[doyouknowSBmean]

more pictures

#257, from the first year batch. Nice.

The highest SN for Omega I've seen is #6xx.

 

[SilverEars]

Over time I've been reading about the 007 and 009, and I mainly read that 009 may not be the preferred choice due to the treble emphasis. Can somebody compare the 009 to the HD800 in terms of treble emphasis? Does the 009 sound thin narrow(lacking a bit of warmth) like the HD800? When I look at the graphs, STAX seems to have bass extension.

I always thought Omega was another name for the 007, which apparently is not the case. Can somebody compare the Omega, 007, and the 009? Would we say one of them is the Pinacle? If so, which one? Opinions appreciated, thank you.

 

[Whitigir]

Over time I've been reading about the 007 and 009, and I mainly read that 009 may not be the preferred choice due to the treble emphasis. Can somebody compare the 009 to the HD800 in terms of treble emphasis? Does the 009 sound thin as the STAX tend to have bass extension according to graphs.

I always thought Omega was another name for the 007, which apparently is not the case. Can somebody compare the Omega, 007, and the 009? Would we say one of them is the Pinacle? If so, which one? Opinions appreciated, thank you.

Depends on what amps you pair it with, my 009 and T2 sound nothing like what you just mentioned, not even close

 

[doyouknowSBmean]

Depends on your amp and music preference. Over 90% of music on my bookshelf are classical music. My order with preference is Omega>>007>009. Amp is the original T2.

 

[SilverEars]

Depends on your amp and music preference. Over 90% of music on my bookshelf are classical music. My order with preference is Omega>>007>009. Amp is the original T2.

I like wide variety of music, so not genre specific. I'm looking for something I can listen to any genre, and the type of headphone I would prefer for various genre, not specific types. Like for example, HD800 is commonly said to be more enjoyable for specific genre, and it's not my cup of tea.

 

[Whitigir]

I like wide variety of music, so not genre specific. I'm looking for something I can listen to any genre, and the type of headphone I would prefer for various genre, not specific types. Like for example, HD800 is commonly said to be more enjoyable for specific genre, and it's not my cup of tea.

I listen to varieties room except hard rock, metal, hip hop. Everything else, and even movies with 009+ T2. It is a blessing everytime I put it on

 

[doyouknowSBmean]

Well. 007,009, original Omega are all good headphones. As I mentioned before, my personal preference is: Omega>>007>009. But they have different strength and weakness. I scripted a brief comparison among them 3 here:

009: 009s are the best all rounder. Super transparent and revealing, with slightly hint of glare, some folks even think 009s are intrusively transparent. I can totally understand this, 009s simply bring everything directly to you face. Brighter then HD800 though, 009s are not as harsh. Their treble is so smooth and sometimes it makes me think Stax intentionally beautify 009's treble presentation. I also think 009s have forward bass and treble presentation, making them super good for modern music such as new age, electronics, soundtracks. But sometimes I think 009s are a little bass heavy for me (mind you, I am a R10 type of guy, I think R10s have the most perfect bass).

007: I have both 007mk1 and mk2. mk1 and mk2 are different but they share lots of similarities. I have to say I prefer 007s than 009s, not because they have more bass, I sometimes hate 007s' bass presentation. 007s have the thinest diaphragm among all Omegas (007- 1um, 009 and Omega are 1.5um), hence they have the fastest transient (their bass is slow though). That's the secret why 007 are so musical and preferred by many. They are also transparent, but not as 'intrusively transparent' as 009s, I am sure the living concerts are by no means as transparent as 009. Another issue I found on 007s is, they are not very natural, bring some syrup to the music, which is drastically different from their big brother - the original Omega. I am not saying it's bad but you will find they are not as natural as 009s or the original Omegas.

Omega: Omegas are the most natural and neutral headphone among 3, and even among all other headphones IMHO. I go to living concert almost every 3 weeks. The original Omega never failed to surprise me with its super-close-to-the-real-world performance. Super balanced energy distribution among spectrum. They are not lightning fast (as Orpheus, baby Orpheus, Abyss) nor slow (Like HD650,LCD3), they are just right, just like the pace in the living concerts. They are super revealing with creepy out-of-head flamboyant soundstage. They might sound boring at first glance but the more you listen to them the more overwhelming feeling they will bring you. However, they are almost impossible to find. The recent most ending transaction (Dec/10/2017) for the original Omega was done around $22000. But still ppl wait in line to buy them (Beware, you will have numerous guys sent you PM every couple days if they found you have the original Omegas). FWIW they are the bitcoins in the world of headphones.

They are powered by the Original SRM T2 and SRM 007T.

 

[SilverEars]

Ok, Omega is too much of a rarity for obtaining.

Is the 007 just as revealing as the 009? The way transparency is expressed here often times, the expression seems to coincide with forward treble or more of an in your face type detailing which I'm understanding as intrusive transparency. HD800 would be considered harsh and I agree that bright and harsh are two separate aspects.

I am looking for revealing, and that's one reason I've become interested the top end STAX models in addition to the fast transient response. It's not necessary for me to get high bass quantity, but good quality.

Perhaps the 007 is more of what I'm looking for, revealing yet not so bright with not so much bass quantity. In general, would 007 be considered transparent, but not so intrusive?

Thanks for the detailed comparison.

 

[Whitigir]

Well. 007,009, original Omega are all good headphones. As I mentioned before, my personal preference is: Omega>>007>009. But they have different strength and weakness. I scripted a brief comparison among them 3 here:

009: 009s are the best all rounder. Super transparent and revealing, with slightly hint of glare, some folks even think 009s are intrusively transparent. I can totally understand this, 009s simply bring everything directly to you face. Brighter then HD800 though, 009s are not as harsh. Their treble is so smooth and sometimes it makes me think Stax intentionally beautify 009's treble presentation. I also think 009s have forward bass and treble presentation, making them super good for modern music such as new age, electronics, soundtracks. But sometimes I think 009s are a little bass heavy for me (mind you, I am a R10 type of guy, I think R10s have the most perfect bass).

007: I have both 007mk1 and mk2. mk1 and mk2 are different but they share lots of similarities. I have to say I prefer 007s than 009s, not because they have more bass, I sometimes hate 007s' bass presentation. 007s have the thinest diaphragm among all Omegas (007- 1um, 009 and Omega are 1.5um), hence they have the fastest transient (their bass is slow though). That's the secret why 007 are so musical and preferred by many. They are also transparent, but not as 'intrusively transparent' as 009s, I am sure the living concerts are by no means as transparent as 009. Another issue I found on 007s is, they are not very natural, bring some syrup to the music, which is drastically different from their big brother - the original Omega. I am not saying it's bad but you will find they are not as natural as 009s or the original Omegas.

Omega: Omegas are the most natural and neutral headphone among 3, and even among all other headphones IMHO. I go to living concert almost every 3 weeks. The original Omega never failed to surprise me with its super-close-to-the-real-world performance. Super balanced energy distribution among spectrum. They are not lightning fast (as Orpheus, baby Orpheus, Abyss) nor slow (Like HD650,LCD3), they are just right, just like the pace in the living concerts. They are super revealing with creepy out-of-head flamboyant soundstage. They might sound boring at first glance but the more you listen to them the more overwhelming feeling they will bring you. However, they are almost impossible to find. The recent most ending transaction (Dec/10/2017) for the original Omega was done around $22000. But still ppl wait in line to buy them (Beware, you will have numerous guys sent you PM every couple days if they found you have the original Omegas). FWIW they are the bitcoins in the world of headphones.

They are powered by the Original SRM T2 and SRM 007T.

I don’t know about the rest, but the part of 009 you described above are spot on from what I am hearing with my T2. However, I do not have Glares even if I was to use Solid OCC silver wires and it stood through Carbon, Grounded Grid as well. The reason I upgraded to T2 was because either Carbon or GG could make the 009 Do something different. The Carbon had speed and trebles details but lacks the tonal realism unless I tuned it down to 16.5mA. Where as the GG would be so lush and realism with the tonal body but is a bit lacking in sparkling details and speed even at 20mA. The 2 are just too different, then I have a trusted friend to tell me if what I am chasing for from 009 is not enough with either of them, the T2 would be the answer as Stax designed tuned the 009 based on from the T2. I was hesitant at first about how difficult it is to make the T2 and Expensive, I could no longer hold out to hear what potentially 009 could do. So it happened

I would still take that Carbon is an awesome pairing with 007 MKI and that is pushing the 007MKI to it limits as well, but is a cheaper alternative than 009+T2. I tried the 007MKI in the T2 and really, I preferred 009 all day long on the T2 just due to what you said Super transparent and revealing, Their treble is so smooth and sometimes it makes me think Stax intentionally beautify 009's treble presentation. I also think 009s have forward bass and treble presentation, making them super good for modern music such as new age, electronics, soundtracks

I am very satisfied with 009 bass on the T2, it is magical and pure awesomeness, however 007 MKI in it was bass heavy in comparison specially the sub bass, the reason why I prefer 009 on it.

Come to think of it, I love bass, and 007 / 009 can both be satisfying or overwhelming. It is the total opposite of what myth people keeps on passing around Stax has no bass, a total fault

 

[Whitigir]

Ok, Omega is too much of a rarity for obtaining.

Is the 007 just as revealing as the 009? The way transparency is expressed here often times, the expression seems to coincide with forward treble or more of an in your face type detailing which I'm understanding as intrusive transparency. HD800 would be considered harsh and I agree that bright and harsh are two separate aspects.

I am looking for revealing, and that's one reason I've become interested the top end STAX models in addition to the fast transient response. It's not necessary for me to get high bass quantity, but good quality.

Perhaps the 007 is more of what I'm looking for, revealing yet not so bright with not so much bass quantity. In general, would 007 be considered transparent, but not so intrusive?

Thanks for the detailed comparison.

Mind you, I only heard 007 MKI, but no, the 009 is the better one in speed and transparency, so 009 is more revealing with better treble extensions. But due to this, it is harder to get satisfactory out of 009 than 007 MKI. IMO, even the best of 007 MkI out of the Carbon running 20mA, the senses of coherent between bass to the rest of the spectrum is a bit odd, where as the 009 has no issues, but rather the tonal body realism, which could only get right with T2

007 MKI is a more forgiving signature in comparison to 009, and if you want 007 MKI to be at it best, get a properly built Carbon for it, but again 009 + KG T2 is neither Bright nor Intrusive, it is just pure Magic!

 

[doyouknowSBmean]

Ok, Omega is too much of a rarity for obtaining.

Is the 007 just as revealing as the 009? The way transparency is expressed here often times, the expression seems to coincide with forward treble or more of an in your face type detailing which I'm understanding as intrusive transparency. HD800 would be considered harsh and I agree that bright and harsh are two separate aspects.

I am looking for revealing, and that's one reason I've become interested the top end STAX models in addition to the fast transient response. It's not necessary for me to get high bass quantity, but good quality.

Perhaps the 007 is more of what I'm looking for, revealing yet not so bright with not so much bass quantity. In general, would 007 be considered transparent, but not so intrusive?

Thanks for the detailed comparison.

007s are indeed transparent. But just as Whtigir said, 007's bass might be a little intrusive, 007Mk1s have better bass though. But I suggest you buy 007 and 009 both and then decide, given them now 'poor man's Hifiman' price to performance bargain, the used price for 007 and 009 are really good. I think most ppl would prefer 009 especially for those who don't have extensive experience with both before.

 

[doyouknowSBmean]

I don’t know about the rest, but the part of 009 you described above are spot on from what I am hearing with my T2. However, I do not have Glares even if I was to use Solid OCC silver wires and it stood through Carbon, Grounded Grid as well. The reason I upgraded to T2 was because either Carbon or GG could make the 009 Do something different. The Carbon had speed and trebles details but lacks the tonal realism unless I tuned it down to 16.5mA. Where as the GG would be so lush and realism with the tonal body but is a bit lacking in sparkling details and speed even at 20mA. The 2 are just too different, then I have a trusted friend to tell me if what I am chasing for from 009 is not enough with either of them, the T2 would be the answer as Stax designed tuned the 009 based on from the T2. I was hesitant at first about how difficult it is to make the T2 and Expensive, I could no longer hold out to hear what potentially 009 could do. So it happened

I would still take that Carbon is an awesome pairing with 007 MKI and that is pushing the 007MKI to it limits as well, but is a cheaper alternative than 009+T2. I tried the 007MKI in the T2 and really, I preferred 009 all day long on the T2 just due to what you said Super transparent and revealing, Their treble is so smooth and sometimes it makes me think Stax intentionally beautify 009's treble presentation. I also think 009s have forward bass and treble presentation, making them super good for modern music such as new age, electronics, soundtracks

I am very satisfied with 009 bass on the T2, it is magical and pure awesomeness, however 007 MKI in it was bass heavy in comparison specially the sub bass, the reason why I prefer 009 on it.

Come to think of it, I love bass, and 007 / 009 can both be satisfying or overwhelming. It is the total opposite of what myth people keeps on passing around Stax has no bass, a total fault

Well, I meant slightly hint of glare.. It doesn't hold any my appreciation for 009s though. The slightest glare comes from the comparison among 007s and the original Omegas, and the music I used for test.

 

[mtoc]

joined: Mar 21, 2017

 

[astrostar59]

I don’t know about the rest, but the part of 009 you described above are spot on from what I am hearing with my T2. However, I do not have Glares The Carbon had speed and trebles details but lacks the tonal realism unless I tuned it down to 16.5mA. Where as the GG would be so lush and realism with the tonal body but is a bit lacking in sparkling details and speed even at 20mA. The 2 are just too different, then I have a trusted friend to tell me if what I am chasing for from 009 is not enough with either of them, the T2 would be the answer as Stax designed tuned the 009 based on from the T2. I was hesitant at first about how difficult it is to make the T2 and Expensive, I could no longer hold out to hear what potentially 009 could do. So it happened

I would still take that Carbon is an awesome pairing with 007 MKI and that is pushing the 007MKI to it limits as well, but is a cheaper alternative than 009+T2. I tried the 007MKI in the T2 and really, I preferred 009 all day long on the T2 just due to what you said Super transparent and revealing, Their treble is so smooth and sometimes it makes me think Stax intentionally beautify 009's treble presentation. I also think 009s have forward bass and treble presentation, making them super good for modern music such as new age, electronics, soundtracks

I am very satisfied with 009 bass on the T2, it is magical and pure awesomeness, however 007 MKI in it was bass heavy in comparison specially the sub bass, the reason why I prefer 009 on it.

Come to think of it, I love bass, and 007 / 009 can both be satisfying or overwhelming. It is the total opposite of what myth people keeps on passing around Stax has no bass, a total fault

Great info there Whitigir. Sadly I never heard the T2, and was too chicken SXXT to get one built (sorry Paradoxper, I did think about it).

On the 009s, yes the upper mids on the 009s got me in the end I guess. This is a completely personal thing, and I don't pretend to be the authority on it, how we perceive music. It is not a fault or failure of the 009, but possibly the way generally Stax (all models) present music in general. It is so hard to put into words that mean anything, but I would summarise it as analysing the sound, not analytical, more sending it to the ears in a way that emphasises the micro details and 'plankton' and as though the leading edges are contrasted up somehow. This is glued to the rest of the music and I found it became a bit distracting and less realistic IMO. I am the first to admit it is very addictive though.

But with more details we have to pay for that......
I found the 009 punishes on less than stellar recordings even on an NOS DAC. Not a disaster, but listening to my 2 channel horn speakers, the presentation was very different. In the end I was having a quick 009 'fix' now and then in the evenings, and not listening to my whole collection on them. Female vocals were possibly the biggest issue for me, it was a bit too pitchy, less body to it, and on the peaks in the chorus for example. My ears also seemed to get loaded with the details and be less aware of the mid range and other things going on. I noticed even on the LCD2-C I was hearing stuff in the lower treble and upper mids that were less noticeable on the 009s, maybe the excitable nature of the 009 drivers I guess? I never felt my 007A 2015 was an alternative. It lost too much in the process, and the bass was lumpy, the stage smaller etc. Though it was miles better than my black MK2 was. But it was the 009 or bust for me really.

Planars
The planers are also not perfect. They are poles apart in the way they present the information. I can seem a bit slow at first, like the drivers are stuck in honey or something. But in a few days my brain adjusted to it, and I believe (may be wrong) the presentation is more accurate and closer to a live sound as I hear it, as in full, deep, and solid mids with lots of body to the notes. The imaging is also wider and more 3D, possibly as the pads are very angled into the ear? There is more thrust and energy in the mids as well which is new to me, and in some material can be very convincing, a bit like what a big 3 way speaker can do when it 'charges' the room. The bass in the Audeze, I don't need to talk about it I guess, it is well known enough as one of it's strengths. It gives a grounded and solid presentation to the stage, less 'floaty' as the Stax, less ethereal. The 009s can go deep, not as deep, and it is presented differently. The LCD4s bass and mids are glued together, the transition is very accurate and cohesive. The sub bass goes down to the floor and disappears, never heard that in any HP before.

Now to the problem treble.
In the 009s I found it was a bit pitchy and forward, a bit cold perhaps. Very fast and getting all the detail for sure. Again, I was very used to it over the last 4 years. I have heard the BHSE with NOS Mullards, XF2 I think and it is better than my Carbon on this upper treble aspect, but only by a small bit, not huge. The Mullards tamed it a bit. The Carbon v BHSE is very close, they sound a bit different, but I would say 90% is the same. But if I used my 2 channel then put on the 009s it sounded very different, possibly too upper treble orientated to be realistic. The treble in the LCD4s straight from the 009s can sound broken at first. I was shocked TBH. After a few hours on the LCD2 C (which I bought first) I readjusted to it, and realised all the detail is still there, but is presented differently.

