New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by dukeskd

How can you forget my avatar?
Yes and the exact same thoughts were going through my mind when I listen to them. Hated the LCD-2 and the HD650.
Thing about the LCD-X is that it has this beautiful treble without being bright/harsh (think HD800/ SR009). That is a huge plus in my book.+1. HE-6 has no where near the sub-bass presence of either LCD-3 or TH-900, they are quite frankly miles ahead. The LCD-X has a bit more but I believe the impact of the HE-6 is more refined.
I definitely do not want you to freak out! The LCD-X are indeed excellent but they do have less sub-bass presence than what the LCD-3 offers. The only other can that offers similar sub-bass and impact is the Fostex TH900. From my experience, quality sub-bass is the secret ingredient that allows you to rock out with headphones. For pop, the LCD-X is great and very detailed. It will also be very interesting to read your comparison on the HE500 vs LCD-X.
For those genres, and this is a personal opinion since I own the X and 3, I prefer the 3 always for rock and electronica. But that's just me (and my bass-head requirements)
Electrostats will never be obsolete. They are a different flavor to the magnet based drivers and I predict that won't change. If graphene becomes available as a material for the 'stat diaphragm then it would certainly be a welcome development to the niche. Take a look here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.2391
.g
Hows the bass ?
I choose the LCD-3 over the X whenever any bass-heavy, rhythm dependent music is on. Otherwise, for classical, smooth jazz, film I go with the X.
New Posts  All Forums: