Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › New Audeze LCD3
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Audeze LCD3 - Page 695

post #10411 of 11320

Let me clarify something about the 3c headphones that I preferred over the 3f.  The 3c is also a fazor model.  I did not buy the very earliest LCD-3 non-fazor build that start with 231 serial numbers.  What I preferred is the previous generation fazor LCD-3 version starting with 261 serial number.  Please see this post by jonstatt for more details about the *three* different versions of the LCD-3. 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/575751/new-audeze-lcd3/10320#post_11481245

 

I simply preferred the earlier fazor variety and have actually never heard the non-fazor version of the LCD-3.

post #10412 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Articnoise View Post
 

 

Glad you got the sound you wanted and I can fully understand that the classic can sound better than the fazor in some systems and to some preference. Your description that the piano sounds darker and muddier is the opposite of my experience.  Are you sure that the LCD 3F you had was okay?


The 3c I preferred is also a fazor headphone.  I just made a post clarifying that as many people think I preferred the very early LCD-3 non-fazor model so everyone can breathe a huge sigh of relief. :)  I've never even heard the non-fazor version.  To answer your specific question, the 3f I heard was surely ok, just a little different than the fazor 3c I heard and I preferred the 3c fazor headphones.

post #10413 of 11320

Ha ha ha..  I see now.  I was like "WTF"  

 

Ok, so to keep things understandable.  We don't assoicate the LCD-3C with any fazors.  The C should mean all pre-fazored LCDs.  That why we use the F, the F = Fazor.  C = classic, pre fazor.  

 

I didn't know there was different flavors of the fazored LCD-3s? 

post #10414 of 11320

That makes sense to me.  I was going by that posting by jonstatt which looked pretty detailed and well-informed so I assumed that was the standard nomenclature used here.  So I guess what I preferred was LCD-3f version 1?  There definitely is some difference between the 261 and the 271 serial numbers though it's not huge.  In my specific case and for the type of music I listen to it was enough of a difference for me to have a strong preference in one direction, but I suspect for most people they're both great.

post #10415 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

^ Ah that's interesting. The LCD2 rev 1 (which I've heard described as the near cousin of the 3c albeit slower and less detailed) is my preference for classical solo piano as well. You play, right? So your ear for piano sound comes from sitting at the keyboard...?

Edit: Btw, glad you resolved the problem

 

I wrote a mini review about the ability of the LCD2 (and subsequently the LCD 3c) to reproduce piano. I use the Audeze with my Yamaha Clavinova as the headphone amplifiers in the Clavinova's is more than powerful enough to drive them. I should have tried the 3f that my friend has with the Clavinova when he brought it over recently but I didn't as we were focusing on comparing with the Oppo HA-1.

post #10416 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMNY View Post
 

That makes sense to me.  I was going by that posting by jonstatt which looked pretty detailed and well-informed so I assumed that was the standard nomenclature used here.  So I guess what I preferred was LCD-3f version 1?  There definitely is some difference between the 261 and the 271 serial numbers though it's not huge.  In my specific case and for the type of music I listen to it was enough of a difference for me to have a strong preference in one direction, but I suspect for most people they're both great.

 

My assumption, and others here too, is that there are no fazor'd LCDs with serial number starting 261. That is new to me. The only exception to that which I knew about was a few people had fazors retrospectively added to their current drivers...but of course that is a hybrid and not an official release. Sorry if I put things off track and there are in fact official fazor'd 261 LCD 3s

post #10417 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonstatt View Post
 

 

My assumption, and others here too, is that there are no fazor'd LCDs with serial number starting 261. That is new to me. The only exception to that which I knew about was a few people had fazors retrospectively added to their current drivers...but of course that is a hybrid and not an official release. Sorry if I put things off track and there are in fact official fazor'd 261 LCD 3s


