New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by AiDee

^ You're right Cheers ps: I misspelled your handle - sorry about that!
You're right, there's a misunderstanding - to repeat "as the graphs show in my particular (emphasis added) 3F versus 2r1 case". I'm not speculating about that, it's indicated by my particular graphs (below 40Hz the 3F tails off, the 2r1 doesn't). What I'm reacting to is a general perception that seems to be developing that the 3F loses the bass qualities possessed by the 3C. On this specific comparison I can't comment, as I've never heard the 3C. Hence the "FWIW" in my...
^ An afterthought - looking at bfeedma's and Bigsecret's posts above, a lot of the timbral and textural information that gives bass instruments their distinct character lies in the mids and highs. Speculating, it's possible the 3F bass is in fact less (as the graphs show in my particular 3F versus 2r1 case) but the net product is indeed "better defined" (Bigsecret) because of the "better treble and soundstage" (bfeedma).
Generally, the 3F has distinctly more bass 'presence' than the 2r1, so I would say filling out of the low end. It's similar to moving from a dry to a wet piece of gear., e.g. I hear a longer 'boom' with a bass drum, including more of its resonance through the floor of a stage.However, punch and slam may be less. I'm not sure as I would need to repeat comparisons with specific tracks.I did post a comparison of the 3F and 2r1 but it may be in the other (impressions)...
Hmm. FWIW, my LCD3F has 'more' (or I may mean 'better') bass than my LCD2r1
Jan does indeed quote conservatively. Unfortunate as there is a tendency on head-fi to say orthos need "moar power"
Cheers, glad to help. I posted a comparison of the LCD2r1 and 3F in one of the LCD3 threads which might interest you. I found the differences subtle. Interestingly, the differences sounded much bigger until I A/B'd. But you know how it is in this hobby: sometimes "subtle" becomes "essential" As well, it's true - the 3 is more picky of what's in front of it Btw, it took me years to decide to get the 3. I felt as you, the LCD2 (even r1) were ample. And by the time I...
^ I think SP Wild was only concerned about the "3 or 4 volts" in relation to the earlier mk II I mentioned (in case one could be got second hand), not the III. Useful quote - I don't recall seeing that part about setting the 2 (or 3) "between 5 and 8 volts" for some lower power tube amps.
I think the Taboo was originally designed to pair with a preamp (with Decware, this meant the CSP series). As well, it was made to drive speakers and only added an hp capability when Frank I asked if it was a possibility. The latest mk III addressed the 3-4V thing by making it stand-alone. It now - I understand - can definitely be driven to full power from a standard 2Vrms source. As well, I must say I didn't notice any lack of dynamics at first driving the mk II from...
Sounds good. Steve's notes for the mk II indicated it needed 3-4V - which the mk III does not - but I was never sure whether he meant rms or peak. Certainly the Taboo sounded better with the Eastern Electric MiniMax's 2.5V rms in tube mode, but best of all (fed direct) is from my BMC PureDAC at full output (have no idea what the Vout is but it's certainly more than 2V rms). Of course the PureDAC's abilities compared to my other dacs have a part in this. Regardless, the...
New Posts  All Forums: