Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Amp recommendations for Audeze LCD-2
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Amp recommendations for Audeze LCD-2 - Page 416

post #6226 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadEars View Post


I'm not sure that I agree that the objective is to have sound as free from colorations as possible either.  I think the objective is to recreate a musical event inside your head.  Your ears are interpreting a wave of sonic information, and your brain is filling in the blanks.  So much of what happens is idiosyncratic to the individual.  You are building an illusion, but the "reality" of that illusion can be enhanced by absence of noise, reduced distortion, a broader set of frequencies at their correct respective levels, and full harmonic dimensionality delivered on time. 


........

I do know that I feel the LCD-2 gets cello's right.  I listen to a lot of cello music.  Frankly, I've never heard HD-800's deliver as convincing illusion of a cello concerto as I have with the LCD-2.  But that's based on how my brain processes the aural signals I get through my recording chain.  Perhaps my brain could be re-trained to do the same thing with a different set of cans.  But the LCD-2's get it right for me, and give me terrific enjoyment.  It doesn't mean they are perfect, by any means.  But NOTHING is perfect.  Fiddling with cables, parametric equalizers or balancing the sound signature with complementary products might improve your ability to be drawn into the music, and give you more enjoyment.  But if you can't use the resulting sound to build the illusion of the event in your head, it's not worth doing any of this stuff.  It's like re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

I'm not at all sure whether neutral helps or hurts the ability to create the illusion of real music.  I know it's very hard to achieve, and many people spend wild sums to do so.  But for me, it's all about the music, so when I get that working I lose interest in fussing around with equipment.

Just my $.02

 

That's the age old difference in taste.

I believe the role of reproducing the music as faithfully as possible to the way it sounds in the concert hall, for classical music, belongs to the recording engineer.

In a perfect world, the source (analog or digital), the amplification and the transducers (speakers, headphones) should, or dare I say MUST be a neutral or transparent chain in the music reproduction,adding or substracting a little as possible to or from the recorded music.

Reality is of course far from ideality. Each link of the chain (source, amplification, transducer) adds colorations to the music or subtract some crucial information from it.

So as a listener of music, I feel my role is to try the best I can to RESTORE the sound of the music the way that the recording engineer intent for me to hear it. My best guide is my remembrance of the way music sound in the concert hall. I attempt to faithfully the recorded music by judiciously selecting my source, the amplifier and the headphone (plus cable) i use. I think this is a valid attempt to deliver the kind of sound that is closest to the live music in the concert hall. With headphones, this is of course nearly impossible but that should not stop me from trying.

I achieve this by carefully matching the link of the chain to minimize their sonic colorations, which may be additive or substractive. That is what I meant by "neutral" sound but perhaps the word "transparent" may have been a better choice. Your choice might be to CHANGE the sound to suit your taste. That's a legitimate approach as well.

Finally, I would not put the use of parametric equalizer in the same bucket as matching components in the sonic chain (different amps and cables for a pair of headphones). This is a more brutal--sledge-hammer-- assault on the reproduced sound that introduced their own colorations which are far worse, in my opinion, than the colorations they are attempting to correct.


cheers,

ST
post #6227 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin_Time View Post

So as a listener of music, I feel my role is to try the best I can to RESTORE the sound of the music the way that the recording engineer intent for me to hear it. My best guide is my remembrance of the way music sound in the concert hall. I attempt to faithfully the recorded music by judiciously selecting my source, the amplifier and the headphone (plus cable) i use. I think this is a valid attempt to deliver the kind of sound that is closest to the live music in the concert hall. With headphones, this is of course nearly impossible but that should not stop me from trying.
 

QFT...

 

I am exactly the same, having an [admittedly, fading] recollection of my theatre and concert hall visits, how they sounded, I've yet to hear anything remotely like that, however, the LCD2's sound far more like those memories than the likes of the Senn HD800 that the Audeze replaced...

 

In a similar vein, for out on the road - the FAD FI-BA-SB sound the nearest to my past experiences than any other IEM I've heard... compromises, but - good compromises.

post #6228 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin_Time View Post

[snip]

Finally, I would not put the use of parametric equalizer in the same bucket as matching components in the sonic chain (different amps and cables for a pair of headphones). This is a more brutal--sledge-hammer-- assault on the reproduced sound that introduced their own colorations which are far worse, in my opinion, than the colorations they are attempting to correct.

cheers,

ST

 

+1

 

I've yet to use a digital EQ that doesn't corrupt the cleanness of a pure tone, as when playing Bink Audio Test files (WAV).  Try sending a clean, 50 Hz tone to your headphones first with and then without +2 dB applied at or near 50 Hz.  It's horrible - like taking a coffee grinder to the signal.    Try this with a pure tone at any frequency.   The corruption is not as easy to hear when listening to actual music, but it's there, just the same.

 

I would love to find a parametric EQ plugin for Foobar 2000 (or any other Windows player) that can pass this test - increasing the amplitude of a pure tone test signal without altering it in any other way.

 

Mike

post #6229 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by zilch0md View Post

+1

I've yet to use a digital EQ that doesn't corrupt the cleanness of a pure tone, as when playing Bink Audio Test files (WAV).  Try sending a clean, 50 Hz tone to your headphones first with and then without +2 dB applied at or near 50 Hz.  It's horrible - like taking a coffee grinder to the signal.    Try this with a pure tone at any frequency.   The corruption is not as easy to hear when listening to actual music, but it's there, just the same.

