The Stax Thread III

Mar 18, 2017 at 2:46 PM Post #11,416 of 27,944
   
I think this was covered a few times, but my 2 cents based on A/B'ing them for quite some time:
- the L700 sounds more open, more ethereal, with less body, and somewhat coarser highs (needs a smooth amp and source)
- IMHO the 007 Mk2 (latest) is more coherent, with more body, more midbass and more realistic instrument sound, less treble level, and less grain (but less fluid than the 007 Mk1).
I'd pick the 007 Mk2, but I can imagine many people would choose the L700 because the more open sound, and IMHO the L700 is better than most dynamic or planar headphones out there (below 2K certainly).
 
Most Stax dealers have them both, so I'd really recommend listening to both in person. 

 
Crazy, I am sitting here and listening to the SR303 / SRM 1/ MK-2 combination. The listening experience is so satisfying, that I almost cannot imagine, that there is someting even better out there.
 
The music comes so liquid and effortless, like a calm river.
 
Mar 18, 2017 at 3:15 PM Post #11,417 of 27,944
   
I think this was covered a few times, but my 2 cents based on A/B'ing them for quite some time:
- the L700 sounds more open, more ethereal, with less body, and somewhat coarser highs (needs a smooth amp and source)
- IMHO the 007 Mk2 (latest) is more coherent, with more body, more midbass and more realistic instrument sound, less treble level, and less grain (but less fluid than the 007 Mk1).
I'd pick the 007 Mk2, but I can imagine many people would choose the L700 because the more open sound, and IMHO the L700 is better than most dynamic or planar headphones out there (below 2K certainly).
 
Most Stax dealers have them both, so I'd really recommend listening to both in person. 

what do you mean by more open? As in soundstage?
 
Mar 18, 2017 at 3:21 PM Post #11,418 of 27,944
   
As others said before, they (the springs) elevate the pads away from the plate, and also keep distance from the ear.
 
I have tested a lot of times with and without them, with various combinations of pads filling, but every single time I liked more the sound without them.
 
That applies to the 007 Mk1 and 007 Mk2 (current model) - note that the 007 Mk1 spring is slightly larger, and it's assembled in slightly different way than in the 007 Mk2.
 
Even better, you can put 009 pads on the 007 (both Mk1 and Mk2) and they will sound more open - the 009 pads don't accept the springs, and they are not needed.
 
My recommended minimal (and reversible) mod on the 007 Mk2 is this:
1) remove the springs, then if you are brave,
2) take out the filling from the ear pads and cut off the 4mm thick white styrofoam reinforcement from the foam filling. I used a ceramic knife for that and when finished, I could glue the foam back with the original glue layer (if I wanted).
3) re-adjust the head band.
The sound becomes cleaner and more open, bass will have more texture and definition, too. I have also measured them both ways and the measured difference is nearly none, while the sound character did change.
 
You can combine this with Spritzer's port mod, and decide which combination you like most. FWIW I have left the port open on my Mk2.
 
On the 007 Mk1, the best sound (and closest I've ever heard to the Stax SR-Omega) is (so far) obtained as follows:
1) remove the springs,
2) use the 009 pads, but cut off the 4mm styrofoam reinforcement and
3) replace it with 2-2.5 mm thick carbon foam inserts: about 4-5 cm long and 15 mm wide crescent shaped one at the back side, and 2 cm long 10-15 mm wide on the front side.
4) re-adjust the head band: start by making it wider and flatter and bent more inwards on the ends, then work your way backwards until you find the best bass impact with largest sound stage.
The change in sound is absolutely shocking. It opens up, sounds more dynamic, much larger stage, and very smooth and natural. I thought my modded TH900 has killer bass, but this is better, and it's better at everything than any Stax I've heard this side of the SR-Omega (including the 009).
 
Modding the 009 would IMHO make most sense with changing the cables to solid core pure copper and take care of the capacitance. The pad mods don't help the 009 as much as the 007's (the 009 is the most consistent, neutral and reference level Stax I have heard so far), but there is slight change into warmer sound with more bass impact if you do the mod above (you can leave out step 2 if you want, and just add the inserts below the white styrofoam disk but inside the leather pad). However, I would leave the 009 alone, it sounds pretty optimal in stock form. Eventually consider the cable change and/or use a darker/deeper/relaxed sounding source.
 
IME all these converge in similar directions, towards the listening experience that I've heard with the SR-Omega, but approaching it in different ways and to different extent. The modded 007 Mk2 would be my choice for jazz and small chamber, perhaps for EDM too. The modded 007 Mk1 is good for everything, really, it makes everything sound good since it's so smooth and fluid while dynamic and big sounding, and sounds closest to the SR-Omega. The modded 009 is... well, a 009, with some flavors, and the results will depend more on the ancillary equipment, as it's very revealing. Each to his/her own.

What does taking these metal things do to the sound specifically?
 
Mar 18, 2017 at 5:39 PM Post #11,420 of 27,944
   
I think this was covered a few times, but my 2 cents based on A/B'ing them for quite some time:
- the L700 sounds more open, more ethereal, with less body, and somewhat coarser highs (needs a smooth amp and source)
- IMHO the 007 Mk2 (latest) is more coherent, with more body, more midbass and more realistic instrument sound, less treble level, and less grain (but less fluid than the 007 Mk1).
I'd pick the 007 Mk2, but I can imagine many people would choose the L700 because the more open sound, and IMHO the L700 is better than most dynamic or planar headphones out there (below 2K certainly).
 
Most Stax dealers have them both, so I'd really recommend listening to both in person. 

 
Yes, I tend to agree with this, though it is just my first day with the SR-007 MK2 and I have owned SR-L700 and 009 longer.
 
Mar 18, 2017 at 7:45 PM Post #11,421 of 27,944
Sorry if anyone feels like i am spamming the crap out of this thread


Yes, you are. It all had been covered before.

Speaking of, Anyone have impressions of MK2.5 007s vs L700?


I listened to both a few days ago, though my Mk2 is the latest version that's supposedly better balanced than the SZ3 versions. I listened with the SRM-717. The L700 is brighter, more open, and on the 717, more dynamic. The SR-007 is more linear, more coherent, more detailed, and has better imaging.

The L700 feels like it has less linear bass, with more bass rolloff in the deep bass and more emphasis in the mid and upper bass. Which means that when you listen to basslines on the L700, the lower the bass goes the quieter it gets, whereas on the 007 the bass sounds more linear. The mids on both are not too different to be honest, though the L700 has a bit more upper mid emphasis, and sometimes upper mid-heavy instruments will jump out of the mix more than on the 007. Whether or not that is natural is debatable, and I like the mids on both. The upper treble is notably more present on the L700, which has more sparkle in the highs in general, whereas the 007 sounds a bit dark up top (but we all knew that). The L700's does better than any previous Lambda in soundstage, but its soundstage is always large, whereas the 007's soundstage will vary in size depending on the recording. The L700 is very detailed, and on its own doesn't feel like it's leaving anything behind, but the 007 is even more detailed, with simply incredible microdetail. The L700 also sounds lush and very airy pretty much always, whereas the 007 is more textured and recording-dependent. With it, dry recordings will sound dry and lush ones lush. Dynamics are hard to comment on, because while the 717 is not the worst amp for the 007, it's still not quite enough.

My only real complaint with the L700 is not the sound, it's the comfort. There is too much pressure on the top of the earpad, and if you wear glasses they will be pressed into your temples leading to discomfort over time. It sounds very good however and its sonic flaws are minor.

The SR-007 is a higher caliber of headphone all around, offering more resolution and refinement, but it's harder to drive, and optimizing a 007 rig will be a lot more expensive. If I had no comfort issues with the L700 I would probably be quite happy with it, but the 007 does give you that extra 5% - at a lot more cost. And if you lean towards a brighter sound, go elsewhere.
 
Mar 18, 2017 at 11:57 PM Post #11,424 of 27,944
  I think the SZ2s were the mk2, the early SZ3s the mk2.5, and the latest SZ3 which has been dubbed the mk2.9


I'm really not too sure about that?
But, I don't have much experience with the Stax models/versions, though.
 
Also, I'm under the impression @catscratch is saying his isn't even an SZ3?
 
" though my Mk2 is the latest version that's supposedly better balanced than the SZ3 versions."
 
Mar 19, 2017 at 1:02 AM Post #11,425 of 27,944
 
I'm really not too sure about that?
But, I don't have much experience with the Stax models/versions, though.
 
Also, I'm under the impression @catscratch is saying his isn't even an SZ3?
 
" though my Mk2 is the latest version that's supposedly better balanced than the SZ3 versions."


​As far as I know, and could be wrong, the MK2s are the SZ-2 and SZ-3 versions. Now the latest update I believe has been called the MK2.9, and are still SZ-3 to my knowledge. So the OP could have a MK2 (Latest revision "MK2.9") that is better than the early versions of the SZ3. Someone could clarify further.
 
Mar 19, 2017 at 1:21 AM Post #11,426 of 27,944
Stax went from 70xxx and 71xxx serial numbers to SZ1 for the Mk1, SZ2 then SZ3 for the Mk2, and my latest version is an SZ2 again. But, there is absolutely no real consistency with Stax and serial numbers, so they really don't mean a thing. I wouldn't read too much into them, however there seems to be a consensus among some of us that the latest Mk2 version, whatever its serial numbers are, is the one to have at the moment.
 
Mar 19, 2017 at 1:28 AM Post #11,427 of 27,944
Stax went from 70xxx and 71xxx serial numbers to SZ1 for the Mk1, SZ2 then SZ3 for the Mk2, and my latest version is an SZ2 again. But, there is absolutely no real consistency with Stax and serial numbers, so they really don't mean a thing. I wouldn't read too much into them, however there seems to be a consensus among some of us that the latest Mk2 version, whatever its serial numbers are, is the one to have at the moment.

I wouldn't have expect the SZ3 to go back to the SZ2.
Thanks for the clarification.
 
Mar 19, 2017 at 1:32 AM Post #11,428 of 27,944
 
​As far as I know, and could be wrong, the MK2s are the SZ-2 and SZ-3 versions. Now the latest update I believe has been called the MK2.9, and are still SZ-3 to my knowledge. So the OP could have a MK2 (Latest revision "MK2.9") that is better than the early versions of the SZ3. Someone could clarify further.


Stax models/versions are hard to lee up with!
 
Mar 19, 2017 at 1:48 AM Post #11,429 of 27,944
Stax went from 70xxx and 71xxx serial numbers to SZ1 for the Mk1, SZ2 then SZ3 for the Mk2, and my latest version is an SZ2 again. But, there is absolutely no real consistency with Stax and serial numbers, so they really don't mean a thing. I wouldn't read too much into them, however there seems to be a consensus among some of us that the latest Mk2 version, whatever its serial numbers are, is the one to have at the moment.

My pair is SZ2, but they were sent in for driver replacements after they developed some channel imbalance. This was in January of this year so I believe I should have the latest drivers, which do not have the midbass hump some folk were complaining about. Very linear extended bass, and not emphasized at all.
 
Stax models/versions are hard to lee up with!


​They sure are lol
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top