The Stax Thread III
Jul 25, 2023 at 4:57 PM Post #24,106 of 25,505
I guess I'll just play the waiting game in the classifieds for the 007 Mk1. It's kinda a legendary headphone the way it is discussed online. I'm real curious.
I'm still pretty new to STAX but can already see the appeal of the 007 MK1. I can't comment on differences between 007 models but I can say there's a very clear difference in body between my 70XXX SR-007 and my X9000. The X9000 is technically superior but I can see why some prefer the tone/timbre of the 007. Glad I bought both, they're pretty complimentary whereas from what I read, I don't think SR-009 and X9000 would be as different.

I've been enjoying Oratory's EQ on my SR-007 btw. It lifts a bit of the veiled darker sound the 007 has.
Here it is:
Preamp: -6.8 dB
Filter 1: ON LSC Fc 105 Hz Gain 9.0 dB Q 0.70
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 2541 Hz Gain 7.5 dB Q 1.70
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 1116 Hz Gain -3.1 dB Q 0.64
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 70 Hz Gain -2.5 dB Q 0.21
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 54 Hz Gain -5.7 dB Q 1.42
Filter 6: ON HSC Fc 10000 Hz Gain -7.1 dB Q 0.70
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 7917 Hz Gain 4.4 dB Q 1.14
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 5246 Hz Gain -3.8 dB Q 2.99
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 1225 Hz Gain 2.0 dB Q 5.66
Filter 10: ON PK Fc 1445 Hz Gain -2.2 dB Q 5.69
 
Jul 25, 2023 at 5:12 PM Post #24,107 of 25,505
1690117382402.png


Kevin Gilmore Megatron and Kevin Gilmore Stax T2, both built by Soren Brix



Megatron

  • Build according to KG design
  • 450 V HV
  • Golden Reference HV and LV Power supply
  • Transformers: 400 VA + 2x 40 VA
  • Tubes:
1st Stage (12AU7/ECC82/(E80CC)): EH 12AU7

2nd Stage (12AX7/ECC83): ECC83 TELEFUNKEN Smooth Plates

Output (EL34): TESLA brown base (double O-getter)

CCS (EL34): Russian MULLARDS


T2
  • Build according to KG redesigned T2, no replacement semiconductors
  • 500 V KG power supply
  • RK50 attenuator
  • Tubes:
  • Input (6922): JAN PHILIPS (Sylvania)
  • Output (EL34): TESLA brown base (double O-getter)

Testing source

QOBUZ/TIDAL è SINGXER SU6 (DDC) è MUSETEC MH-DA005 (DA) è MT XLR out to T2

Cables (just for the record, no talent on my side to hear a noteworthy difference to previously used cheaper whatever cables…)

USB è DDC: AQ Coffee, I2S DDC è DA: AQ Carbon 48, XLR DA è MT: Inakustik NF-803, XLR Megatron è T2: ORB J10

Musetec runs with 2x Sabre 9038 pro, but is tuned to a warmer, less than for ESS typical forward/incisive signature. Matrix X-Sabre 3 with same 2x 9038 pro e.g. was a lot leaner and more incisive sounding. Overall sound signature I would describe as fairly neutral.

Music

Completely mixed, but I listened less to classical music.

Headphones

Stax SR307, 007A (2016, port + spring mod), 009, 009S, X9000


Sound

Treble
Extension and resolution seems similar on both, outstanding (maybe slight advantage for T2).
Treble on MT is more rounded and never causing fatigue, slightly subdued in comparison to T2. A completely grain free and sweet presentation.
T2 is presenting treble with more energy and dynamics, and most important, without harshness. Treble kicks in much stronger on T2 and more immediate, but appears not overdone in absolute terms.

Mids
Mids on MT appear to my ears as full, very liquid and “creamy” sounding. There is absolutely no shout to vocals (or anything), no matter how far the volume is cranked up.

On T2 the mids are tighter, less warm and big sounding, but maybe more articulated and focused. Probably many would say more neutral than MT, but I cannot say MT having colored mids in the reverse conclusion.

Bass
MT bass is precise, extends deep and delivers the fattest bass of all amps I listened to. T2 bass is most precise and extends deeper, bass is not as big and fat as MT. Bass impact is very prominent on MT (but not overdone), but is in comparison softer. T2 bass can hit you like a hammer, there is so much punch and rumble, if the music demands for it. MT is more polite in comparison. IMO the bass presentation of both suits all the a.m. headphones very well, and this alone sets both amps apart.

Overall

MT overall sound signature is relaxed and engaging at the same time, timbre is on the warm side. Both micro- and macrodynamics is great (be sure, all these EL34 are no statists). Already after plugging in MT for the first time, with the very first song it was clear to me that it is special in the way how harmonic its sounds. Tuning is on the softer side, very natural. There is not too much tube glare (unlike e.g. an unmodified SRM007t). The attribute coherency comes into mind, and that this is no one trick pony, more like experiencing one of the most “adult” sound of an amp I ever listened to, whether HP or speaker amp. Paired with great resolution all across the board, good transparency, delivering the most beautiful sound colours. Soundstage is very wide and deep, but exactly not like some overly exaggerated fuzzy tube amp staging one might have experienced. Next on the favorite list is how much body is given to the music, especially to the bass, resp. the lower frequencies in general. I guess this is not the kind of tuning one can generate by EQing other amps, this is organically implemented, and it suits the Staxes so well (even my 007A). MT is the perfect amp for (very) long listening sessions.


T2: Overall more (most!) energetic and more straight sounding. The analogy of an athlete, whose muscles are always tensioned comes to mind. This leads to a very lifelike (but not stressful) presentation, there seems to be not one millisecond delay from the record till it reaches the ear. Simply impressive!

T2 sounds a bit brighter/leaner than MT, having less of this “organic charm”, but there is even more transparency. Many might say T2 is more neutral. In comparison to the Carbon I experienced, T2 is less bright. I think there is enough warmth for most tastes and I think this makes a big difference. If some amps (also sources and transducers) suffer from either being highly dynamic but more lean sounding, while others from being warm but less dynamic, this is not the case with T2. I guess most would say T2 is where you want it to have. Compared to MT, stage on T2 is smaller, but probably more “correct” in size, with width and depth equally pronounced.

Mainly because of in comparison less treble energy of MT, listening at higher volume is possible and can be highly enjoyable. Both amps have excellent reverb, another ability which sets them apart from the other amps I could try before (speaking from memory though). Reverb on MT seems to be even more distinct than on T2.

T2 adds excitement already at low listening volumes. T2s most energetic presentation challenges you more, especially when cranking up the pot. You will not read a book while listening to music which is presented with this lifelike absolute authority.


Tube rolling

Megatron

Above mentioned tube configuration is based on the preceding words. Few other settings I tried:

1st stage
  • E80CC instead of 12AU7. (Possible if the PS can handle the filament current of 0,6 A instead of 0,3 A. Using this tube results in slightly more gain.)
  • I tried Valvo (Heerlen) and Tungsram E80CC. Both seem to be similar in sonics. This leads to a more engaging presentation, leaner and more treble sparkle compared to the EHs, but in the last time I feel it is maybe somehow not 100% “harmonic”. I would say its a preference thing. For now I switched back to EH 12AU7, because:
2nd stage
  • Coming from EH 12AX7 I switched to Telefunken ECC83 (Smooth plates), and this tube makes a difference. The Tele is adding resolution, treble extension, midrange presence and stage depth, tight bass. It is not a very tubey sounding tube I would say, but suits in this position very well, highly recommended. Together with a.m. E80CCs maybe too much of a good thing, bringing it to the lean side.
  • I tried also Valvo ECC83 MC2 45° (Hamburg), this adds some 3D stage, but overall a bit too sleepy for my taste here.
Output stage
  • Coming from Russian Mullards. They are overall pleasing in every regard, nothing to complain about. Recently I put in the Teslas, and they seem to be slightly more refined and clear sounding, a bit tighter in a good way. JJ EL34 II were no improvement (too lean). Overall there seems less influence compared to 1st and 2nd stage rolling, maybe no need to spend big money here. (Btw., GG was reacting much more on changing EL34)
  • CCS: The Mullards I never changed.
  • Receiving any experience from other MT owners would be very welcome.
(edit: Telefunken + Tungsram ECC82 and vintage Mullard ECC83 are on its way)

T2
  • No change of the input tubes so far (want to try Valvos)
  • Changed the output from Russian Mullards to the Teslas. Not very much difference, but the Teslas I liked better. Also here overall a bit clearer, tighter with better treble resolution, but not night and day.

Synergy with Headphones (preliminary)

This was respective still is not an easy (but most enjoyable!) task, personal preference as mood and music are playing a role and there are many combinations + influence of tube rolling. I think I can already say that none of the mentioned headphones sounds less than at least very good on both amps, there are no real sonic mismatches.

Megatron
  • X9000: Especially with this one I had my issues when getting it and I was not sure whether I would keep it. When MT arrived, I found missing synergy with X9000, so I forgot that idea. The full bodied character of MT with its thick mids was like it was made for X9000. Only area where I feel “only” good synergy, is in the treble. Both partners are having great resolution and extension, but are on the softer respective harmonic side.
  • 009/009S (I will not differentiate between these at this point): IMO the perfect match! Period. I doubt anybody would call 009 bright or edgy in this combination and you would be surprised at which volume fatigue free listening is possible.
  • 307: see 009, just wow. I would prefer 307 with MT over the round Staxes on certain “lesser” amps.
  • 007A: IMO also a good match and no, I do not find the bass region too congested. But indeed a combination where bass heads might lift an eyebrow. Btw., MT is able to drive also 007 to unhealthy volume levels, and everything remains so listenable.
  • (Once I could compare 007Mk1 (70xxx) and my 007A on MT and Carbon. 007MK1 I liked better on Carbon, but 007A (and all the other HPs) I preferred on MT.)

T2
  • X9000: Very good match, but different synergy than with MT. As T2 adds a bit less body and thick mids to the music than MT, presentation is of course also leaner (but luckily not lean in absolute terms). Where X9000 really profits is in the bass and treble. Compared to 009, X9000 bass bleeds a bit into the lower mids (my perception), but the control, punch and precision of T2 cures that for me in a noteworthy way. The treble of X9000 was originally an issue for me. While resolution could not be better, treble is on the soft side and I missed macro dynamics, excitement. T2 cured this, treble is simply outstanding now.
  • 009: Very very good match (at lower volume perfect). Two wild tigers are meeting, playing with their laser swords. All the qualities of T2 applied on 009 lead to a maximum exciting listening experience. For me the most impressive of all combinations at lower volume. Listening loudly for longer time can be too much of a good thing though. Right now I prefer 009S over 009 on T2, as it is slightly more “civil”, less challenging at higher volume.
  • 307: Very good match, highly energetic and exciting sounding. Reasonable volume without fatigue is possible. And while I rate a 009 or 009S (which share a good part of their tuning with 307) higher, it is again surprising how much also this one is scaling with amplification. Taking into account I paid 250 € new, this thing is a kind of small wonder.
  • 007A: You expect it, and yes, T2 fits to 007A perfectly. T2 transforms specially this one to a much more awake and precise transducer. Midrange recession is reduced, bass is juicy and accurate, the treble alive and just right. Having all the HP in front I ones was about to swap from 009 to 007, until I realized 007 was already on my head.

Overall thoughts:

I can easily agree with previous statements who called these two amplifiers outstanding, both are by far the ones I enjoy the most. Every headphone I tried sounds great in its own way with either amp, pairing is in the end as always a question of preference.

IMO T2 is not simply a better Megatron, as a Ferrari is no better Bentley. The full bodied and liquid tuning of MT is something very special and it suits probably the taste of many. On the other hand the energetic nature of T2 in combination with its balanced and lifelike sound is impossible to ignore and I´m sure will excite every listener.

Before T2 arrived here I thought at low volume listening most estat amplifiers do sound more similar to each other vs when cranked up, when more capable amps dominate due to lower distortion and all that. T2 somehow disproved this for me, I expect this alone might make some prefer T2 over MT.

I hope I could give a little bit of (preliminary) indication what to expect with these amps. Sorry for a not more polished language, and while reading it there are repititions…(never tried to describe sound in more than 2-3 lines before).
Btw, some might need to consider the WAF (wife acceptancy factor). I can say MT with its smaller one box solution is easier to “sell” for having it in the living room :wink:

Again, thank you Soren for providing these two excellent builts. Kevin, thank you for making these possible.
This should be it's own thread. Don't let this get buried here.
 
Jul 25, 2023 at 5:26 PM Post #24,109 of 25,505
Just sat and back to backed my X9000 vs my CA-1a. Possibly the best estat vs best ribbon. Signal path was Qobuz > HDMI > Anthem MRX540 > speaker terminals into either modded SRD-7 MK2 or TI-1b transformer boxes > headphones. CA-1a was using open pads and EQed with Mitch's filter. X9000 had no EQ.

Was using the section starting at 2:20 of "Over Now" from Alice in Chains Unplugged. Must have just listened to it 20 times hah. It's a nice test section, there's a steady background drum that shows off dynamics pretty well since it's a sharp hit, along with a steady strum of bass guitar and some vocals. Then you get to the guitar "solo" where there's still some drum and bass but the guitar really takes focus and you get a wide range of low and high frequencies as well with some really sharp "zingy" string plucks.

Thoughts:
-More bass/bass impact on the CA-1a. Nothing surprising here, the X9000 is known to be bass light and needs to be EQed up below 50Hz.
-Attack/dynamics are a win for the X9000. It's simply sharper and hits faster. The drum hit has more of a snap to it and the string plucks are sharper.
-Interestingly while I would say the bass "impact" was greater on the CA-1a, the bass attack/dynamics were better on the X9000. In other words the bass in the CA-1a hit my head harder but the bass in the X9000 hit my head faster.
-Strings "zing" more on the X9000. I love this effect. Picture an empty black space with a single guitar string taught through it, pluck it and watch it oscillate and vibrate the air. That's the sensation the strings give on the X9000 and to a lesser degree on the CA-1a as well.
-Staging is probably the most immediate and impactful difference I notice between the two. I've always been bad at detecting/describing staging but I feel like I moved to a completely different position in the concert hall when I switch between these two. Best I can describe it is the X9000 feels more like they're playing in front of me/in the room and CA-1A is more in my head. Interestingly I feel like there's a verticality difference between them as well, X9000 sounds like I'm sitting up in a loft looking down at them playing on stage whereas the CA-1a is like I'm front row looking up at them. I preferred the X9000's presentation.

Conclusion is I'd take the X9000 with some EQ to bring up the bass but the CA-1a put on an excellent fight here and has no right sounding this good against a $6200 headphone. The differences I described here (aside from the staging difference) were maybe within 10-20% of each other. Very impressive showing from the CA-1a but I gotta give the win to the X9000.
 
Last edited:
Jul 25, 2023 at 7:31 PM Post #24,111 of 25,505
CA-1a put on an excellent fight here and has no right sounding this good against a $6200 headphone.
All headphones are equal. People keep on misunderstanding this. We are all so brainwashed by this price gouging war.

A $500 headphone is just as good as a $5000 headphone.
There's so many studys, blind tests, new individuals that can not even tell a difference between a $5000 headphone vs a $500 headphone.

Headphones,com did a great video on this.
Spoiler, plywoodman susvara is $300 , 😆 🤣 😂 😹
Of course it is! 🙄
 
Jul 25, 2023 at 7:45 PM Post #24,112 of 25,505
So, all this talk about the 007 has me very curious. Some say that the 007mk1 and the 007a are equal, but others say differently. It's hard to find a mk1. Would the 007a suffice?

I haven't liked the 007a any time I've heard it. But I have never heard it modded, which people seem to really enjoy even after something as simple as the blue tak mod. MK1s pop up pretty affordably here and there. I'd hold out for one. I think you'd really enjoy its signature based on what you have and like.

I think the X9000 is still in that stage that Susvara was early on where people hadn't really found out how to use it optimally yet. Most people probably hook it up to a BHSE or Carbon and call it a day. We don't even have an agreed upon flat EQ profile available for them yet (that I've seen). X9000 vs 009 EQed to the same target should in theory be better on the X9000 with its larger and lighter driver. Excited to send my X9000 off to Mitch once he finishes making filters for the current batch of headphones I sent him, a true neutral EQ should resolve a lot of complaints.

The x9000 is REALLY good. It's just very unique in its presentation. Very open and spacious to the point of a bit of a diffused sound, and laid back and just a tad recessive in the midrange. These are things that aren't really changeable by EQ. I think some people will just really love it, while others may not. Its technical abilities are undeniable though. As much as I loved the 009, I knew immediately it was an improvement across the board (except for me the laid back/less forward presentation).
 
Last edited:
Jul 25, 2023 at 7:51 PM Post #24,113 of 25,505
Stax 007mk1
Stax 007mk2
Stax 007A
Stax 007MK2/A 2.9 (mod)
Stax Omega w/ 007mk1 drivers

Which one the best? Not a perspective or opinion. It's almost universally agreed.

Stax 007MK1 wins. Especially the early editions. But there is a but and most to all never understand it.

Stax omega w/007mk1 is good, even better than 007mk1 but it's technically a mod and next to 0.001% will never hear this.

Stax 007mk2/A is the so-so ones with mods to sound good.

It is not about MK2/A being better than mk1. It is about the strain relief and cable issues in the mk1. You get the MK2 for the looks 😆 and the "A" for the better build and hopefully a good tuning out of box. To enhance it, you use puddy to make it 90% mk1, actually do not need to.

That's all. So, get the 007A for the better build and about 75% of the og sound. With gear matching, and puddy mod it can get up to a 90% to 100% mk1 sound. That's all about the 007.

The 009 is better than 009S. But the 009BK is the best of the two.
 
Jul 25, 2023 at 9:12 PM Post #24,114 of 25,505
I find the 007mk1 to be "the Stax headphone for people who normally don't like Stax headphones" lol.

There's a warmth and natural tonality that the modern Stax headphones tend to lack (i.e. 009 series or the modern L-series). Certainly more bass and toned-down treble, but the 007mk1 isn't a detail beast in comparison.

I'm not sure the 007mk1 really does much superior when comparing to the X9000, the X9000 corrects some of the wrongs of the 009 while maintaining a detailed approach. But it is a very pleasing listen, easy to just get lost in the music with the 007mk1.

When discussing stats with non-stat fans i've found the following helps:

Broad estat generalisations
(a) 007 – most dynamic sounding
(b) ES1A – most planar sounding
(c) 009 – most classical “estat” sound people expect
(d) X9K – next evolution of estat sound

Mapping to observation of preferences / current stable (i.e. (a) 007 will be preferred by fans of audeze and ZMF vs the other Staxes)
(a) Audeze, ZMF
(b) Abyss, Audeze, Final, Focal
(C) Hifiman, Raal, Focal
(D) Hifiman, or people who own at least 2 of the above

Pls feel free to critique / refine all!
 
Jul 25, 2023 at 10:08 PM Post #24,115 of 25,505
When discussing stats with non-stat fans i've found the following helps:

Broad estat generalisations
(a) 007 – most dynamic sounding
(b) ES1A – most planar sounding
(c) 009 – most classical “estat” sound people expect
(d) X9K – next evolution of estat sound

Mapping to observation of preferences / current stable (i.e. (a) 007 will be preferred by fans of audeze and ZMF vs the other Staxes)
(a) Audeze, ZMF
(b) Abyss, Audeze, Final, Focal
(C) Hifiman, Raal, Focal
(D) Hifiman, or people who own at least 2 of the above

Pls feel free to critique / refine all!
Very interesting
 
Jul 25, 2023 at 10:14 PM Post #24,116 of 25,505
The 009 is better than 009S. But the 009BK is the best of the two.
First sentence on the HeadAmp page for 009BK:
"This Special Edition black version of the STAX SR-009 has the same amazing sound as the original model"

It's the same headphone but with the X9000's color.
 
Jul 25, 2023 at 11:50 PM Post #24,117 of 25,505
Has anyone here used Ferrum Audio gear with their Stax? I recently demoed the Ferrum Erco and quickly decided to buy it because I found that it added greater dynamic impact to anything it drove. I found it similar to the expander effect of a dynamic EQ like FabFilter Pro Q 3, but done in hardware across the entire frequency range. To me, this made it pair very well with electrostatics like my L700mk2, which normally have weaker dynamic punch compared to a planar or dynamic driver headphone. Due to the dynamic expansion effect, I can't call the Erco neutral, because it specifically colors the sound that way, but I find it very synergistic with electrostatics.
 
Jul 26, 2023 at 6:22 AM Post #24,119 of 25,505
First sentence on the HeadAmp page for 009BK:
"This Special Edition black version of the STAX SR-009 has the same amazing sound as the original model"

It's the same headphone but with the X9000's color.
Has anyone done a FR graph on a 009BK? I’ve often wondered how much of the sound difference is placebo effect since I could never find anywhere that Stax intentionally tuned the BK differently.
 
Jul 26, 2023 at 8:23 AM Post #24,120 of 25,505
Has anyone done a FR graph on a 009BK? I’ve often wondered how much of the sound difference is placebo effect since I could never find anywhere that Stax intentionally tuned the BK differently.

Here, INEXXON in Germany measured them, the 009BK is here:
https://www.inexxon.com/stax-übersicht-history/2010-2020-kopfhörer-headphones/sr-009bk/

and here the 009:
https://www.inexxon.com/stax-übersicht-history/2010-2020-kopfhörer-headphones/sr-009/

009 is on the LEFT, 009BK on the RIGHT:

STAX 009 vs 009BK 2023-07-26 142850.jpg
STAX 009 vs 009BK 2023-07-26 142850 (i).jpg
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top