Nigel
Been here a while!
Watching over Gotham City keeping us safe
Posts: 2,064
|
Stax
Jan 4, 2007 17:13:10 GMT
Post by Nigel on Jan 4, 2007 17:13:10 GMT
Hi,
Anyone with any thoughts on these? I've never heard a pair & have read so many opposing views. Lack of bass, good for classical, poor for rock, outstanding midrange etc.
Cheers,
Nigel
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 4, 2007 18:44:20 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 4, 2007 18:44:20 GMT
You pretty much covered it I own a pair of vintage Stax cans that currently I use with the Stax energizer and a 20 watt Class-A amp being "ampless" at the moment ;D Considering the age factor and modern advances my eval may not be dead on but here goes anyway 1-great with delicate music like plucked strings,brass,the human voice without added effects,massed acoustic instruments where you can pick out each one distinctly but I find them a tad "light" for any power music such as Rock where the compression of the format does not blend with the ES sound so here I much prefer dynamic cans.Early Jazz and blues a yes,more recent stuff depends leaning to no if it is powerful 2-Mine are a real bitch to drive and when I very first purchased them then plugged the energize in to the speaker selector box (no WAY I run my speakers through the Stax box,no way !) thought they were broken because I could not hear a damn thing ! Nothing but silence ! In a panic I shut down the system then checked all the connections hoping I didn't short out a speaker lead in my rush to hook the cans up,checked tomake sure all the line level interconnects were making contact,checked the position of my tape monitor switch,etc and everything checked out so i fired the big rig back up and gave another listen to see if I could find the problem. Turns out they WERE playing just so damn softly that I didn't even notice and when you combine the somewhat lightweight presentation (though like ES speakers having a glorious midrange and highs ) the low levels wer such that I never realised the "air" I was hearing was the music playing. Now I should add here that all my other transducers are very efficient so it does not take very much to reach LOUD which it turned out the Stax combo was anything but so when i tried to listen with the volume control in my normal listening position the end result was not enough power for the Stax setup with all it taking to rectify the problem was to turn up the volume (dumb ass ;D ) and the music played allowing for a proper eval session. with my vinyl collection mostly great across the board if a bit bass shy again but man,what they did well they did VERY well so the mini jam session turned into me going through a serious portion of my record collection marvelling at the clarity some of the old and worn discs could still provide with the right engine with even the surface noise going to inconsequential because of the smooth manner in which the cans dismissed it making it no more a pain in the ass than having an air conditioner on in the summer while listening with speakers. Bottom line I kept them and depending on moodd,type of music,phase of the moon,whatever swap back and forth between my Grado RA-1s and the ancient Stax setup with the only problem being the sensitivity/volume difference between the Stax and all my other speakers or headphones,something that i learned REAL fast when after that first listening sesssion i forgot to turn the volume back down to my "normal" levels and the next day when i went to play a cut over my speakers was BLASTED damn near right out of the room ! Wife came wheeling around the corner ready to yell at me for playing the music too loud,I'm making the mad scramble to the volume control but being in a state of shock am moving in quicksand,the family cats are hauling ass up the stairs hitting every other step in their haste to get away,birds outside are falling from the sky...........thwump ;D Lesson learned ! Adjust the fkn VOLUME idiot when you are going from stats to dynamics or all hell will break loose ! ( dumb ass ;D ) Even still,definate keepers **
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 4, 2007 23:13:55 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 4, 2007 23:13:55 GMT
I auditioned a pair many years ago and, as lovely as the midrange was, I just couldn't live with that airy void where the bass should be. I'd imagine these would be the ultimate 'phones for guys who are into string quartets, choirs, solu flute renditions, violins and all that arty farty kind of music but I couldn't live with that "unplugged" kind of presentation... I want bass that makes my toes curl and makes my teeth rattle.
The AKG K-340 was the 'phone I ended up with, at the time (early 80's) with it's dynamic bass drivers (5 of them IIRC) and electrostat.... sounded the dog's bollocks and were a lot cheaper than the stax too! I think mine were £79.99 out of Comet (when £79.99 was a lot of money!) I thrashed the f*ck out of them and thought they were the best thing since sliced bread. A couple of years ago I bought a secondhand pair of K-340 but they didn't quite live up to my memories of them back in the 80's sounding decidedly "airy" and lacking in bass.
A pretty warped opinion this considering it's based on memory and 27 years old so my advice would be to try and audition a current pair if you can Nigel... the K-340, at the time, was the electrostat with added subwoofer in my opinion and was my choice over the Stax.
Would be interesting to hear a pair of current Stax though, from all reports, the bass still seems to be the one area where they can't compete with the dynamics.......
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 8:20:01 GMT
Post by digitalmind on Jan 5, 2007 8:20:01 GMT
I auditioned a pair many years ago and, as lovely as the midrange was, I just couldn't live with that airy void where the bass should be. I'd imagine these would be the ultimate 'phones for guys who are into string quartets, choirs, solu flute renditions, violins and all that arty farty kind of music but I couldn't live with that "unplugged" kind of presentation... I want bass that makes my toes curl and makes my teeth rattle. The AKG K-340 was the 'phone I ended up with, at the time (early 80's) with it's dynamic bass drivers (5 of them IIRC) and electrostat.... sounded the dog's bollocks and were a lot cheaper than the stax too! I think mine were £79.99 out of Comet (when £79.99 was a lot of money!) I thrashed the f*ck out of them and thought they were the best thing since sliced bread. A couple of years ago I bought a secondhand pair of K-340 but they didn't quite live up to my memories of them back in the 80's sounding decidedly "airy" and lacking in bass. A pretty warped opinion this considering it's based on memory and 27 years old so my advice would be to try and audition a current pair if you can Nigel... the K-340, at the time, was the electrostat with added subwoofer in my opinion and was my choice over the Stax. Would be interesting to hear a pair of current Stax though, from all reports, the bass still seems to be the one area where they can't compete with the dynamics....... I have no experience will Stax's, but would like to comment on the K-340, as it is a seriously weird thing. They sound absolutely brilliant but I can't figure out why. For one, each differs in sound a bit, so it could definitely be true that your first K-340 had more bass than the one you got so much later. For two, there are 6 dynamic drivers and one electret (spelling?). But the really funny thing is, is that 5 of the dynamic drivers are passive! They apparantly start working as the dynamic driver itself starts working, just bouncing along on the air waves. The active dynamic driver is placed BEHIND the stat unit, so without the passive drivers to 'forward' the sound around that it would sound like all the bass dropped out. I just don't see why this works as good as it does. Then there's the crossover with the transformer for the electret unit. It's very cheap, resistors aren't very well matched (Atleast, not on the two pairs I've checked), and the connections and wires to and from the transformer are terribly thin. This crossover also makes them an absolute bitch to drive. After that the cups are filled with foam which actually degrades the sound because they put in too much. Then, they make a fairly closed cup but left a small part of it open, again degrading the sound. To me the K-340 looks like a bunch of new, unproven techniques (atleast, at that time when it was introduced), and AKG got lucky. It sounds great if you get a right one and if you can amp it. If you can't it'll sound hollow and not as exciting as it can sound. I can't wait to hear a Stax, or a full Electrostat for that matter. Two more weeks till I receive my HE60 so I can hear what they are like.
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 22:24:07 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 5, 2007 22:24:07 GMT
For one, each differs in sound a bit, so it could definitely be true that your first K-340 had more bass than the one you got so much later. There's a reason why..... these guys lose their charge after a while, Karl Peschel (AKG engineer) once told me they were good for about 30 years. I think the pair I got had well and truly started to lose their charge. At the time (when they were brand new) I remember that bass being the best I had ever heard, it was so energetic it made my face vibrate. The ones I tried recently were pretty shy in the bass department. I stand corrected, yes there are 6 diaphragms for the bass with 5 of them being passive. Sounded the dog's bollocks back in the day
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 22:32:25 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 5, 2007 22:32:25 GMT
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 22:53:17 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 5, 2007 22:53:17 GMT
I;m not sure what to make of those pics mike.
Passive Radiator technology has been a round a very long time with the earliest/best example in my meory banks being the Polk Monitor Series,none of which had a "proper" woofer but all excepot the mini monitor having passive radiators providing all the low notes.So a valid method.
The AKG however appears to fire the main transducer energy directly into the back of the "tweeter" element and if it does then the low notes must be contaminating the treble due to the bass slamming into the back of the driver.
If however the front of the main transducer is totally walled off then it makes more sense ion that there would be no driver interaction AND all the bass would be provided by the five passive radiators that being even smaller should be lightening fast yet because there are five probably move even more air than does the regular driver
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 22:55:01 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 5, 2007 22:55:01 GMT
oh yeah,seems like a great mod/update project for older versions would be a battery bias supply to energize the electrets. Something tiny like a watch battery I'm thinking
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 23:16:20 GMT
Post by digitalmind on Jan 5, 2007 23:16:20 GMT
True Mike, 5 diagrams, but another "low frequency capsule" as AKG calls it in their Service Manual. This one is placed behind the Electret unit (which they call the "high frequency capsule"). It's pretty obvious once you have it open and in front of you, but the drawings in the Service Manual are quite decent aswell. You can get that here: Manual(I hope that link works) And it still sounds the dogs bollocks! (If that's a good thing. I'm unknown with the rather british english that you've chosen to use. )
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 23:29:49 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 5, 2007 23:29:49 GMT
And it still sounds the dogs bollocks! (If that's a good thing. I'm unknown with the rather british english that you've chosen to use. ) "The dog's bollocks" means it's really good, first class etc. That amp is the dog's bollocks! means it's a really good amp. Posh people have a different saying, they say "It's the cat's whiskers" I remember once a geezer told me that he considered a pair of certain speakers to be the Pig's bollocks..... "Pigs bollocks?" I asked and he said "yeh, pig's bollocks are a lot bigger than dog's bollocks" so to him the best way of expressing his joy with these speakers was to class them as the Pig's bollocks. I generally tend to stick with dog's bollocks as it's a pretty commonly used, and understood, saying. More on the dog's bollocks here
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 23:44:52 GMT
Post by digitalmind on Jan 5, 2007 23:44:52 GMT
And it still sounds the dogs bollocks! (If that's a good thing. I'm unknown with the rather british english that you've chosen to use. ) "The dog's bollocks" means it's really good, first class etc. That amp is the dog's bollocks! means it's a really good amp. Posh people have a different saying, they say "It's the cat's whiskers" I remember once a geezer told me that he considered a pair of certain speakers to be the Pig's bollocks..... "Pigs bollocks?" I asked and he said "yeh, pig's bollocks are a lot bigger than dog's bollocks" so to him the best way of expressing his joy with these speakers was to class them as the Pig's bollocks. I generally tend to stick with dog's bollocks as it's a pretty commonly used, and understood, saying. More on the dog's bollocks hereBritish is elephant's bollocks!
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 23:53:26 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 5, 2007 23:53:26 GMT
British is elephant's bollocks! Yup, the yanks have a lot of catching up to do their language is more akin to the hamster's bollocks I quote from that link: The Dog's BollocksMeaning Excellent - the absolute apex. In most other contexts the word bollocks (meaning testicles) is used negatively: - 'that's bollocks' -> 'that's rubbish' - 'give him a bollocking' -> 'chastise him' - 'He dropped a bollock' -> 'he made a mistake' For reasons that aren't clear, dog's bollocks, which have all the credentials to be thought of badly, are considered the top of the tree. Dogs do enjoy licking them of course, but there's no evidence that links the coining of this phrase to that. It is most likely that this is just a nonsense phrase, coined because it sounds good. In that it would join a long list of earlier nonsense phrases, e.g. 'the cat's pyjamas', 'the bee's knees' etc. Origin The word bollocks, meaning testicles has been in the language since the 18th century, but didn't become used to mean nonsense until the early 20th century. The 'dog's bollocks' seems to have originated in Britain in the late 1980s. At that time the scurrilous magazine Viz used the term frequently. For example, they used it in the title of an issue in 1989: "Viz: the dog's bollocks: the best of issues 26 to 31." It isn't clear that that is the origin though as Viz's writer's would latch onto any vaguely obscene street slang and print it. Bollocks has long had street cred as a swearword of choice amongst the English young. The Sex Pistols' 1977 album 'Never Mind The Bollocks, Here's The Sex Pistols', no doubt brought the word to greater prominence. Since the phrase came into use some alternatives have emerged - 'the pooches privates' and, more successfully, 'the mutt's nuts'.
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 5, 2007 23:58:41 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 5, 2007 23:58:41 GMT
Apologies for veering off course (stax to AKG K-340 to dog's bollocks) I can't help it.... it's the way I am ;D
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 6, 2007 0:01:09 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 6, 2007 0:01:09 GMT
I;m not sure what to make of those pics mike. Passive Radiator technology has been a round a very long time with the earliest/best example in my meory banks being the Polk Monitor Series,none of which had a "proper" woofer but all excepot the mini monitor having passive radiators providing all the low notes.So a valid method. The AKG however appears to fire the main transducer energy directly into the back of the "tweeter" element and if it does then the low notes must be contaminating the treble due to the bass slamming into the back of the driver. If however the front of the main transducer is totally walled off then it makes more sense ion that there would be no driver interaction AND all the bass would be provided by the five passive radiators that being even smaller should be lightening fast yet because there are five probably move even more air than does the regular driver Remember KEF (Kent engineering foundry) were the first in the world to go ABR IIRC with their bass radiators. Can't recall the model number but am sure they employed the racetrack shaped ABR radiators.
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 6, 2007 0:08:49 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 6, 2007 0:08:49 GMT
would be nice if one of the days you Brits learned how to speake "proper" english so the rest of us would have a GD clue what you are talking about..... ;D
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 6, 2007 0:11:48 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 6, 2007 0:11:48 GMT
oh yeah,seems like a great mod/update project for older versions would be a battery bias supply to energize the electrets. Something tiny like a watch battery I'm thinking Yup, something all these "modders" who charge a fortune for a bit of cable have never mentioned (my guess is they don't know) and probably the only part of the 'phone that needs serious attention ;D Karl (AKG tech) was pretty specific with his info on the life of the charge I wish I'd kept the bloody e-mail from him, I do remember he said 30 years or thereabouts (depending on a lot of variables) They're probably "still" the best 'phone out there but not being heard at their best because they've lost charge. Recabling them and fcking around with them is futile if they've lost their charge (or a good percentage of it) How to recharge your K-340........ now that "would" be a project worth doing
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 6, 2007 0:16:05 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 6, 2007 0:16:05 GMT
Was identical to the flat piston "something something 139"speaker of the same size with the motor removed.
The polks used something similiar but unlike the oval shape of the KEF used a round 12" flat pistom (as did the KEF) passive that when used with a 6.5 inch mid-woofer (the basic speaker for every single Polk speaker at the time,even their subwoofer)
all in all a cool way to drop the f3 of a small driver while increasin thew amount of and increase the "air" moved without adding another crossover.If you think about it all the really successful designs use one method or other to get more and deeper bass without resorting to more speakers or more amps
Horn loading
Transmission Lines
Slot loading
Passive Radiators
Woofers aimed at the floor or ceiling.....
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 6, 2007 0:19:28 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 6, 2007 0:19:28 GMT
Was identical to the flat piston "something something 139"speaker of the same size with the motor removed. Yes, the KEF BD-139 one of the best British drivers ever. There may be something about it at KEF history www.kef.com/allhistory.aspShame they've gone to basically a one man band CAD operation when they were the world leaders at one time employing thousands of people ;D
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 6, 2007 1:52:55 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 6, 2007 1:52:55 GMT
The drivers were not only cool but offered for sale either singly or in approved "KEF Kits" that had a project example of damn near every speaker in the commercial lineup. TLD and IMF used the LF drivers in their transmission line monitors along with the also defunct Coles Tweeter and they were so accurate they were scary and because of that didn't sell as well as they should have due to most humans SAYING they want plane brown wrapper accurate until they actually hear it BTW-I ever get my greedy hands on a pair of the B139 or SP1044 woofers I'm determined to build the MONSTER TL subwoofer affectionately known as "The Coffin" www.hogheaven.com/diyaudio/subwoofers/PATL/patl.htmlmake for one hell of a coffee table,if shit didn't rattle right off and onto the floor it would anyway
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 6, 2007 12:56:43 GMT
Post by smeggy on Jan 6, 2007 12:56:43 GMT
Well, say what you like, my Staxes *are* the dogs bollocks. Some of them anyway. I prefer the older stax (the ones with less bass) to the newer ones I have. They are ferkin' awesome from 45Hz up I have a few dynamics too but they don't get much airtime. I run mine off a wee T-amp and they sound much better than from the Stax amps. More bass, better dynamics and lotsa fun.I have them plugged into a Stax 313 for the weekend and it sucks donkey balls. Totally lifeles, so the 313 is going. I need more T-amps.
