Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Audeze LCD-2 Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-2 Impressions Thread - Page 731

post #10951 of 10961
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeGuyDude View Post

I actually disagree here. The Conductor, at least, was dreadfully flat to my ears.
I found it quite disengaging.

But as mentioned in a previous meet that i took it to there was a lot of poaotive feedback with hps i including akg, he560, t1 and hd800.

I had tried a few dacs and it seems (to me) it needs a dac with some warmth in the mids like the irdac - whixh is also a little rolled off up top.

I even tried the irdac with a few amps (like the hdva600) and that too sounded best with the soloist. I put it down to just one of those things.

The only thing i never heard that i wondered about was how the firsy release of the conductor amp/dac sounded with its burr brown dac as opposed to the sabre dac whcih i found a bit sharp/grainy
post #10952 of 10961

I'll also say this (and I'm just using a Watson), the most befuddling thing about the LCD-2 is that it's like it changes its sonic signature depending on the music. Sometimes I find myself wishing there was more bass, sometimes the bass feels elevated. Sometimes the highs are up front, sometimes soft and veiled. I'm really thinking this is a case of them just being able to present things in an honest (if slightly tilted) way.

post #10953 of 10961
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecrow View Post

I am using a woo w2 which I have for my 'main' setup/pref of the hd800

 

The LCD-2 is FAR easier to drive than the HD-800. The LCD-2 is 70 ohms purely resistive, so same 70 ohms at all frequencies. The HD-800 (and all conventional drivers) have widely varying impedance with frequency, which makes them a more difficult load for an amp to drive. Also, the HD-800 has a strong resonance spike around 5-7 kHz which can make them sound overly bright or harsh with a neutral amp.

 

This means, when selecting an amp to drive the LCD-2 you have a lot more options. The LCD-2 has a lot of detail, even though it doesn't shove the detail in your face like the HD-800 does. So the LCD-2 benefits from a clean low distortion resolving amp. But it doesn't need a power beast of an amp.


Edited by MRC001 - 4/21/17 at 12:45pm
post #10954 of 10961
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeGuyDude View Post
 

I'll also say this (and I'm just using a Watson), the most befuddling thing about the LCD-2 is that it's like it changes its sonic signature depending on the music. Sometimes I find myself wishing there was more bass, sometimes the bass feels elevated. Sometimes the highs are up front, sometimes soft and veiled. I'm really thinking this is a case of them just being able to present things in an honest (if slightly tilted) way.


That's true, and it shows how transparent the LCD-2 is. It steps aside and you hear what's in each individual recording.

post #10955 of 10961

Update on the 2014 vs. 2016 LCD-2 Fazor differences. I own one of each, one at work, one at home.

 

Overall the 2016 is better, a touch faster in transient response, a touch cleaner and tighter in the bass. It's like a small step toward the LCD-X, but retaining the more natural (in my opinion) voicing of the LCD-2. But the 2016 is not better in every way; the 2014 has a touch more midrange presence. This is a double-edged sword; I prefer it on small ensemble works and in some vocals, but it becomes a slight veiling glare on large ensemble works.

 

As I've listened to both extensively now, I find my preferences leaning toward the 2016 overall. I don't miss the extra midrange presence of the 2014 even on small ensemble works, and it is a big more fatiguing during extended (> 1 hour) listening. It seems to me that the 2016 is closer to the "truth" and more transparent, even in small ensemble & vocal music.

 

The differences are subtle enough I am still not paying the $400 Audeze wants to upgrade the 2014 to the 2016. The 2014 is still the best headphone I've ever heard, except for the 2016, and it's 99% as good as the 2016. But if the 2014 ever needs repair, I'll have no regrets about upgrading it in the process.

post #10956 of 10961

Interesting! I've only had experience istening to the 2016 Fazors, but I've always been interested in knowing what it sounded like on release. Those differences are more or less what I expected.

post #10957 of 10961
Hi, just got myself the aluminimum lcd2 from scan. I have the akg k712, and thought i would upgrade to the hifimann 400i, but i had to send them back as they really hurt my head, the bass and live music was something else though. I was reading that the lcd2 was really hard to drive, but i find it very easy, i have a trilogy 931 amp, and a rega dac, the instructions dont say anything about burn in time, im assuming theyll need a few hours , does anyone have the aluminimum version, are they different to the wood im assuming there shouldnt be a sound difference
post #10958 of 10961
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnow View Post

Hi, just got myself the aluminimum lcd2 from scan. I have the akg k712, and thought i would upgrade to the hifimann 400i, but i had to send them back as they really hurt my head, the bass and live music was something else though. I was reading that the lcd2 was really hard to drive, but i find it very easy, i have a trilogy 931 amp, and a rega dac, the instructions dont say anything about burn in time, im assuming theyll need a few hours , does anyone have the aluminimum version, are they different to the wood im assuming there shouldnt be a sound difference

You mean the 400i hurt your head? That's odd that you would think that of the 400i but not of the lcd2... the 400i feels weightless on my head after using the lcd2.

post #10959 of 10961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesse Oh View Post
 

You mean the 400i hurt your head? That's odd that you would think that of the 400i but not of the lcd2... the 400i feels weightless on my head after using the lcd2.

The LCD2 is heavy, but comfortable IMO. It distributes itself well. Perhaps the 400i didn't do that as well?

post #10960 of 10961
Quote:
Originally Posted by SomeGuyDude View Post
 

The LCD2 is heavy, but comfortable IMO. It distributes itself well. Perhaps the 400i didn't do that as well?

Don't get me wrong, i find the lcd2 comfortable too. Its weight feels reassuring in a way, i like it; there is good weight distribution. But the 400i to me is just so much lighter; it is more comfortable imo. I just can't envision how they can "really hurt" someone's head. I will say this though: the soft material on the inside of the focus pads on the 400i can get itchy, especially in warmer weather.

post #10961 of 10961
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnow View Post
 I was reading that the lcd2 was really hard to drive, but i find it very easy, i have a trilogy 931 amp, and a rega dac, the instructions dont say anything about burn in time, im assuming theyll need a few hours , does anyone have the aluminimum version, are they different to the wood im assuming there shouldnt be a sound difference

There is no sonic difference between LCD2 wood versions and the Aluminum version. The LCD2s are very efficient. When we introduced the LCD2, compared to the headphones introduced at that time (HD800, Beyer T1 etc.) the LCD2 was a little harder to drive. Somehow the reputation seems to have stuck. Unlike any other Planar headphone, the LCD2 staggered magnet arrangement that is very unique and is very efficient for its design. 

Audeze LLC is a U.S. manufacturer of headphones that redefine the world of high-end audio using a unique combination of proprietary planar magnetic...
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Audeze LCD-2 Impressions Thread