also** if you think Electro Stat is so easy to make to performances, ask those DIY folks, and Hi-fi Man LoL!

 

[Jones Bob]

Headphone listening to stereo sources is absolutely artificial in its reproduction of perceived sound. People tend to adapt and mentally accept its flaws after a short time.

Many times in auditioning headphones, one’s attention is immediately drawn to exaggerated aspects of the reproduction. As head time with those headphones increase, those aspects become liabilities as identified being the headphone’ s inherent sonic signature. Everything heard played over them will sound “colored” to some extent to that listener. So begins the upgrade itch.

It takes awhile to live with to really recognize and appreciate the subtle qualities that STAX brings to one’s overall listening experience and enjoyment. They simply get out of the way between you and the music. It’s a personal journey of self awareness and discovery.

It’s taken literally years for me building amps, buying many different STAX models, and putting together the rest on my system to fully taylor the sound to my headphone preferences.

It’s been a long journey climbing my headphone Mt Everest, and still not at the top yet (if ever). Knowing what I know now, I would never consider just taking a helicopter to the top. The view there would be much less engaging. And after a short while would become boring.

 

[weasel1979]

Whitigir, I wasnt talking about dynamic headphones, I dont like their sound compared to planars and electrostates, they dont stand a chance imo. But between planars and electostates, I am very interested to keep seeing that battle unfold. Its a great time for headphones and yes, I also love Stax headphones, but that doesnt mean I think they are perfect at EVERYthing, come on.

 

[VRacer-111]

Not really a fan of most planars (too flat and slightly dull sounding to me), but love dynamics and STAX Lambdas. What I care about in listening to music is dynamics and punch along with adequate detail and clarity, and good body to the sound. STAX are indeed top level 'phones', absolutey love what they do. However, they can't do bass presence/feel like a dynamic headphone, nothing usually does other than a dynamic. Sure the dynamics have more distortion and are a less precise, slower driver... but that doesn't matter when it comes to the feeling you get from the sound they produce. Technicalities aren't everything, especially with less than perfect sounding music.

The 3 headphones that basically have the entirety of my music listening time now are the modded TH-X00PH, the new HD58X, and modded SR-L300 Ltds - two dynamics and the STAX. About half of my listening time is with the STAX. Sometimes, I just feel like jamming out and listening to bass driven, impactful and dynamic music - so TH-X00PHs. Other times, I just want a more detailed and balanced sound and relax a little more - so the HD58Xs. And then there is the times feel like actually diving into the music and fully explore everything about it: STAX Lamdas FTW - absolutely excell at that beyond most anything else.

 

[Contrails]

I beg to differ. The LCD-2 Rev 2 and even the LCD-X are excellent in the Bass region. The X has a straight line going into well Sub-bass section on the charts. Compare this to the HD650/660/800S, they all lack the sub-bass of the mentioned planars. The HD650/660S have a mid-bass hump but can't produce the Bass detail, tightness or speed of the LCD-X. The Sub-bass can actually become distracting at times on the LCD-X but there is hardly any on the mentioned dynamics. A middle ground would be perfect. The LCD-4 which I haven't heard so I can not comment on it but quite a few people say it's a step up from the LCD-X. I have heard the HD650 from mediocre to uber expensive amps and is one the best value headphones out there! It's one of my favourite headphones. Where the planars fall short is the soundstage and imaging superpowers of the dynamics aka HD800/HD800S and the AKG K1000. The older planars were also guilty of Frequency roll-off at the top.

The L700 is the HD650 of the Stax line. It has a slight mid-bass hump like the HD650 but the treble was a little hot for me (amp dependant as many have mentioned). But still has the technicalities of an electro-stat. Beautiful sounding headphone especially if you are just want a fun sounding e-stat (perfect for most genres). Bigger soundstage than the HD650 with better imaging. Not soft/delicate sounding at all. I think a powerful KGST/BHSE with the L700 would give you plenty of meat/Bass in the sound while still providing the clarity.

My headphone journey started 5 years ago when I wanted more bass out of the HD280 pro. And now I sit with the SR007 Mk1 around my head. It has exactly the right amount of bass. If the track calls for it, it hits hard but when not required it backs off but still adds weight to the sound. The song 'Within' on Random Access Memories is my test for this. The Piano at the start is sublime to listen to. It has plenty of sub-bass rumble too. Almost as good the LCD-X. Couple this with a slight laid-back sound but the treble still extends beautifully. Some members like Birgir prefer the SR007 MK1 to the SR009 because of it's powerful sound. Almost like if Sennheiser were to make an estat version of the HD650, the SR007 would be it. Wait a minute, He-1...

Is it the perfect headphones? No. It lacks the soundstage and imaging of the HD800S, might not be as fast and detailed as the SR009 or the He-1. But I don't need that super wide and soundstage as I hardly listen to symphonies. But for rest of my music, it does a fantastic job, especially in the Bass.

 

[Rhamnetin]

^ Looks like VRacer was commenting on Stax bass not planar bass.

But on the contrary, I can't name a single open back dynamic headphone with more bass slam than the SR-009. In fact I can't name a single open back dynamic headphone with a single advantage in bass reproduction than the SR-009 with a great amp.

Having owned the SR-009, Audeze LCD-4, and LFF Code-6, the SR-009's bass is far superior to the Code-6's in every way except for sheer extension which in this case is actually meaningless. The Code-6 extends down close to 10 Hz while the SR-009 stops at right around 20 flat. Makes no real difference in practice especially since the Code-6's sub 25 Hz presence is super weak. The Code-6's bass is very muddy compared to the SR-009 and also softer.

The LCD-4 has amazing extension (about 10 Hz deeper than SR-009), a bit more punch, and overall a lot more heft and growl so to speak. The bass is monstrous and has very good texture and detail and transparency. But it's still veiled and almost two dimensionsal compared to the SR-009 bass.

Due to the SR-009's mind blowing transparency and resolution, you can hear so much more detail and depth in the bass even compared to the LCD-4 and it's not even close. It lifts a veil and lets you see into the bass so to speak, the texture and transparency and detail blow away the LCD-4 even in this bass vs bass comparison.

All the SR-009 gives up to the LCD-4 in bass performance is 20 Hz vs 10 Hz max extension (estimated to my ears plus the test I use is limited to 10 Hz), and overall less bass presence. The bass of the LCD-4 is always there at least subtly rumbling in the background waiting to explode, and when it does explode there's a bit more of it.

That's my experience at least. The SR-009's bass is by far my favorite and I listen to lots of bassy music such as heavy metal and rock and even rap. On heavy metal songs with extremely fast drums, that is one of the areas where the SR-009's bass performance just obliterates the LCD-4 and every other headphone I have used.

I am mildly curious about the Abyss Phi (CC) which some here have said edges out the LCD-4 but meh... a non electrostat just can't reach this level of realism so I don't really care.

And to think the SR-009 costs less than the LCD-4, Abyss Phi, Susvara, Utopia... and then there's the SR-007 with its modest price. Going from top tier non estats to a good SR-009 system seriously reminds me of going from cheap gaming headsets to good $200 open backs. Since that's when the upgrade was big enough to cause me to hear things I never heard in songs before, and when it allowed me to hear music differently. Going from even an HD 598 to an HD 800 is a smaller upgrade to me than HD 800 to SR-009.

 

[Contrails]

Cheers Rhamnetin, I had read Vracer's post incorrectly.