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 15, 2007 16:13:31 GMT
Post by dc on Jan 15, 2007 16:13:31 GMT
Well, say what you like, my Staxes *are* the dogs bollocks. Some of them anyway. I prefer the older stax (the ones with less bass) to the newer ones I have. They are ferkin' awesome from 45Hz up I have a few dynamics too but they don't get much airtime. I run mine off a wee T-amp and they sound much better than from the Stax amps. More bass, better dynamics and lotsa fun.I have them plugged into a Stax 313 for the weekend and it sucks donkey balls. Totally lifeles, so the 313 is going. I need more T-amps. hehe, we use an expression "the bees' knees" here in aus, never quite understood it anyway, i was under the impression you needed a special stax driver unit. wasn't aware you could run the earspeakers straight off an amp? as they have a special plug/connection. i ask this as im looking at mayb getting some SR-303s+SRM-323a driver unit
|
|
|
Stax
Jan 15, 2007 21:21:25 GMT
Post by PinkFloyd on Jan 15, 2007 21:21:25 GMT
Mike, here is Karls contact information: "Peschel Karl" <PeschelK@akg.com> Cheers Miguel, I already have his details
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 15, 2007 22:36:20 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 15, 2007 22:36:20 GMT
I never have any luck with Klipsch subs which is baffling to me since my main speakers ARE Klispch.The two just don't seem to mate well at the hand off frequency as if the woofer is a step behind. At one time I thought it was maybe trying to mate a sealed box (mains) to a "slower" ported or passive assisted box until I built a HUGE ported sub I used to call "The Refridgerator" that was about as big as a fridge and used a single 15" driver so I thinking in my case it is a "size matters" thing so because my first choice won't fit www.volvotreter.de/downloads/Edgar-Monolith-Horn-01.jpgwww.volvotreter.de/downloads/Edgar-Monolith-Horn-03.jpgwww.volvotreter.de/downloads/Edgar-Monolith-Horn-04.jpgand since I no longer have my "Refridgerator Sub" and can't build another not having the plans anymore figure the Fried Coffin is about my last best hope.Would make a KILLER TV stand so big as it is not too big when used in the middle with a big ass video monitor on top
|
|
rickcr42
Fully Modded
Rest in peace my good friend.
Posts: 4,514
|
Stax
Jan 16, 2007 0:23:24 GMT
Post by rickcr42 on Jan 16, 2007 0:23:24 GMT
the commercial version of the Monolith,the "Seismic"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Stax
Apr 16, 2007 12:51:10 GMT
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2007 12:51:10 GMT
RE Stax (if anyone still cares !) I completely agree with the comments by Nigel and PinkFloyd. However, they are fabulous for listening to female singers.as they all show their individuality, I found that a later model STAX transformer driven by the Class A, was streets ahead of the SRM313 driver. Actually, the bass is only down by about 2db, but it sounds a helluva lot more. I have a compilation test disc of various types of material that several of us use for evaluating our mods to different types of equipment. Using the response graph from STAX,and SoundForge 8 , I roughly equalised several of the worst variations , and corrected the bottom end below about 150HZ by up to (from memory) 2db at the very low end, and burned an equalised disc. They then sounded very much like the Sony MDR CD780 on most material, but with much more delicacy in the treble. Anyone with a digital equaliser in their gear could then really make the Stax sound great on almost all material. SandyK
|
|