Stax SR-009 Electrostatic Earspeaker (Playback 54)

Best Headphone Ever

For many decades the name Stax has been synonymous with top quality electrostatic headphones, and many discerning listeners have regarded their top models as among the best, if not the best, headphones presently available. Last year, however, Stax changed the game by releasing a new ultra-rare and ultra-expensive flagship model—the SR-009 electrostatic earspeaker ($5250). To appreciate what a quantum leap into the price/performance stratosphere this represents, consider the fact that Stax’s previous flagship model, the SR-007 Mk2, sells for $2650 (the SR-007 Mk2 will continue in the product line and be sold alongside the SR-009).

The SR-009 is, to the best of my knowledge, the most costly headphone on today’s market, and there is frankly only one thing that can possibly justify its lofty price: performance, performance, and more performance. Does the SR-009 deliver the sonic goods? That’s the question this review will address, but the unequivocal one-word answer is, yes! If any headphone can ever make a $5250 price tag seem warranted, this is the one. Read on to find out why.

 

FEATURES/TECHNICAL HIGHLIGHTS

I’ve been around electrostatic speakers (and headphones) for most of my adult life, so that I’m very familiar with the technology, but for those of you are new to electrostatic drivers allow me to provide a brief bit of background information that will help explain what makes them special.

Unlike conventional dynamic drivers, electrostats do not use rigid cone or dome-shaped diaphragms, nor do they use voice coil/magnet-driven motor assemblies. Instead, electrostatic drivers use exceedingly light, thin, flexible, conductive, membrane-like diaphragms that are suspended between two fixed, perforated, mesh-like metal panels that Stax simply calls “electrodes” (some manufacturers call them “stators”—hence the term “electrostat”). The only moving part of the driver is the conductive diaphragm, itself, which is incredibly light: in fact, Stax diaphragms are less than 2 microns thick—meaning they have vanishingly low moving mass.

When the earphone is in operation, a continuous bias voltage (580V in Stax designs) is applied to the diaphragm (the voltage is supplied by a purpose-built electrostatic headphone amplifier or “energizer,” as Stax calls its electrostatic amps). In turn, balanced audio signals are applied to the driver’s electrodes, so that one electrode takes on a positive charge while the other takes on a negative charge. As audio signals are applied, the conductive diaphragm is pushed away from one electrode panel and simultaneously attracted toward the other, and vice versa, moving back and forth in precise response to the ebb and flow of the audio signal.

To see a well-illustrated explanation of electrostatic technology in action, click on this link to the Stax web site: http://staxusa.com/Technology.html.

In principle, electrostatic drivers provide several key benefits that no other driver type can fully equal:

Simplicity: the only moving part in the driver is the diaphragm.
Precision & Control: the entire surface of the driver is driven, rather than just the center of a cone or the rim of a dome, as in conventional dynamic drivers. This means the whole moving surface of the driver is under the precise control of the audio signal at all times. (The same is also true of planar magnetic drivers.).
Ultra Low Mass: The very low mass of the electrostatic driver allows terrific transient speed and the ability “turn on a dime,” so to speak. (While planar magnetic drivers are also low in mass, their diaphragms do incorporate conductive metal traces arranged as planar “voice coils,” which do add a little bit of extra mass).

There are really only two perceived drawbacks to electrostatic headphones:

Specialized Amps Required: Conventional headphone amplifiers are not capable of driving electrostatic headphones. Instead, electrostatic ‘phones require dedicated, purpose built electrostatic headphones amps (or energizers), sourced either from Stax or other amp manufacturers. As a rule, electrostatic amps (or at least ones good enough to be used with the SR-009, tend to be quite expensive).
Caution - High Voltages Within: By their very nature, electrostatic headphones are high-voltage devices and therefore require amps capable of supplying the requisite bias voltage (again, 580V for Stax headphones), and of supplying high-voltage, balanced-output audio signals. To my knowledge there is absolutely no rational reason to feel anxious or fearful about wearing or using electrostatic ‘phones. Even so, I would concede that some listeners simply do not like the idea of having drivers with hundreds of volts coursing through them positioned just fractions of an inch from their ears.

Comments

Gadgety -- Fri, 03/09/2012 - 04:34

So how do you account for this improvement that warrants a doubling of the price: thinner diaphragms and stiffer stators? I doubt that explains it all. What about the amplifier? Can Stax explain what the performance upgrades are, and how they warrant a doubling of the price?

Chris Martens -- Fri, 03/09/2012 - 14:09

Hi Gadgety:

You pose a fair question. I'll tell what I know based on my investigations thus far.

1) The differences are not solely attributable to the amp, good though the Woo Audio WES is. I know this because I have heard a pair of Stax SR-007 MkIIs alongside the SR-009s with both headphones driven by the very same WES amp. I found there was quite a big performance gap between the SR-007 MkII and the SR-009, and since the same amp was driving both 'phones at the same time, I have to think the difference was attributable to the superior design/execution of the SR-009.

2) I'm not sure whether you will find Stax's information on the SR-009 compelling or not, but to see the company's own explanation of the improvements made in the SR-009, follow this link: http://staxusa.com/Earspeaker/STAX-SR-009.html

3) Do the improvements warrant a doubling in price? Only you can answer that one.

As I mentioned in this review, today's best dynamic and planar magnetic 'phones can get you fairly close to the performance of the SR-009 for much less money (think of prices in the $1k - $2k range versus $5250 for the Stax). Still, in high-end audio (and the SR-009 is unquestionably at the high end of the high end), the final 5% or so of performance has traditionally been the hardest to achieve and also the most expensive. This is a roundabout way of saying that the value proposition of the SR-009 (and of the high performance amp it will require) is very much in the ear (and wallet) of the beholder.

Personally, I can't afford the SR-009 or the amp I would need to match with it. So, I content myself (quite happily) with a set of planar magnetic 'phones and a good but not painfully expensive amp. But that doesn't stop me from admiring what Stax and Woo have achieved, or from dreaming that one day I'll perhaps figure out a way...

Best, Chris Martens

Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision 

tonereef -- Thu, 03/15/2012 - 19:02

Chris, you mention what you feel to be a slight upper mid-range rise. In my experience these phones require careful matching of amps and/or sources for them to sound natural in the treble, at least if your system is really open up there. In my case it helped to substitute 6FQ7s for 2 of the 6DJ8s in my DIY tube amp. Quite a lot of people have commented that the 009s sound bright with different amps; of course, there is considerable variation in the perception of highs via headphones due to outer ear differences (not to mention HF hearing loss!). Tyll Hertsen's measurements (at Inner Fidelity) show a bump of about 3 dB around 1K. They also show that the bass below about 50 Hz is down 3-4 dB compared to the upper bass/mids. I believe I hear this and that it's not caused by the source or amp or cables; did you not hear it with the Woo? In any case these are wonderful phones, for all the reasons you mention.

Tony Reif

Chris Martens -- Fri, 03/16/2012 - 11:30

Hi tonereef,

You do raise a good point. The SR-009's are VERY sensitive to tubes or to any other elements of the system. The Stax 'phones can and do expose even the smallest system changes or tuning adjustments.

I experienced no brightness problems at all when the SR-009 was used with the Head Amp Blue Hawaii SE and the pre-production prototype of the Cavalli Liquid Lightning, and only occasional trace amounts of upper midrange brightness (on some but not most recordings) through the Woo WES. The tradeoff, however, was that the Woo--as configured with Sophia driver tubes and Shuguang 50 Years Treasures output tubes--was arguably the most transparent/open-sounding of the three amps. According to Jack Wu, you can temper those trace bits of midrange forwardness observed in the WES either by making a different tube choice or by ordering up the WES with the extra-cost V-CAP options that Woo offers.

In my experience, perceived bass output levels varied somewhat with different amps, too. I would say that in general terms the extreme low end of the SR-009 may not be **quite** as full-bodied as that of a properly driven Audeze LCD-3 or LCD-2, Rev.2, nor as rock solid as the bottom end of an also properly driven HiFiMAN HE-6. But with that said, I would add that the SR-009's low frequency balance often tends to seem more consistent with the sound of live music (most of the time, at any rate), and that its pitch definition and transient speed are spectacularly good. All in all, I could live happily with the SR-009's bass performance; it certainly didn't seem "bass shy" to me, and I'm normally quite sensitive to (or even finicky about) such things.

Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision 

dyl1dyl -- Fri, 03/23/2012 - 04:16

Hi Chris,

Would be very interesting to read a comparison piece between the 009s and the Audez'e LCD-3s. Any news on whether you guys have/are going to have a pair of the new Audez'e flagships in soon?

Best Regards

 
Speakers: B and W 802 Diamonds, Bose Lifestyle 35, Audioengine AP4 Bamboo
Headphones: Audeze LCD-3, LCD-2, Beyerdynamic T5p, dt880, AKG K701, Ultrasone HFI-780
IEMs/Earbuds: Westone 4, Mons

Chris Martens -- Fri, 06/22/2012 - 12:54

Hi dyl1dyl:

A review of the Audeze LCD-3 will be coming soon in Playback.

Best,

Chris Martens

Chris Martens
Editor, Avguide.com/Playback/The Perfect Vision 

aross -- Thu, 08/30/2012 - 15:07

Chris: When I purchased the WES, Jack Wu suggested the ultimate tube upgrades and internal parts upgrades, I purchased both. Some time later, when the SR 009 was released, I purchased those as well. Before I come off sounding like a "big spender," let me mention that as a teenager in the 1950s I was designing and building my own audio equipment, and into the 1960s building "top rank" amp and preamp kits. A successful legal career enabled me to reach the ultimate audio heights in the 1980s. In the early 1990s, as empty nesters, my wife and I moved into a new townhouse condo community. Approaching retirement, I sold much of my system and moved into the world of earspeakers, at a small fraction of the cost of my ultimate system. (Stax amps and earspeakers and a fine CD player)

I must assume that your review process could not extend over the time frame of my listening experience (since my purchase of the WES), so I want to let you know about some long term developments.

When I purchased the SR 009s, Jack suggested that I bring in WES to upgrade the original chokes. (I have no idea what I am talking about)
Immediately I could hear a major improvement. At somewhere between the 200-300 hours of listening experience my audio "troops" and I felt that we had reached the full and final break-in... nirvana! Then, quite unexpectedly, somewhere around 700-800 hours or so, there was a further step into reality. Understand that we had already concluded that "nirvana are us!" But there arrived further clarity... not that we were experiencing any congestion on massed strings, etc., but even more transparancy appeared! On well recorded material, from FIM CDs to hi-res downloads, "YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY THERE"!

Live concerts rarely drive us to greater listening joy except for the participation experience.

ADR 

ianmedium -- Sat, 09/29/2012 - 00:54

I have listened to the Eagles track so many times and never got what you heard..Until now! Though I am hearing it through my FAD Piano Forte IX's. That is quite a revelation! Just to be sure I then plugged in my LCD2's balanced and it was not there!

lhissink -- Fri, 11/16/2012 - 05:43

Chris,

Just received my SR009's - and you are correct in your conclusion - they are essentially transparent, transmitting the audio characteristics of the driving chain, and thus potentially frustrating if the drivers are not as transparent as others.

Mind you I was initially startled listening to them to an FM signal during which I heard the musicians sliding their fingers along the frets - heads-up sort of reaction. This information via a standard (low) FM signal ??

That said I'm still running mine in via the Stax SRM600 but bear in mind that this amplifier is being driven by a Qol unit via Accuphase and Bryston sources, so while not Wu's, the driver's are not shabby under most circumstances.

Immediate impressions (Listening to the Decca recording of Ute Lemper) is that this is a very transparent transducer. Switching the Qol in and out has dramatic effects to the soundstage and timbre as well.

Equipment used for this opinion:
1. Computer files produced from DDPoweramp and Audiogate software.
2. Bryston BDP-1
3. Accuphase C2110 preamp with DAC30 option
4. Qol Signal enhancing unit
5. Stax SRM-600
6. Stax SR009 headphones.
7. HP Envy all in one PC, Windows 8, Audiogate Software 4.3 via Accuphase DAC30 SP/DIF USB.

 Louis Hissink

Michael Oelgesc... -- Thu, 05/09/2013 - 02:34

I now have the set for almost 1 month. And there was not a single moment, where I have regretted the purchase. For the most part of the last 10 years, I had a Stax SignatureI headphone set with a SRM 006tII energizer. But somewhere along the line, I decided to buy a better headphone set, opted for the SR 009 headphone with the SRM 007tII energizer and bought them. Frankly, when I listened to the new set for the first time, I didn't expect the improvement in quality to be that big. While I always enjoyed the Signature set, the SR 009 really makes a difference in terms of clarity, reproduction of cymbals and basses, etc. And I don't even have a stellar audio system. My Cambridge Audio CD Player 851C is just fine along with some solid main plugs, XLR- and Cinch cables.

In that regard, if you can't afford to be all your stereo components high end, you can make concessions and still be happy. Some 20 years ago, a dealer told me to spent the same amount for player (phone, cassette, CD, tuner), and amplifier combined for the speaker set (in my case the Stax set). I always kept that in mind and in my opinion, he was right.

At last I would like to add, that in my opinion, the SR 009 is worth the 5.000 € you have to spent (in germany where I live).

It isn't easy to quantify, whether money for an item is well spent or not or is worth the amount. In my opinion it depends, what you expect from the item to be bought. When it comes to listened to music and enjoying life, the SR 009 is a good choice.

All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1999 - 2011 NextScreen. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.