It was also possible to overload the SR-Omegas in the bass, though it was difficult to predict which material would challenge it. Pictures was handled without a hitch. Two bass transients on "Second Hand Copter," from the Clear and Present Danger soundtrack (Milan 73138-35679-2), however, broke up badly at high levels, though the SR-Omegas handled most of the (very deep) bass on this recording with ease. Occasionally, the SR-Omegas showed definite but less overt signs of strain. There were hints of breakup, without things actually pulling apart, where powerful deep-bass passages are combined with densely scored passages.
That's about it, folks. Unless you want to come down on the SR-Omegas for the above-mentioned generic headphone weaknesses—the less-than-natural imaging and the lack of tactile feel in the bass, which still make me ultimately prefer listening through good loudspeakers than to any headphones—these 'phones are hard to criticize. Despite that residual brightness, its top end was exceptional: massed violins were silky-sweet; percussion was detailed and crisp, without any of that "zippy aftertaste," to borrow a good line from DO; sibilants were especially good—even those difficult ones in closely miked pop vocals never "took off" for parts unknown after the singer was finished with them. There was plenty of air and space, though less than with the Sennheiser HE 60s/HEV 70. Though the Sennheiser system has a little too much sparkle at the very top, it is totally free of any brightness in the low to mid treble.
I found nothing to criticize in the midrange performance of the SR-Omegas. Voices were real, with a full-bodied naturalness and three-dimensionality that extended through the upper-bass region. Instruments, both singly and en masse, simply sounded right.
Apart from the rare overload problem noted, the bass of the SR-Omega was exceptional. The Stax didn't hype the bass region to achieve an artificial illusion of the "feel" possible with loudspeakers; neither was there any question of its ability to reach deeper than all but the best loudspeakers and subwoofers. It also didn't slight the mid- to upper bass critical to proper spectral weight. The latter is a difficult tightrope to walk—too much body and you risk muddying the sound; too little and music lacks the proper sense of scale. The SR-Omegas got this balance as close to right as you're likely to hear.
Against the Lambda
I compared the SR-Omega with its "economy" sibling, the $2000 SR-Lambda Signature T1, which I fortunately still had on hand. With two Pro-series outputs to the SRM-T1S amplifier, it was simple to plug in both headsets and have a listen. It took almost no time to characterize the differences. The SR-Lambdas remain excellent headphones, but their somewhat etched, crisp quality was immediately evident in comparison with the SR-Omegas, which simply sounded more relaxed, more natural, and more subtly detailed. The differences were not trivial, particularly on complex material. Less obvious, but nonetheless evident, was the superiority of the SR-Omegas in bottom-end extension and clarity. In one respect, however, the SR-Lambdas were marginally superior—they had better LF power-handling capability.
A note of warning if you're able to make the same comparison yourself: The SR-Lambdas are slightly more sensitive than are the SR-Omegas, so you'll have to readjust the volume when switching over, to avoid being misled. In all my comparisons, I set the respective levels of each headphone subjectively. I normally prefer a more precise means of level matching; but, short of inserting tiny microphones in the ear canal to measure the operational sensitivity of each headphone, it's impractical with headphones.
Are the Stax SR-Omegas as good as the Sennheiser Orpheus headphones I reviewed in February 1994? I did have some reservations about the balance of the Orpheus 'phones, but their astonishing openness nevertheless won me over. However, while I felt that they certainly belonged in Class A, they didn't redefine the class.
The SR-Omegas do, and at a substantially more reasonable—if still high—price. As I haven't heard the Orpheus in a year, it would be presumptuous to make a more detailed comparison of it with the SR-Omegas. Still, the SR-Omegas moved me in a way that the Orpheus did not. If you're able to manage and justify buying the Orpheus, I urge you to also hear the SR-Omegas, then decide for yourself. If in the likely event you're able to hear only the SR-Omegas (Orpheus dealers aren't exactly on every street corner), and find them as superb as I did, then buy them without regret. Let's see, how many recordings will that $9000 difference in price buy?
Conclusions
The Stax SR-Omega is simply in a different class. I can't remember when I've been this excited by the sound of the business end of a two-channel system, be it headphone or loudspeaker. Granted, loudspeaker manufacturers are faced with a far more difficult challenge, because of the amount of air they have to move. And even headphones as good as the SR-Omegas won't replace loudspeakers for reasons I've already enumerated. But, despite the limited consumer market for expensive headphones, Stax deserves to sell a pair of SR-Omegas to every recording studio in the world, with a pair to every manufacturer of high-end components, including loudspeaker manufacturers, thrown in for good measure. The SR-Omegas will tell them more about what's happening in their recordings and products than anything else I can imagine. Did I mention that the Stax SR-Omegas were stunning? That's an understatement.
I compared the SR-Omega with its "economy" sibling, the $2000 SR-Lambda Signature T1, which I fortunately still had on hand. With two Pro-series outputs to the SRM-T1S amplifier, it was simple to plug in both headsets and have a listen. It took almost no time to characterize the differences. The SR-Lambdas remain excellent headphones, but their somewhat etched, crisp quality was immediately evident in comparison with the SR-Omegas, which simply sounded more relaxed, more natural, and more subtly detailed. The differences were not trivial, particularly on complex material. Less obvious, but nonetheless evident, was the superiority of the SR-Omegas in bottom-end extension and clarity. In one respect, however, the SR-Lambdas were marginally superior—they had better LF power-handling capability.
The Stax SR-Omega is simply in a different class. I can't remember when I've been this excited by the sound of the business end of a two-channel system, be it headphone or loudspeaker. Granted, loudspeaker manufacturers are faced with a far more difficult challenge, because of the amount of air they have to move. And even headphones as good as the SR-Omegas won't replace loudspeakers for reasons I've already enumerated. But, despite the limited consumer market for expensive headphones, Stax deserves to sell a pair of SR-Omegas to every recording studio in the world, with a pair to every manufacturer of high-end components, including loudspeaker manufacturers, thrown in for good measure. The SR-Omegas will tell them more about what's happening in their recordings and products than anything else I can imagine. Did I mention that the Stax SR-Omegas were stunning? That's an understatement.
