Stax SR-Lambda -- Extended Impressions

[Ninja Pirate]

Stax SR-Λ -- extended impressions

Figure I'd post this here if anyone is interested.

My original post on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/2gedoi/stax_srλ_normal_bias_extended_impressions/




TLDR: Electrostatics are nice.


Preamble:

• My sound preference: Generally on the warm and dark side of neutral
• Source used: PC --> Yulong D100 MkII --> Emotiva mini-X --> Stax SRD-7 SB (adapter box/step up transformer for speaker amps).
• Other headphones used: HD 800 / LCD-2
• Time spent with product: 7+ months.

What is it?

• Product link: http://wiki.faust3d.com/wiki/index.php?title=SR-Λ[2]
• Description: It's an electrostatic headphone first introduced in 1979. I purchased it off the for sale section on Head-Fi.
• What do you get: These were bought used so all I really got was the headphones themselves and adapter box (bought as a bundle).
• Price: 350 EURO shipped (used item)

How does it sound?

• Bass: Surprisingly the SR-Λ actually doesn't do too bad in the bass department. Extension is reasonable and there is a decent amount of punch though lacking in both areas when compared to the LCD-2 and a bit behind the HD 800 (Anax 2.0). Does in rare cases exhibit some low end break up/distortion, most likely due to the driver age/wear.
• Mids: If it wasn't for the slight harshness in the upper mid range, it would be almost perfect. Definitely not recessed in any way, not as lush/thick sounding as the LCD-2, gives an incredible sense of speed and detail.
• Treble: Doesn't seem overly prone to sibilance though I have noticed it on occasion. Not as bright as the stock HD 800, definitely brighter than the LCD-2. Typical electrostatic levels of detail and air.
• Soundstage: HD 800 still wins hands down in this department, SR-Λ is noticeable more spacious sounding than the LCD-2.
• External Isolation: Non existent, you can hear your dog fart from across the room.
• Overall: Fairly 'natural' sounding headphone, slightly harsh in the upper mid range, with some insane transient performance.

Comfort and Build Quality:

• Headband: Great, plenty of room for adjustment even for my large noggin. Headband is of the suspension type design. The material is some kind of very soft fabric (not leather), the headband arms are made of plastic. It's probably the most comfortable headband out of all my headphones.
• Ear pads: The shape is rectangular with an oval cutout for your ears. There is a slight angle making the headphones sit slightly forward. They are large and easily fit around my ears. Depth is a bit shallow (though the drivers sit back in the housing so your ears won't touch them) and padding is a bit meh (I suspect the foam inside has degraded). They use some kind of leather/pleather material for the covering, feels ok, definitely not the nicest pads I've tried.
• Cable and connectors: Cable is the typical ribbon type that Stax tends to use, they are soft to the touch and in pretty good condition. They exhibit pretty much no microphonics at all which is great. The cable itself is pretty bloody long (at least 2m). It is terminated on one end in a 6 pin connector (modern Stax headphones use the 5 pin connector).
• Clamp: Very light, closest headphone I can think of with such a light clamping force would be my MA900.
• Weight: Decent, the headband really distributes the weight on your head very well so they don't feel all that heavy. The cable on the other hand does feel a lot heavier than what I'm used to.
• Durability: Considering these headphones are more than 30 years old I'd say the durability is reasonable. No doubt these have been well looked after but still 30 years is a long time. The cover over the diaphragm does show signs of degradation, and the ear pads and headband both show a bit of wear. They do feel rather flimsy when you hold them being made almost entirely out of plastic. Not something you'll want to just throw around.

Purely subjective rankings:

• Bass impact: LCD-2 > HD 800 >= SR-Λ
• Bass extension: LCD-2 > HD 800 > SR-Λ
• Bass enjoyment: LCD-2 > HD 800 > SR-Λ
• Mids lushness: LCD-2 > HD 800 = SR-Λ
• Upper Mid range harshness: SR-Λ > HD 800 >> LCD-2 (most harsh -> least harsh)
• Mids enjoyment: LCD-2 >= SR-Λ = HD 800
• Treble air: SR-Λ = HD 800 >> LCD-2
• Treble enjoyment: SR-Λ = HD 800 > LCD-2
• Soundstage width: HD 800 > SR-Λ > LCD-2
• Imaging: HD 800 > SR-Λ > LCD-2
• Headband comfort: SR-Λ > HD 800 > LCD-2
• Earpad comfort: LCD-2 > HD 800 > SR-Λ
• Clamping pressure: LCD-2 >>>>> HD 800 > SR-Λ (more clamp -> less clamp)

Other notes:

• Amping: Being an electrostatic headphone it needs a compatible amp to go with it. I use the SRD-7SB attached to the speaker taps on my mini-X. Seems to do a decent job of driving them (I have the volume knob set at about 11 o'clock on the mini-X), it does take a few seconds at the start to build up the necessary charge (i.e it sounds quiet and the bass is non existent). On a side note, it can be quite hard to find amplifiers for the normal bias range (230V compared to the current 580V). When you do find one, they are usually still quite expensive.
• Driver wear: Due to having such a light/thin diaphragm, the older Stax models can be rather prone to driver wear/damage (moisture and dust on the drivers seem to be the main culprits). My pair seems to be in pretty good shape, the gold covering over the diaphragm does show a few dark spots but apart from the rare bit of break up/distortion on some bass notes, it seems to be working fine.
• A word on soundstage and imaging: I find it quite hard to accurately judge soundstage differences so be aware that like everything else above, I could be full of schiit.

Pics:

• A few more: http://imgur.com/a/qTcaD

 

[Cookeh]

Heard an awful lot about these beasts - thanks for the review, an interesting review to say the least! I had heard/read that they are meant to give much more accurate sound reproduction due to the principal of electrostatics either side of the driver.

 

[Ninja Pirate]

Heard an awful lot about these beasts - thanks for the review, an interesting review to say the least! I had heard/read that they are meant to give much more accurate sound reproduction due to the principal of electrostatics either side of the driver.

I wouldn't say that electrostatics are inherently more accurate sounding (I define accuracy as having good timbre). They tend to have very fast transient characteristics due to their extremely low mass diaphragms. The diaphragm on mine are 2 microns thick (0.002 mm) and the ones on the flagship models are even thinner. This means that they don't require a lot of external dampening to make the drivers come to a rest (i.e. a very fast transient response).

 

[rids57]

I've never been fortunate enough to hear a Stax setup but the initial reaction has to be "my god they are fugly".

It's a shame that the electrostatic headphone is still rooted firmly in the esoterica of the headphone world because it has so much to offer sonically.

 

[Ninja Pirate]

Yeah the Lambda range aren't exactly lookers. I do quite like the Omega's though (they sound amazing to boot).

I think in the next few years we may see a few more electrostats from people other than Stax. Both Hifiman (Jade 2) and Sennheiser (HE100) are apparently releasing new models, though I suspect they won't come cheap (I'm thinking at least $2k+). Kingsound is another one to watch.

I do wish some more affordable options (sub $500USD) would come out though. The current range of electrostatics are pretty poor value, especially when compared to the electrostatic speakers on the market (the Martin Logan ESL's for instance are simply amazeballs for the money).

 

[rids57]

I think the problem with cheaper electrostatics is that they can't really be thought of as just the headphones because you still need that high voltage amp to drive them.

I do wonder if the fear of having hundreds of volts an inch from your ears might have something to do with their continued life as a niche headphone?

 

[Cookeh]

I wouldn't say that electrostatics are inherently more accurate sounding (I define accuracy as having good timbre). They tend to have very fast transient characteristics due to their extremely low mass diaphragms. The diaphragm on mine are 2 microns thick (0.002 mm) and the ones on the flagship models are even thinner. This means that they don't require a lot of external dampening to make the drivers come to a rest (i.e. a very fast transient response).

Thanks for the more detailed explanation - filled a few holes in my knowledge

 

[Ninja Pirate]

I think the problem with cheaper electrostatics is that they can't really be thought of as just the headphones because you still need that high voltage amp to drive them.

I do wonder if the fear of having hundreds of volts an inch from your ears might have something to do with their continued life as a niche headphone?

I'd be more concerned about the amount of current you run through something like the HE-6

I agree, the amps are probably the main downfall of electrostatic headphones. For the most part they seem grossly overpriced for what they do (I mean the actual circuit layout isn't that complex if you look at the KGSSHV) and even the cheapest amp on the market (SRM 252S) is almost half a grand here in the UK...

 

[GoRedwings19]

I wouldn't say that electrostatics are inherently more accurate sounding (I define accuracy as having good timbre). They tend to have very fast transient characteristics due to their extremely low mass diaphragms. The diaphragm on mine are 2 microns thick (0.002 mm) and the ones on the flagship models are even thinner. This means that they don't require a lot of external dampening to make the drivers come to a rest (i.e. a very fast transient response).

That's only half the story it due to the fact that there is no moving parts i.e the diaphragm doesn't move compared to a conventional speaker diaphragm.

There are very few conventional headphones which can match let alone surpass the transient response of an electrostatic due to their nature. Of the electrostatics I have heard probably the most noticeable electrostatic with the fastest transient response was the Sennheiser HE60 better known as the 'Baby Orpheus'.

And the only headphone I ever heard which matched it speed and surpassed it was the Sony Qualia 010 now discontinued as far as I know.

I have never heard the Stax Lamda's But I do have experience with the Stax Omega 2's, Sennheiser HE60's (Baby orpheus) and of course if you are remotely interested in electrostatic headphones the Sennheiser HE90 (Orpheus).

The Stax Omega 2's and I hate this analogy but it the one that seems most to fit the bill is a Sennheiser 650 on steroids if that makes sense. It has a dark presentation somewhat similar to the Senn 650.

The Sennheiser HE60's was at least to these old ears the fastest sounding and the brightest sounding of the bunch.

The Sennheiser HE90's was the closest sound of the bunch to neutral. Although it does have a colouration of a slightly sweet sounding midrange. Not as sweet as a Burmester cd player midrange but definetely along those lines.

I love electrostatics as a whole although there is one thing I wish they could do that even the most budget of headphones can do that a electrostat can not do and that's irrespective of how much the electrostat headphones cost and how much money you plough into the amplification...Bass impact.

Some people don't like it, some have no preference and some love it. I am the first to admit I love it a lot. My fave pastime was to put on a set of Grado PS-1's use the flat pads and then sit on top of a subwoofer (in this case a Rel).

I also liked the Audio Technica's L3000 for this reason as well.

But nevertheless once I got my grubby mitts on a set of HE90's I didn;t quite forget about it but it wasn't so much of an issue.

Good luck with your electrostatic headphone enjoyment.