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

LCD-2 Rev. 2 upgrade

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 

Anyone get word on whether this is available, and the cost, to upgrade the old Rev. 1 drivers to Rev. 2?

post #2 of 28

I am not sure Audeze is currently doing upgrades unless you bought the Rev1 within around a month of when the Rev2 was release in which case they let you exchange your pair for the Rev2. Email Audeze your serial number and they will let know. Also, check in the LCD-2 thread under Summit-Fi (High-End) Forum

post #3 of 28
If you don't mind not getting the exact same housing, I think buying the LCD-2 rev 2 new and selling your rev 1 would be a good move money wise.
post #4 of 28

If you bought your lc2 after June 1 you were eligible for the free upgrade. Everyone else has to buy the lcd2 rev2 at full price.

post #5 of 28

I bought my LCD-2 in January this year and have hardly listened to it yet.  Is there a significant margin of improvement between the rev 2 and rev 1?  I am still pondering over a decision of whether to sell the almost new rev 1 to trade up for a rev 2.  How much would I be missing living with the rev 1 as compared to upgrading to the rev 2?

post #6 of 28

Apparently not much, if you've hardly listened to the rev1. tongue.gif

post #7 of 28

I figured that out before posting the question.  It seems silly I know, but this is like an itch that I've just got to scratch.  Do you happen to own an LCD-2 rev 1 or rev 2 by the way?

post #8 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by john1711 View Post

I bought my LCD-2 in January this year and have hardly listened to it yet.  Is there a significant margin of improvement between the rev 2 and rev 1?  I am still pondering over a decision of whether to sell the almost new rev 1 to trade up for a rev 2.  How much would I be missing living with the rev 1 as compared to upgrading to the rev 2?



I am looking to buy a used pair and have been wondering the same thing.

post #9 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by john1711 View Post

I figured that out before posting the question.  It seems silly I know, but this is like an itch that I've just got to scratch.  Do you happen to own an LCD-2 rev 1 or rev 2 by the way?



A rev1. And I know something about itches, as we all do.

 

I haven't heard the rev2, and I don''t intend selling the rev1 to get one. Here's why:

 

I generally find the rev1 quite bright enough. On a few recordings, it's a little too bright. On these recordings, I suspect a rev2 would be unlistenable. My gut feeling is that the rev1 is very well balanced, that it's not "dark" at all (never understood that word in this context). The reviewer on Headphonia said something I thought very significant: that the LCD-2 lacked the "metallic" treble common to almost all dynamic phones, and therefore could sound less bright to people used to those phones. I believe this is so. The rev1 is very chameleon-like; it can sound bright or dull depending on the recording and amp (and source, I guess, but I'm not very source-sensitive). It works best with a brighter amp, and no doubt the right cable would help as well. Under those conditions I don't believe most people would find it in any way dark. For that reason, I don't crave a rev2.

 

Of course, it's said that the rev2 is faster rather than brighter, and that can only be a good thing. However, the music I listen to--orchestral/classical--isn't transient response-critical, and I don't believe I'd hear a huge difference. The consensus over in the major LCD-2 thread on Summit-Fi is that the rev2 is an improvement but not a large one and not to every listener; some still prefer rev1. Conclusion: don't assume that just because the rev2 is a later version it's going to suit you better. 

 

Phew. That was a lot of words to say not much. rolleyes.gif

 

post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post

The consensus over in the major LCD-2 thread on Summit-Fi is that the rev2 is an improvement but not a large one and not to every listener; some still prefer rev1. Conclusion: don't assume that just because the rev2 is a later version it's going to suit you better. 

 


 

Agreed, and having owned both, if I still had rev 1's, I wouldn't bother 'upgrading'. Depending on your point of view, they each do some things better and some things worse than the other.    


Edited by BrainFood - 8/29/11 at 7:15am
post #11 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post





A rev1. And I know something about itches, as we all do.

 

I haven't heard the rev2, and I don''t intend selling the rev1 to get one. Here's why:

 

I generally find the rev1 quite bright enough. On a few recordings, it's a little too bright. On these recordings, I suspect a rev2 would be unlistenable. My gut feeling is that the rev1 is very well balanced, that it's not "dark" at all (never understood that word in this context). The reviewer on Headphonia said something I thought very significant: that the LCD-2 lacked the "metallic" treble common to almost all dynamic phones, and therefore could sound less bright to people used to those phones. I believe this is so. The rev1 is very chameleon-like; it can sound bright or dull depending on the recording and amp (and source, I guess, but I'm not very source-sensitive). It works best with a brighter amp, and no doubt the right cable would help as well. Under those conditions I don't believe most people would find it in any way dark. For that reason, I don't crave a rev2.

 

Of course, it's said that the rev2 is faster rather than brighter, and that can only be a good thing. However, the music I listen to--orchestral/classical--isn't transient response-critical, and I don't believe I'd hear a huge difference. The consensus over in the major LCD-2 thread on Summit-Fi is that the rev2 is an improvement but not a large one and not to every listener; some still prefer rev1. Conclusion: don't assume that just because the rev2 is a later version it's going to suit you better. 

 

Phew. That was a lot of words to say not much. rolleyes.gif

 



Not to start a debate of sorts, but the 'metalic' sound you mention of certain dynamic cans, or brightness, is likely closer to balanced and accurate than what the Rev.1's offer. It's a harshness you hear even in real life at loud performances on cymbals and so forth. Hell, even the Stax headphones (SR-009's) display it a little bit of it, and by your standards might be considered 'overly bright'. Even some owners of the Rev.2's have mentioned the treble now is a tiny bit drier or more grainy. I think this is just something that occurs when high frequencies are more pronounced. That said, If this brighter, or should I say, more detailed presentation, was not more accurate, I doubt Audeze would have amended the sonic signature (which is now closer to certain other cans) to have more extended highs and an overall ever so slightly more detailed and open presentation.

 

Naturally people hear differently, and those particularly sensitive to high frequencies might enjoy the smoothness or more laid back sparkle of the Rev.1's. It's a case of different strokes for different folks. I'd imagine to some the Rev.1's likely will be dark, to others it might be a blessing.

post #12 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Naim.F.C View Post





Not to start a debate of sorts, but the 'metalic' sound you mention of certain dynamic cans, or brightness, is likely closer to balanced and accurate than what the Rev.1's offer. It's a harshness you hear even in real life at loud performances on cymbals and so forth. Hell, even the Stax headphones (SR-009's) display it a little bit of it, and by your standards might be considered 'overly bright'. Even some owners of the Rev.2's have mentioned the treble now is a tiny bit drier or more grainy. I think this is just something that occurs when high frequencies are more pronounced. That said, If this brighter, or should I say, more detailed presentation, was not more accurate, I doubt Audeze would have amended the sonic signature (which is now closer to certain other cans) to have more extended highs and an overall ever so slightly more detailed and open presentation.

 

Naturally people hear differently, and those particularly sensitive to high frequencies might enjoy the smoothness or more laid back sparkle of the Rev.1's. It's a case of different strokes for different folks. I'd imagine to some the Rev.1's likely will be dark, to others it might be a blessing.


I'd say that the blessing lies in the fact that these are one of the very few high-end cans that have a dark sound signature. To other people that means a departure from the so-called audiophile sound with treble emphasis. Diversity is the key.

post #13 of 28
Quote:

Originally Posted by Naim.F.C View Post


 

Not to start a debate of sorts, but the 'metalic' sound you mention of certain dynamic cans, or brightness, is likely closer to balanced and accurate than what the Rev.1's offer. It's a harshness you hear even in real life at loud performances on cymbals and so forth.

 

Respect your viewpoint, Naim, but beg to disagree. That metallic sound is what to me has always separated hi-fi from reality, but I never quite realized it until I had lived with the LCD-2 for a few weeks. The thing about concerts, at least orchestral concerts, is how little harshness one hears even at high volumes. You start to wince as the volume rises, but instead of the harshness you expect to hear, there's just an increase of level. Amazing! How can there be such a huge increase of level without harshness, because there always is at home? And as for cymbals, unless they're sounded right in your ear they should be sweet and tinkly, tshhh, not like the smashing of a plate glass window. I don't know, maybe you sit very close or something; there's no doubt distance reduces treble and ameliorates harshness. But to me an orchestra is not harsh sound in any of its aspects, and what I hear from the LCD-2 takes me frequently back to the concert hall.  

post #14 of 28

The rev. 2s aren't "brighter" as such, that is, the don't have more treble. What they do have is less of a drop in the upper-mids where instruments such as violins play. If anything, due to the stronger balance in that region, I'd say they sound less bright (and the bass less strong) as both frequency regions will be weaker relatively to the mids at any given volume level. 

 

My issue with the rev. 1s was particularly with classical and violins seeming to be more in the background than they really were, so the rev. 2s were just what I was after.

post #15 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Currawong View Post

The rev. 2s aren't "brighter" as such, that is, the don't have more treble. What they do have is less of a drop in the upper-mids where instruments such as violins play.

 

Is that measurable?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › LCD-2 Rev. 2 upgrade