New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Lan647

Definitely an interesting comparison. I've owned the HD 800 but only auditioned the K812 and comparing it to the HD 800. I concluded that both have a very large, open and airy sound (the HD 800 sounding the biggest) with great dynamics and clarity. The 812 is certainly the more musically involving headphone, though. It's got a little bit more bass presence and punch to it and is also livelier up top. However, it's not quite as refined sounding as the HD 800. I heard vocals...
 I have a single simple qualification for a headphone to be described as "high-end" in my book: it should sound like real life. 
 I agree! But that's the HD 800s you were hearing, not the amp. I've seen measurements of the M1HPA and along with the specs (provided they are truthful, of course. But they should be when it's such a major audio company like MF) there is nothing to imply the amp would bottleneck the HD 800s. A friend of mine who is an audio engineer also confirmed for me a few years ago the M1 is a solid buy for performance. I compared the M1 with the Burson HA-160 (using the HD800) and...
 Do explain why you think so? I personally found nothing particularly wrong with it, plenty of gain and very transparent. Was great for the LCD-2s. 
 The further I kept reading this ^ post, the more certain I became of its stupidity.First of all, I sold my equipment. I ran the HD 800 of a Musical Fidelity M1HPA and very good DIY USB DAC with ultra-low jitter and a very expensive (relative towards many other DACs) clock. I did not enjoy that combo, so I sold it. I have also tried the HD 800s with Sennheiser's own HDVD800 with a good source and balanced cabling, supposedly a great combo. It was good by HD 800 standards,...
 When properly colored* you mean?  The HD 800 is not a headphone worthy of being called high-end. There, I said it.
 I must say this is strange, I listened and compared the 2s and XCs for about a day. I definitely stand by my impressions, and what I heard is perfectly understandable as closed-back headphones generally get more resonant because of the bass being amplified by the acoustics. The bass of the XC I heard was definitely both heavier and less tight than that of the LCD-2 rev 2 (and, from memory, also the LCD-3) 
 Bubinga is the name for african rosewood, sillie willie! The LCD-XC bass by itself is not boomy per se, but when you compare it to the LCD-2 (which, along with the other open-backed LCDs has perhaps the best bass reproduction of any dynamic headphone) the XC comes off sounding a little bit more subwoofer-ish. Two other people I know who also listened heard the same. Nothing wrong with source material. As I had both headphones for comparison directly and you didn't, we can...
 No way, dude... 
  Working (and sounding) beautifully! 
New Posts  All Forums: