or Connect
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 13

post #181 of 9898
Quote:
Originally Posted by tisb0b View Post

I think Skylab did say he preferred his WA6 just barely over the concerto which is pretty much as good as amp recommendation as you are going to get =)
 


 


I have a maxxed WA6 (non-SE), and I think it sounds excellent with the LCD-2.  I listen at very "sane" levels - 80 dBA peaks, measured with an SPL meter.  So while the WA6 can't reproduce 110 dB peaks with the LCD-2, that is never going to be an issue for me at all.

 

I'm using 6FD7's in my WA6, which sound the best with the LCD-2, IMO.

post #182 of 9898


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post




I have a maxxed WA6 (non-SE), and I think it sounds excellent with the LCD-2.  I listen at very "sane" levels - 80 dBA peaks, measured with an SPL meter.  So while the WA6 can't reproduce 110 dB peaks with the LCD-2, that is never going to be an issue for me at all.

 

I'm using 6FD7's in my WA6, which sound the best with the LCD-2, IMO.

Do you prefer it over the SS Concerto and it the 6SE is 1W so I have heard both and the SE has more power which probably open the sound stage and give more headroom. . Have you trie the D7000 with the Woo also. The 6
 

post #183 of 9898

I do prefer the WA6, slightly, over the Concerto, driving the LCD-2.

post #184 of 9898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post

I do prefer the WA6, slightly, over the Concerto, driving the LCD-2.


Did you play the D7000 on the Woo 6

post #185 of 9898


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoney View Post

 

 

I appreciate your expressive and varied way to articulate what you hear.  

 

Perhaps you can comment more on the few clips I've excised above.... It can be fun but challenging to read into someone's language to imagine the sound itself.  And useful, given that we order without hearing, usually.

 

I've found that people (sometimes me) can get several concepts mixed together.  "Speed" is a word that I usually distrust, because some people mean "bright" or "peaky" or "emphasises transients" (as in transient distortion).  Others mean "the other headphones are muddy or inarticulate sounding."  "Speed" isn't something one can hear directly (like "treble" or "trumpet" or "body") because it is a characterization of a transducer, not of music.  It's an "engineering" term not a musical one.  So, there is quite a diversity of what people might mean.  

 

You are describing a different sense of air than I use, but a useful one.  (I usually think of the way the triangle hovers over the orchestra and makes you feel you can "hear the air" over the orchestra rather than being black or smeared and indistinct.)  I like the idea of space around instruments being reproduced well, something that takes good accuracy or transparency to do, an illusion based on low-level details and thus easily destroyed.  

 

Yet, I've too often found components praised for "detail," to pick a different example, when in fact what is happening is a peakiness that spotlights a band of frequencies that trigger the idea of "detail."  

 

You used the word "etched," which I hear in two ways.  The way it can be used that I don't like the sound of is detail emphasis over body and integration into a liquid total soundfield.  Treble dominating midrange, sometimes. 

 

But I think you mean a distinction of boundaries around instrumental images.  

 

I was also curious that you mentioned the LCD-2 sounding more "analytical" than the HD800.  I find the latter enthralling intellectually, given the soundstage size and better detail than my HD650, but also unmusical due to the treble emphasis band, such that it saps the joy out of listening.  So, I'm looking to understand your use of the word "analytical" in this situation.

 

In any case, you are helping me get a sonic picture of something I am interested in perhaps buying.  Tx. 


When I speak of driver speed - it is with no relation to frequency response and it is in the engineering sense:  The ability of the air pump (diaphragm) in tackling physical inertia.  I highly recommend all members that are unsure of this concept to read the posts in Tylls headphone measurement thread at the sound science forum - starting from here

 

With regards to you example with the triangles - I am uncertain of whether or not the sound will "float above" the orchestra in the LCD2s as this is not objective and purely psycho-acoustical.  I can confirm that the triangle sound will be reproduced with excellent accuracy and definition - as any bell type sound (triangles, drum cowbells, ride cymbals) is a strenuous test of driver speed.  How much the triangle sound will be emphasised in overall energy will be subject to frequency response, in this sense - the HD800 will emphasise the triangle more than the LCD2.  The LCD2 rendering the triangle with better definition and "bite" but further back in the mix, and in my opinion, with a greater sense of space - because the outline of the note is more clearly rendered and differentiated from the surrounding "noise". 

 

When I mentioned "detail" and "etched" it is with reference to the above illustration of the triangles definition and sense of "space" and go hand in hand with driver inertia control and with little relation to frequency response.  All three conditions exist in all frequencies, bass, midrange and treble when the engineering aspects of the driver are technically capable.

 

The LCD2 I found to be more "analytical" because it is more able to expose recording flaws than the HD800 and the HD800 more capable than the HD650 in this regard.  If I were to use temperature to describe tonal balance (as it is used to describe motion picture color palette),  The HD800 is cool, HD650 is warm, and the LCD2 is warmer.

 

I hope this can help you conjure the LCD2s character in your imagination more accurately - with the description that is as objective as I can be.

 

Regards.


Edited by SP Wild - 9/26/10 at 12:07am
post #186 of 9898

What we hear on headphones or loudspeakers is only a illusion of the real thing. As far as the real thing we are not even close. If you go to live symphonies even in a good hall, the music sounds like mono. You can tell where the horn section is vs the cellos and violins but they all seem to come close to the same area. Also the music is warm not lean and not putting it through a microscope like microphones do. You can hear bells but they are never the way you hear them in recordings. So as far as I am concerned warm in a recording is one aspect that gets it closer to the real thing. Now if you go to a live jazz club that is not amplified the sound is still mono. If you sit close usually the sound is so dynamic it is scary; another thing we can't quite reproduce yet.

post #187 of 9898

Lets see if anyone can help me out with this.

 

How would this headphones compare to some stax like the SR-202 and/or the Koss ESP-950?

 

I might sell the majority of my current dynamic HPs to go for either this LD2 or T1 and would like to know in advanced. 

post #188 of 9898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jwm48324 View Post

What we hear on headphones or loudspeakers is only a illusion of the real thing. As far as the real thing we are not even close. If you go to live symphonies even in a good hall, the music sounds like mono. You can tell where the horn section is vs the cellos and violins but they all seem to come close to the same area. Also the music is warm not lean and not putting it through a microscope like microphones do. You can hear bells but they are never the way you hear them in recordings. So as far as I am concerned warm in a recording is one aspect that gets it closer to the real thing. Now if you go to a live jazz club that is not amplified the sound is still mono. If you sit close usually the sound is so dynamic it is scary; another thing we can't quite reproduce yet.


This is due to you being further back from the performance then the mics. Bass travel further and separation get less the further back in the theater you sit since you get less and less angles to play with.  Sitting in an orchestra you get quite a lot of instrument separation I can tell you that.

 

 

 

 

post #189 of 9898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jwm48324 View Post

What we hear on headphones or loudspeakers is only a illusion of the real thing. As far as the real thing we are not even close. If you go to live symphonies even in a good hall, the music sounds like mono. You can tell where the horn section is vs the cellos and violins but they all seem to come close to the same area. Also the music is warm not lean and not putting it through a microscope like microphones do. You can hear bells but they are never the way you hear them in recordings. So as far as I am concerned warm in a recording is one aspect that gets it closer to the real thing. Now if you go to a live jazz club that is not amplified the sound is still mono. If you sit close usually the sound is so dynamic it is scary; another thing we can't quite reproduce yet.


You're making many assumptions that aren't necessarily true.  On top of all of your other assumptions, live sound is not mono unless you only have one ear. 

post #190 of 9898
Quote:
Originally Posted by kwkarth View Post




You're making many assumptions that aren't necessarily true.  On top of all of your other assumptions, live sound is not mono unless you only have one ear. 


Agree. To say real sound is "mono", one better go and have a hearing test. Again, if one is sitting in a hall for live symphony, feeling all sound is coming from same place, than it is a good time to stop.

post #191 of 9898
Thread Starter 

"Mono" sound is not the way to go to get a "live" sound. Quite the contrary. My vintage Hall Synthesizer creates four extra ambience channels for wall reflections. Not all the sound comes from dead ahead! (However, it's recommended to place both front speakers next to each other with a thin dividing wall between, to get the ambiosonics right, so it's slightly "mono" from there... except that the idea is to get stereo separation (as with headphones).... The other speakers are placed to get the directon of the wall reflections right.). The idea is to get a headphone-like sound (binaural, but without the effect that everything moves with your head.).

 

Can we get back on track now?


Edited by DefectiveAudioComponent - 9/27/10 at 1:00am
post #192 of 9898
Hey all,

Just a quick question regarding the warranty policy... I have an opportunity to buy a used LCD-2 right now but I was wondering if the warranty is transferrable. I'm on the pre order list also and will be buying it eventually either way, but just wondering if I'd be covered if I buy it used, as I'm sure some of you here on this thread have. Thanks.
post #193 of 9898

Short answer probably not, long answer a lot of manufacturers don't care to that point.  You have a receipt, you are within the time... it'll be covered.  Which makes sense since really if I buy you one for your birthday, I'll be on the order, but you are the first owner.  Make sense?

post #194 of 9898

Makes sense, thanks.  Seems like it should be okay then as long as the seller is willing to help out in case of warranty claim and such. 

post #195 of 9898

Mail Audeze to make sure perhaps?

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