Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Audeze LCD2 vs Sennheiser HD800??
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD2 vs Sennheiser HD800?? - Page 5  

post #61 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by aimlink View Post

He was snoring, so you didn't. 


Ahh, he must be a sleep typist!  

post #62 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigzStudio View Post

Sound trumps all IMO.  


So if a pair of headphones came along that had razor blades, broken glass and thorns on the headband and ear pads, but they sounded like a slice of pure heaven, that would be acceptable?  You, sir, must have a head of steel.

 

I personally think comfort is important, to a degree.  If I can wear a pair of headphones for two hours without experiencing significant discomfort, then they are acceptable to me.  They don't have to "disappear", I don't have to "forget that I was even wearing them", but if they hurt outright then I can't wear them.

 

If the headphones pass this comfort test, then I'd agree that sound trumps everything else at that point.

 

Anyway, I just hopped on the list for the LCD-2s, though by the sound of it I'll be lucky to get them before August has come and gone.  It will be my first pair of orthos that I've owned, and I'll be interested to see what they can do as compared to the HD800s and T1s.  I'll admit that the FOTM syndrome has probably influenced my decision to buy a pair, but it certainly won't make them sound any better than they actually are when they're sitting on my noggin.
 

post #63 of 1379


I was speaking rationally, of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sophonax View Post




So if a pair of headphones came along that had razor blades, broken glass and thorns on the headband and ear pads, but they sounded like a slice of pure heaven, that would be acceptable?  You, sir, must have a head of steel.

 

 

post #64 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigzStudio View Post


I was speaking rationally, of course.


 


Haha, yeah I figured you were.  I don't think we'll be seeing the Audez'e LCD-2 Glass and Razor Blades edition any time soon
 

post #65 of 1379

The comfort issue is neither luck not delusion in my case. As described earlier, you can adjust them to be very comfy. Not 800 comfy but still comfy. Mine have the new headband foam and it's an excellent material and very gentle on the head. Removing the heavy cable sleeve and replacing it with nylon sleeve reduces overall weight and the pads will soften with time. Sheer weight and size aside these are well withing the top 10% of all phones I've tried. Anyone who has read about the stuff I do to phones will know that comfort is extremely important to me and a few small adjustments will get these there.

post #66 of 1379

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post
 


I'm not sure what you're saying here.  Are you saying that the HP1000 and HD580 were FOTM?  or do you disagree that the HP1000 has accurate timbre?



Neither. When they arrived on the scene, they were hailed as being extremely accurate in truth of timbre, which I assume would mean they sound rather like the real thing. Recording and mastering engineers were using them in their decision making. I have heard both, and each sounds very different, yet they are (were) both accurate to different people. That's why I take these "true to life" comments/hype with a rather large grain of salt. Everybody says they know what "reality" is, yet they have different opinions on what it should sound like through headphones.

post #67 of 1379

All true. In my case I wouldn't necessarily say they were true to timbre and accuracy. I put it that to me they sound natural. What that means is that they gel in a way that sounds organic and realistic. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are either accurate or realistic to source of original instruments, that all seems way too subjective. But sounding natural is a different thing.

post #68 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeggy View Post

All true. In my case I wouldn't necessarily say they were true to timbre and accuracy. I put it that to me they sound natural. What that means is that they gel in a way that sounds organic and realistic. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are either accurate or realistic to source of original instruments, that all seems way too subjective. But sounding natural is a different thing.

And this is the way I would describe the original RS-1 w/flats. So I guess it's still different strokes...

 

post #69 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeggy View Post

All true. In my case I wouldn't necessarily say they were true to timbre and accuracy. I put it that to me they sound natural. What that means is that they gel in a way that sounds organic and realistic. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are either accurate or realistic to source of original instruments, that all seems way too subjective. But sounding natural is a different thing.


So would you say the LCD-2 are more colored than the HD800?

post #70 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by smeggy View Post

All true. In my case I wouldn't necessarily say they were true to timbre and accuracy. I put it that to me they sound natural. What that means is that they gel in a way that sounds organic and realistic. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are either accurate or realistic to source of original instruments, that all seems way too subjective. But sounding natural is a different thing.


Keep them impressions coming..I realized this after i heard the first TP..you and I have very similar (if not identical) tastes/preferences. 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post

And this is the way I would describe the original RS-1 w/flats. So I guess it's still different strokes...

 

Well duh..of course it is different strokes. What were you expecting?..some sort of consensus?.way too many variables. Just listen to them yourself and make an informed choice.

 

 

post #71 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post





Neither. When they arrived on the scene, they were hailed as being extremely accurate in truth of timbre, which I assume would mean they sound rather like the real thing. Recording and mastering engineers were using them in their decision making. I have heard both, and each sounds very different, yet they are (were) both accurate to different people. That's why I take these "true to life" comments/hype with a rather large grain of salt. Everybody says they know what "reality" is, yet they have different opinions on what it should sound like through headphones.


Perfect.

post #72 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by sachu View Post

Just listen to them yourself and make an informed choice.

 

 


Duh.
 

post #73 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post

Neither. When they arrived on the scene, they were hailed as being extremely accurate in truth of timbre, which I assume would mean they sound rather like the real thing. Recording and mastering engineers were using them in their decision making. I have heard both, and each sounds very different, yet they are (were) both accurate to different people. That's why I take these "true to life" comments/hype with a rather large grain of salt. Everybody says they know what "reality" is, yet they have different opinions on what it should sound like through headphones


I guess I don't see a discrepency between the HP1000 and HD580 both sounding real to people.  I think they both focus more on tone and timbre than excitement/fun/energetic treble, etc.  But the HD580 just sacrifices more to get there than the HP1000.  But I agree that "real life" seems to sound different to different people through headphones.  I still don't understand this, and feel it has more to do with preferences and what sacrifices people choose to make (because no headphone is perfect) than what "real life" sounds like.  We all listen to the same "real life"  But that's another thread (or a past thread )

post #74 of 1379

Is true sach :)

 

as to whether I think the LCD or 800 is the more accurate in absolute terms, I really have no idea and wouldn't want to presume I know what I'm talking about :p I take my cues from what my ears tell me I like. I don't need absolute fidelity to the original source, I need what I enjoy hearing, whatever sucks me in and makes me smile. It's really that simple. The LCD, thunderpants etc do that, the 800 didn't. It sounded like a good, competent well engineered headphone that lacked soul, for a better word. Now that is no condemnation of the 800, it means it didn't make me tap my toes. For others it's nirvana. We all hear differently and look for different criteria in our listening.

 

Like everything else in this hobby, suck it and see is the best approach if possible. I'm lucky in that I have friends here who can more or less gage what will appeal to me.

post #75 of 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post
I guess I don't see a discrepency between the HP1000 and HD580 both sounding real to people.  I think they both focus more on tone and timbre than excitement/fun/energetic treble, etc.  But the HD580 just sacrifices more to get there than the HP1000.  But I agree that "real life" seems to sound different to different people through headphones.  I still don't understand this, and feel it has more to do with preferences and what sacrifices people choose to make (because no headphone is perfect) than what "real life" sounds like.  We all listen to the same "real life"  But that's another thread (or a past thread )

We all listen to the same "real life," but when we put on headphones our individual HRTF is replaced by the headphone designer's idea of an average HRTF.  Works for some and not for others.  That's why some cans sound "real" to some folks and not to others.  Make sense?
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Audeze LCD2 vs Sennheiser HD800??