New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by dukeskd

 Oh that really sucks, but that is the risk with old electronics. I think the Omega and MDR-R10 are risky investments judging by their prices and failure rate.
You guys are really tempting me to withdraw my for sale classified and open the box to try these babies out
I did. And yes technically they shouldn't be a good match, but after listening to the pairing its clear it is awesome. With the LCD-3, the Phonitor brings out the negatives therefore I use the HA160 for the 3. Also wanted to mention that Burson HA160 and the LCD-X isn't an optimal pairing (mids get recessed and treble gains harshness).
 It has that magical mid-range quality that other cans do not have. IMO, a steal when compared to more pricey headphones, including the current Stax lineup.
LCD-3 would benefit from some "treble harshness" (even though I don't experience it with this DAC).
Nope, X has the bigger sound stage most def.
They both reach pretty low to be honest but I feel my LCD-3 has the tighter bass with shorter decay. The TH900 has the dynamic driver quality "sub-bass rumble" reminscent of a woofer which can be quite enjoyable for electronic music, hip hop, rnb, and so on. In the current top flight cans, the Audeze and Fostex are kings for bass-heads.
TH900 is a lot different from the LCD-2 in the upper frequency range, it is brighter and detail extraction is an improvement. Mid are more seductive with the LCD-2s and sound stage is a lot more closed in. The only similarities are in the bass but the TH900 having more impact or "rumble" as they call it and the bass has a different texture. Both cans are great for bass-heads.
So what differences do you hear between the TH900 and XC? I assume (since I own LCD-X) the sound stage is wider on the TH900s.
How will this statement prevent the TH900 fans from chewing your head-off ?
New Posts  All Forums: