BTW, where does the Carbon name come from for this amp?  Carbon makes me think resistors, but not sure what that has to do with it.  Just out of curiosity.  

Maybe for this ¿? C2M1000170D

http://www.mouser.com/ds/2/90/2m1000170d-838564.pdf

Edited December 4, 20178 yr by jose

first "All Triode" ... a bit humble, but never the less, described the main idea,  ... a breakout to the pacific and Blue Hawaii came to life,  sometimes wonder if the place of birth had been Burger King, the amp would have been "Whopper Cheese" as  James McLamore thought it conveyed "imagery of something big"  ...
then a bit more bold: KGSS: "Kevin Gilmore Solid State" , humming along same convention came the KGSShv  the creator soon realized that the mini panels preferred by the baker didn't  had enough real estate for the trend of adding letters for every bright idea ....Megatron was  a bold stand up against Disney, although the pupils of Walt soon realized that the best thing to do, was not to do anything ... one knows Darth Wader when he comes around! ...being the Che Guevara of electrostatic amplification can be a bit challenging at times although having high potential, so a short re-visit to the old scheme, and the Kevin Gilmore Single Triode (KGST) was a reality , but sadly didn't really take off .... the hole thing started as means of creating the best for the SR-007 ... my name is Bond ...Carbon ....feeling dizzy? confused? everything going in circles? and the  Circlotron was a reality ....I bet Q has a plan, anyways, it is about time that a proper amp is named: "Surströmming", as the taste is more delicious  than the smell ...

For those that have the Carbon, what would you recommend as the better earspeaker?  SR-L700 or SR-007A (newest version)?  Price of the 2 are within about $500, so cost savings is only a minor consideration.  I also want to be able to drive my earspeakers with the SRX-Plus since I find that amp gives a good tone for some music.  Not sure if that changes the answer or not.  

From what I heard, 007 MKI was an excellent pairing with Carbon, not sure about MkII

Sorry but, but... 500$ for a SR007A? Where?   

17 minutes ago, jose said:

Sorry but, but... 500$ for a SR007A? Where?   

As I understand he meant the price difference between L700 and 007mk2

32 minutes ago, jose said:

Sorry but, but... 500$ for a SR007A? Where?   

 

13 minutes ago, Sechtdamon said:

As I understand he meant the price difference between L700 and 007mk2

LOL.  Yes, the cost difference is about $500.  $1250 for L700 and $1800 for 007A.   I cannot quite justify the 009 cost of $3300 (right?...right?)

I don't have the L700 and never had the chance to try one either. I do have the 007 MK2.9 and it works well with both my Carbon and SRX Plus FWIW.

I like 009 more than 007MkII out of the Carbon.  To me, worth the $$$.

May be get a chance to listen to both before commit buying anything? 

Yea, that has been the issue.  I missed the last San Francisco meet up and there are no dealers in the SF Bay Area that I know of.   

Edited December 7, 20178 yr by Blueman2

I think it depends on your preferred tonality balance. For me, the 009>>L700>>007mkII progression tilts the perception curve toward more bass and less treble.

I think you're coming from the 507? If so, the 007mkII will likely sound most different from what you have now (but still great, I use those more than my 009's out of my Carbon).

Edited December 7, 20178 yr by MLA

I have both the 009 and the 007 Mk 2.9 with port mod.  At the last Albuquerque meet, out of 6 listeners, 3 preferred one and 3 preferred the other, driven by a BHSE - I told them the 007 is less efficient so they needed to turn up the volume a bit to compensate.  I slightly prefer the 007, as to my ears the 009 is a bit on the bright side, and the 007 Mk I is a bit on the soft/dull side. FWIW, recording engineer Bob Katz also prefers the 007 Mk 2.9 with port mod as being more tonally accurate, and Tyll at InnerFidelity seems to like Bob's modded 007 more than either the 007 Mk I or 009 based on his comments from Big Sound 2015.

Another factor to consider is the build quality. The 007 and 009 are both very well built, solid headphones. The L500 and L700 look to have more plastic parts?

Yes, another point. Interesting that my 507s have a metal yolk, yet the L700 which is 2X the price has a plastic yolk.  Or at least some have reported it being plastic.  I have no complaints about the build of my 507s though.  

But rather than pollute this Carbon thread with a earspeaker discussion, I will stop here and say I just ordered a SR-007A that will hopefully arrive by Christmas.  If I am unsatisfied and want to go to the 009, I will at some future date.  By then, maybe the next gen -009 will be out!

Thanks for the recommendations, everyone!

 

Edited December 7, 20178 yr by Blueman2

On 12/4/2017 at 7:34 PM, Blueman2 said:

BTW, where does the Carbon name come from for this amp?  Carbon makes me think resistors, but not sure what that has to do with it.  Just out of curiosity.  

Silicone Carbide... that's what makes it tick so...Carbon. 

I would recommend you look into the used market and snatch yourself a pair of mk1 for $1000-1500$ or the sr-009 for 2000$-2500$.

8 hours ago, spritzer said:

Silicone Carbide... that's what makes it tick so...Carbon. 

That's SiC, man!

Since the Carbon (and I guess all Stax amp designs??) is inherently balanced, is it worth getting a DAC with balanced output?  I know balanced helps for long cable runs, but is there any real benefit when the DAC is 1 foot away from the Carbon? 

This is a loaded question...with all things being equal and same quality balanced and singled ended outputs on the same dac the balanced is superior.  This is almost never the case so a case by case basis really... 

It depends on what parameters are important. One thing is noise. Simple balanced input stage based generally have (a) different input impedance for balanced differential, +, - and common mode and (b) Based on 10k resistors produce about -105dBu from a low impedance drive. Although that is pretty quiet and good enough for many, with a single ended stage there is no series resistance and it is fairly straightforward to get  -120dBu either with a low noise op-amp or discrete..

You *can* design balanced stages with the same noise performance as unbalanced, by using parallel unity gain buffers driving parallel low feedback resistance balanced stages. But you end up with a lot of op-amps and board real estate to achieve that.

The THAT balanced input stages and drivers (Designed and patented by Bill Whitlock of Jensen) are interesting. Their input stage common mode rejection, and distortion, is superb, which is the main aim of the chip topology, but internal resistances are around 14k which again compromises noise performance.

It is horses for courses, really.

@Craig Sawyers: @Blueman2 is rather asking for any benefit finding a DAC with bal out rather than SE. I'd say it boils down to how the DAC is creating the balanced signal, which might be difficult to determine if no inside pics or schematic is available from the specific DAC.
That said, it might be of higher importance that he likes the sonic signature of the DAC rahter than focus on the DAC being SE og Bal.

Thanks guys.  I have ordered a Schiit Gungnir Multibit, which is fully balanced by design (2 pairs of DACs to handle this, so 4 in all).  As of now, I have not wired up the XLR outputs inputs in my Carbon since I only had SE devices in the past.  I was wondering if it was worth the effort to go ahead and wire up the XLRs, install the quad volume control I have, install a DPDT switch to allow enabling SE grounding, and use balanced rather than SE?  Sounds like it might be marginally worth it.  I think I will do it and report back if I can tell any difference.    

Edited December 16, 20178 yr by Blueman2

I think you meant XLR inputs, not outputs? You could just wire the XLRs and use the Neutrik adapters, saving yourself the switch and the wiring of it.

Edited December 16, 20178 yr by Pars