I would love to find a parametric EQ plugin for Foobar 2000 (or any other Windows player) that can pass this test - increasing the amplitude of a pure tone test signal without altering it in any other way.

Mike

What do you think about EQ the other way around-in other words decreasing by two dB … Does it degrade the signal in the same way?
post #6230 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by solserenade View Post

What do you think about EQ the other way around-in other words decreasing by two dB … Does it degrade the signal in the same way?

 

Yes, it does.  :-(    

 

There is no workaround.

post #6231 of 7301
What do you think about EQ the other way around-in other words decreasing by two dB … Does it degrade the signal in the same...


Absolutely. It is not so much the change in frequency distribution but the phase shift that really messes up the sound. The change is more complex than just the emphasis or de-emphasis of certain frequency range, which is easy to recognize. It is a phase shift that is difficult to describe but quite easy to hear. The sound is just...wrong! The impact is both there with (+) or (-) change. Personally I would live with frequency-related colorations than the kind of colorations introduced by parametric equalizer.

ST
post #6232 of 7301
What do you think about EQ the other way around-in other words decreasing by two dB … Does it degrade the signal in the same...


Absolutely. It is not so much the change in frequency distribution but the phase shift that really messes up the sound. The change is more complex than just the emphasis or de-emphasis of certain frequency range, which is easy to recognize. It is a phase shift that is difficult to describe but quite easy to hear. The sound is just...wrong! The impact is both there with (+) or (-) change. Personally I would live with frequency-related colorations than the kind of colorations introduced by parametric equalizer.

ST
post #6233 of 7301
Hmmm..this discussion makes me rethink my use of EQ. while I do believe I'm getting a positive benefit by bringing my headphones response closer to neutral, is it worth it if it's destroying the sound!? I've only ever concentrated on if music sounds balanced and natural. Never listened specifically if I'm noticing more distortion.

It seems with all the technology, someone could devise a software EQ that could diminish or completely do away with that issue.

Still, I use just a db or two with a very narrow q to target just a few spots. Maybe the less correction the less distortion? I could see major changes really messing stuff up, like adding a bunch of bass boost, etc. It seems lots of folks do use some EQ, I guess varying degrees of opinion are in play, as it goes in this hobby. Not trying to be argumentative, just learning. smily_headphones1.gif
post #6234 of 7301

I guess more of a discussion for Sound Science, but how is it possible use EQ in mixing/mastering phase then? Shouldn't it destroy the music result?

 

There are so many EQ's and methods out there, I doubt the OP has tested them all?

post #6235 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by hekeli View Post

I guess more of a discussion for Sound Science, but how is it possible use EQ in mixing/mastering phase then? Shouldn't it destroy the music result?

I meant to ask that in my post...so curious about that as well. I imagine absurdly expensive professional equipment may have some way to do correct EQ processing. But we're taking about Joe Schmo with his "lowly" home equipment.

Unless there is truly no way around it. Then all music is wrecked from the get-go.
In that case, EQ away!
Lol
post #6236 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegrobe View Post


I meant to ask that in my post...so curious about that as well. I imagine absurdly expensive professional equipment may have some way to do correct EQ processing. But we're taking about Joe Schmo with his "lowly" home equipment.

Unless there is truly no way around it. Then all music is wrecked from the get-go.
In that case, EQ away!
Lol

 

Haha!  Makes perfect sense to me!  biggrin.gif

 

Yeah, I've barely scratched the surface of all the various EQ solutions, but it would seem that somebody out there must know a "clean" way to do it.

 

Mike

post #6237 of 7301

Maybe when mastering they don't EQ and just add a few dbs on the desired instrument (since they have the music already separated by different instruments/sounds). Just a guess...

post #6238 of 7301
Quote:
Originally Posted by citraian View Post

Maybe when mastering they don't EQ and just add a few dbs on the desired instrument (since they have the music already separated by different instruments/sounds). Just a guess...

 

I think you're onto it.  I know next to nothing about those giant mixing boards they use in recording studios, but it wouldn't surprise me to learn that there's a discrete pre-amp for each channel.  But that hunch is purely analog in thinking.  I would think that these days, all the mixing is done in the digital domain, but again, I'm completely clueless.  Somehow, they get the job done better than the toys I've played with.

 

Mike

post #6239 of 7301

It seems many people like Lyr. I already targeted LCD-2, currently deciding which amp/dac to get.

 

I actually look at 3 different setup:

 

(1) Bifrost & Asgard2

(2) Bifrost & Lyr

(3) Burson HA-160DS

 

I keep coming back and fore between Asgard2 and Lyr. I budget it max at 1.5k but if there is no reason to max out, i.e. get the best, then I should save it.

Just wondering anyone go from Asgard2 to Lyr, or even Lyr back to Asgard.

 

I like Burson for its combination, and I heard people prefer to it.

 

Any advice is welcome.

 

Cheers

post #6240 of 7301

Um... why not go for Mjolnir + Gungnir, if your budget is up to 1.5k?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Amp recommendations for Audeze LCD-2