or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › The Audeze LCD-2 Ortho thread (New)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Audeze LCD-2 Ortho thread (New) - Page 365

post #5461 of 7128
I'm wondering if the X isn't really meant to be between the 2 and 3 sound quality wise, but instead intended to offer a different flavor, something different than what we think of as the Audeze house sound. In other words, maybe it won't just be more of the same but different smily_headphones1.gif I think that would be a lot more interesting
post #5462 of 7128

Yes, 2 things:

 

The LCD3 uses Zebra-wood whereas the LCD-X is anodized aluminum.  You've already seen what Audeze did to the LCD2 Rosewood vs Bamboo-- which isn't even aluminum either.  So it could very well be that Audeze could have made the LCD-X just as expensive as the 3 if they gave it exotic wood.

 

The LCD-X is supposedly a neutral take on the otherwise warm/dark Audeze sound signature.

 

 

So I don't think Audeze is trying to find a median between the 2 and 3, nor are they trying to replace the 3.  They're just releasing a completely new line.

post #5463 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

Yes, 2 things:

 

The LCD3 uses Zebra-wood whereas the LCD-X is anodized aluminum.  You've already seen what Audeze did to the LCD2 Rosewood vs Bamboo-- which isn't even aluminum either.  So it could very well be that Audeze could have made the LCD-X just as expensive as the 3 if they gave it exotic wood.

 

The LCD-X is supposedly a neutral take on the otherwise warm/dark Audeze sound signature.

 

 

So I don't think Audeze is trying to find a median between the 2 and 3, nor are they trying to replace the 3.  They're just releasing a completely new line.

 

The price for Zebrano wood though doesn't explain the difference of $400. If you look at the Sveiking headphone stands, the Zebrano wood option is actually cheaper ($180 vs. $200) than the other woods. No doubt the aluminium is for a rougher studio environment.

post #5464 of 7128

It's Audeze we're talking about there, they can gouge the price of their 'exotic' woods as much as they want-- just like how they doubled the price of the LCD2 going into the LCD3.

post #5465 of 7128
If it is supposed to be a distinct line, I think it would be a good idea to call them something besides LCD-whatever (X is already taken smily_headphones1.gif )
post #5466 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

It's Audeze we're talking about there, they can gouge the price of their 'exotic' woods as much as they want-- just like how they doubled the price of the LCD2 going into the LCD3.

 

While I agree that the performance isn't 2:1 based on the pricing (between the LCD-3 and LCD-2), that's kinda par for the course in audio. The HE-6's cost difference is roughly 2:1 over the HE-500s and the performance differences are actually closer than between the LCD-3 and LCD-2s.

post #5467 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

 

While I agree that the performance isn't 2:1 based on the pricing (between the LCD-3 and LCD-2), that's kinda par for the course in audio. The HE-6's cost difference is roughly 2:1 over the HE-500s and the performance differences are actually closer than between the LCD-3 and LCD-2s.

 

Your opinion or is it the consensus?

post #5468 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post
 

 

Your opinion or is it the consensus?

 

You believe the HE-6s are 2x better than the HE-500s? I certainly don't. I think they are better, but not by that margin. In fact, many prefer the latter to the former. BTW...there is no consensus here so your question is just plain silly.


Edited by MacedonianHero - 10/7/13 at 8:22pm
post #5469 of 7128

Audeze will likely be keeping the LCD-3 in the product line, but the LCD-X will cannibalize a lot of LCD-3 sales. What does the LCD-3 offer over the LCD-2?  A little more resolution and air in a slightly brighter headphone. If the LCD-X moves further in the same direction and costs a little less--it's going to be very popular at the LCD-3's expense. 

 

It may not matter to Audeze because they're a low volume boutique company that's built for short production runs. It wouldn't be a big burden to keep the LCD-3 in production even if sales drop off--at least to a point.

post #5470 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

 

You believe the HE-6s are 2x better than the HE-500s? I certainly don't. I think they are better, but not by that margin. In fact, many prefer the latter to the former. BTW...there is no consensus here so your question is just plain silly.

 

Chill off.

 

You stated that "the performance differences are actually closer than between the LCD-3 and LCD-2s" and I'm asking if that's your own opinion or if it's widely agreed-upon.

post #5471 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry S View Post
 

Audeze will likely be keeping the LCD-3 in the product line, but the LCD-X will cannibalize a lot of LCD-3 sales. What does the LCD-3 offer over the LCD-2?  A little more resolution and air in a slightly brighter headphone. If the LCD-X moves further in the same direction and costs a little less--it's going to be very popular at the LCD-3's expense. 

 

It may not matter to Audeze because they're a low volume boutique company that's built for short production runs. It wouldn't be a big burden to keep the LCD-3 in production even if sales drop off--at least to a point.

 

Very good points...but as Apple has pointed out, better you cannibalize your products than a competitor. I think the LCD-X is a headphone meant to go between the LCD-2 and LCD-3 price-wise and compete offer a different sound. That said, as I've mentioned, if I wanted a brighter ortho with less bass, I would have kept my HE-6s. I find the Audeze take on natural sound very unique and refreshing which is why I've owned the LCD-2R1, LCD-2R2 and now the LCD-3. 

post #5472 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post
 

 

Chill off.

 

You stated that "the performance differences are actually closer than between the LCD-3 and LCD-2s" and I'm asking if that's your own opinion or if it's widely agreed-upon.

 

Your question came off very snarky and a bit silly.... do I have poll information? If it was a legitimate question, then I apologize...but I'd recommend you pose them in a more "Canadian" manner. :o To answer your question, of course not...what I stated was my opinion based on my first hand experiences....isn't that what we do here? 


Edited by MacedonianHero - 10/7/13 at 8:29pm
post #5473 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post
 

 

Your question came off very snarky and a bit silly.... do I have poll information? Of course not...what I stated was my opinion based on my first hand experiences....isn't that what we do here? 

 

No 'IMO' = fact or widely agreed-upon opinions around Head-fi, I'm just policing it :popcorn: . 

post #5474 of 7128

Pretty sure it will still sound like an Audeze.

post #5475 of 7128
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post
 

 

No 'IMO' = fact or widely agreed-upon opinions around Head-fi, I'm just policing it :popcorn: . 

 

Who designated you sheriff?  I would suggest that your statement is really your perception....and I would suggest that change your perception of the matter. Most (and I hope all) here realize that this is all just "IMO" unless we're talking about objective measurements of gear.


Edited by MacedonianHero - 10/7/13 at 8:36pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › The Audeze LCD-2 Ortho thread (New)