How does one exactly tell if the headphone is fazored or not?  In a previous post I asked that and was pointed to a picture of the inside of the pads with gold horizontal bars/lines along it.  I assumed the gold bars indicated the phones were fazored.  The 261 I liked has those gold lines along the inside of the pad so I assumed that meant it was a fazor model and then incorrectly assumed all 261 models were fazored.  Or maybe I just don't know how to tell whether it's fazored or not and that 261 I like is a real 'c' without fazors?  It wouldn't matter to me since that was the sound I liked, fazor or not, but it would be good to know if there are 261 models with fazors and for my own reference whether that model is a fazor model or not.

post #10418 of 11320

The fazor itself is black, and you'll notice it straight away if you touch, its like a "saw" or rills

post #10419 of 11320
citraian wrote last year that some 261 LCD3s were in fact fazored.

Audez'e have not always been exacting about their model differentiation or serialization.

jonstatt I'd love to see that mini review if you have the link handy.
post #10420 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by FMNY View Post
 


How does one exactly tell if the headphone is fazored or not?  In a previous post I asked that and was pointed to a picture of the inside of the pads with gold horizontal bars/lines along it.  I assumed the gold bars indicated the phones were fazored.  The 261 I liked has those gold lines along the inside of the pad so I assumed that meant it was a fazor model and then incorrectly assumed all 261 models were fazored.  Or maybe I just don't know how to tell whether it's fazored or not and that 261 I like is a real 'c' without fazors?  It wouldn't matter to me since that was the sound I liked, fazor or not, but it would be good to know if there are 261 models with fazors and for my own reference whether that model is a fazor model or not.


For a short time Audeze offered a fazor upgrade for the LCD3c. I had this done to mine for $250 but only the fazors were added and not the new drivers. So, it is possible that you heard a 261 model that had the same upgrade  - a fazored 3c. As far as I know, the 271 models were all fazored with different drivers.

post #10421 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post

citraian wrote last year that some 261 LCD3s were in fact fazored.

Audez'e have not always been exacting about their model differentiation or serialization.

jonstatt I'd love to see that mini review if you have the link handy.

 

Here you go :)

http://www.head-fi.org/t/630446/sennheiser-hd800-vs-audeze-lcd-2-rev-2-vs-denon-d7000-a-pianists-review

post #10422 of 11320

Well ive had the LCD-3Fs for 3 days now, and I have to say I really love them.

They arent as airy as the LCD-X, and dident have as hard punch, but you just get draget so much more into the music. 
Its alot more enjoyable, I'm simply listening to the music and not the gear

 

Ive decided that I will most likly get the Rag, and maybe get a new DAC aswell. 

The rag seems to be 1 of the better amplifiers for the LCD-3Fs? If not the best? :D 

post #10423 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredrikT92 View Post
 

Well ive had the LCD-3Fs for 3 days now, and I have to say I really love them.

They arent as airy as the LCD-X, and dident have as hard punch, but you just get draget so much more into the music. 
Its alot more enjoyable, I'm simply listening to the music and not the gear

 

Ive decided that I will most likly get the Rag, and maybe get a new DAC aswell. 

The rag seems to be 1 of the better amplifiers for the LCD-3Fs? If not the best? :D 

I'm looking into getting the Rag this or next year aswell :)) Seems to be an excellent amp if you are into SS amps!

post #10424 of 11320

Vad har ni for svenska forhandlere av Schiit? 

Ingen norske forhandlere har fått den inn... 

post #10425 of 11320
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredrikT92 View Post
 

Well ive had the LCD-3Fs for 3 days now, and I have to say I really love them.

They arent as airy as the LCD-X, and dident have as hard punch, but you just get draget so much more into the music. 
Its alot more enjoyable, I'm simply listening to the music and not the gear

 

Ive decided that I will most likly get the Rag, and maybe get a new DAC aswell. 

The rag seems to be 1 of the better amplifiers for the LCD-3Fs? If not the best? :D 


I have the Ragnarok and it sounds incredible with my LCD-3F's, you will love the combo if you end up going that way. It's a beast though and it does tend to run HOT!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › New Audeze LCD3