Decision time (YMMV and this is totally my ears so take it for what it is)
My decision moment at Can-Jam on the LCD4s was weird. I heard the BHSE and 009s off the Halo Spring DAC with my 4 tracks off my USB stick. Sat at the head-amp stand for 20 minutes (it was quiet at that point). The sound was what I get on my Carbon (but different DAC) at home, very very close, very familiar. And it sounded way better than the Stax T-8000 amp and 009s and the Trilogy and 009s off the Esoteric K-01 I had just come from on the stand next door. Then just by chance, the LCD4s were available as the guy using them had walked off. So I put them on, still on my 4 test tracks off the Halo DAC. It was very different, and at first I thought not as good. But by the third track I was beginning to get what it was doing. The speed was a bit lower, the plankton was not as obvious, but the timbre and body to the mids were very realistic. I liked it. Then the 4th track I had was a Beyonce track, and that was more removed from the 009s than the Rammstein or Alex Morphe EDM I had before it. That track convinced me right there, her voice was beautifully presented and throaty, so real, very liquid sounding, not pitchy of forward, great dimension to it.

Then the rest of the day I spent trying other HPs to try and get that sound elsewhere. The Utopia out of a Felix 300B amp was very good, maybe halfway between the 009s and the LCD4, but the soundstage was 2D to my ears. The HE1000V2 was good enough, but nothing remarkable. The Susvara possibly better, but the music was odd, so I couldn't say for sure. The price was way to high though, especially looking at the build quality of the Utopia, which I also thought a bit pricey already for a dynamic HP. Sadly no Abyss, but as they say, the fit can be weird, so maybe a non starter. I would still like to hear it though, but it is quite inefficient, so a good amp is required (more money). Some crappy Sonoma system upstairs, oh dear....

Then I heard the HE1 which even in 15 minutes on non familiar music was probably the best I have heard any HP so far, way better than the Shangri-La system I heard in the morning, which was too bright and plastic sounding, which itself was later outpaced by both the systems on the Head-amp stand. Incredible as the GSX + LCD4 or BHSE + 009 is 5 times less money!

So with the HE1 as my target, I came away thinking the LCD4 was closer to the HE1 and was my next HP. It took me a further 6 months to sell my Stax, make up my mind.

I bought the (on offer) LCD2-C for 600 USD first direct off the Audeze website. Damb, what a HP for this money!

I wanted a HP I would use with my whole library, not avoid less than stellar recordings and still enjoy them for what they are. My LCD4 is more forgiving in that aspect.

Anyway, that is my little journey, I have to stop somewhere and enjoy my system, as money aspects and the stress of buying / selling is not so enjoyable to me. There will always be 'another' HP coming out. The Stax 011, the LCD5, an Abyss Phi V2, and Mr Fang seems to be on steroids with his new models and odd pricing structures.

My aim is to run the LCD4 straight off my incoming DAC which has 10v output and tube line stage, through the little Aurix on no gain setting (just impedance fixer). I run my 2 channel with a passive and miss out a pre-amp and it seems to work ok. I do like a simpler set up if that is possible, and i am hoping I don't need to buy a bigger amp like the GSX MK2 or something similar. Having a great gain stage in the DAC should be as good as a Woo Audio HP amp, maybe better.

So my summary is the LCD4 does some stuff I see as important which possibly the 009s is less than stellar at. The 009 is still ahead in other areas. It is probably impossible to find a HP that does it all in every aspect of music reproduction.

I blame that on the these factors:
1. The best high end speakers have 3 way or more cones majoring on their respective frequency ranges.
2. Any HP has to handle all the FR and will struggle to do that, imagine the bass energy interacting with the 8K and above details.
3. The headphone panel by the very nature has to energise the air before it gets into the ear, with no analogue (environmental) filtering or interactions.
It is basically shouting to the ear at close quarters.
This means IMO it has to 'cheat' the FR to suit the ears sensitivity to the 4-8k region. No perfectly flat FR required or wanted IMO.
Which makes a mockery of FR readouts looking for the 'perfect' HP in technical terms. A perfect 20hz -20Khz FR will sound hideous in a HP in my opinion.

Well, that is my thoughts for today. Top respect to both Electrostatics & Planars in my book, but I am reminded there are flavours, or ways to skin a cat, finding the best way... this hobby is complicated.

 

[afgmjkl]

SN:00001

https://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/l495008373