Latest Thread Images

New Audeze LCD3
Nov 16, 2011 at 5:28 PM Post #1,411 of 11,521


Quote:
visualguy said:
In terms of soundstage and air: SR-009>>SR-007mk1>LCD-3=LCD-2r2>LCD-2r1
 
The SR-009 would be perfect if they sounded a little less harsh at high volume.
 
Click to expand...



i add one thing.
today i listened one stax sr-009: where is the bass response???
the amplifier was the 007-tII
 
Nov 16, 2011 at 6:01 PM Post #1,414 of 11,521
 
Quote:
audiowood said:
 
As mwilson pointed out, LCD3 will need a more expensive system to unlease its potential .. Hence I am shopping for a new amp now. Any recommedation amp for LCD-3 (I prefer ss than tube)
Click to expand...


This seems to be the evolving consensus so far, that those who think that the LCD-3 is a huge improvement revolutionary best ever etc. have better systems with topnotch sources and amps.
 
For a top-notch SS amp for the LCD-2/3 from what I have read the Headamp GSX and RSA Apache would definitely be worth looking into.


Quote:
johnwmclean said:
Jude and Skylab must had the LCD-5
 
tongue.gif
Click to expand...

 
Haha, they definitely have topnotch systems to hear it from in any case 
o2smile.gif

 
 
Quote:
wink said:
 
It's not like the AKG K1000 which changed over time with manufacturing equipment wear and tear, and changes in material used changing the quality of the output.
Click to expand...


Can you link to any detailed posts or info regarding these changes on the KK over time? Feel free to PM me since it's off-topic 
smile.gif

 
 
Quote:
skylab said:
Just so people don't start allowing this sort of thing to get blown out of proportion, while I said in my review that the LCD-3 were a "big improvement" over the LCD-2, and I remain convinced that this is the case in at least the way I hear it, I never said this was in any way revolutionary, or anything of the sort.  The context, which I made very clear in my review, is that I already felt the LCD-2 were one of the best headphones out there, in terms of sonics (as opposed to comfort).  I have had them for a long time ranked just a little below the Sony MDR-10 in the list of headphones I own.  The LCD-3 is enough better for me that I prefer it, taken as a whole, over the R-10.  But that does not make it's improvements over the LCD-2 "revolutionary".  For me, the differences are very plainly audible. and sonically meaningful. 
 
When we get to the rarefied air of the high end, however, such differences don't immediately impress.  They come out over long listening sessions.  They are details, and nuance.  They are not "OMG the bass!" type of things.  So the comments I have been reading from people so far seem right in line with what I would expect.
Click to expand...


Great explanation of the Law of Diminishing Returns in this hobby 
cool.gif

 
Nov 16, 2011 at 6:04 PM Post #1,415 of 11,521
 
Quote:
visualguy said:
Skylab - There was a significant improvement in sound between the LCD-2r1 and the LCD-2r2, but I don't hear a significant further improvement with the LCD-3.
 
By the way, I don't agree that the differences in the high-end don't immediately impress. Take the leap made by Stax from the SR-007 to the SR-009 as an example. The SR-009 aren't perfect, but they improve pretty radically on the SR-007 in many ways, and you hear it right away.
Click to expand...


Just had Anax over today. We are starting to wonder about the extent of the improvements of the LCD3 over the r2. The only thing we are sure of is the much improved and smooth frequency response in the upper-mids and treble. We are not sure of increased speed or better detail extraction. Maybe a little bit, but it's hard to say without an r2 to directly compare. In our opinion, the LCD3s sound a little bit muffled in comparison to the r2s that we've heard, which from our memories sounded a bit clearer. At this point, I would almost consider a trade and cash for an r2, but the smoothness of the LCD3 FR gives it an extraordinary advantage: the option to apply simple parametric EQ. I basically shelved the LCD3's treble up 2-3db from 1000Hz and added a 3db bass boost at 90Hz for a little bit more mid-bass punch.
 
 
Nov 16, 2011 at 6:19 PM Post #1,417 of 11,521


Quote:
purrin said:
the option to apply simple parametric EQ. I basically shelved the LCD3's treble up 2-3db from 1000Hz and added a 3db bass boost at 90Hz for a little bit more mid-bass punch.
 
Click to expand...


Actually, I've been considering applying a simple UPS label, and basically shelving the LCD-3 at the UPS store for its trip back to Audeze after giving it a bit of a mid-package punch to make me feel better.
 
Nah, just a fantasy... I'll probably still keep them for a while.
 
 
Nov 16, 2011 at 6:29 PM Post #1,418 of 11,521


Quote:
grokit said:
This seems to be the evolving consensus so far, that those who think that the LCD-3 is a huge improvement revolutionary best ever etc. have better systems with topnotch sources and amps.
 
For a top-notch SS amp for the LCD-2/3 from what I have read the Headamp GSX and RSA Apache would definitely be worth looking into.
 

 
 

 
Click to expand...


Thanks for the recommendation. I am looking at Apache and possibly Darkstar... I am leaning more towards Darkstar and Rob said its good for HE6 and I was wondering if its good for LCD-3 as well.
 
 
Nov 16, 2011 at 7:32 PM Post #1,420 of 11,521


Quote:
alota said:
today i listened one stax sr-009: where is the bass response???
Click to expand...

 
x2.  It's some of the best Stax bass out there yet but tbh I consider it far from perfect.  A lot of stuff in the low end is just off wrt timbre.  FR is pretty much fine but the tonality, lack of reverb, decay and just basic acoustic and percussive presence and body is just unnatural IMHO.  Strings are all string w/ no body and drums are all skin w/ no shell.  I'm not sure if you can have a Stax w/ actual 'weight' though some other stats seem to not suffer as much in this regard.  That's what Orthos are for I guess.  YMMV.
_______
 
After hearing my second LCD3 today I can pretty much confirm my first impressions.  Though the driver appears to have some better technicalities I think the voicing is not to my preference as I continue to hear a distinct lack of crystal clarity on the LCD3.  I find it more pronounced than what many consider the Senn 'veil' and a bit too distracting for me to appreciate any other positives the new driver brings.  Tonally I do like the LCD2r.2 better as most of my issues with that model seem to have been ironed out and for half the price.  If I had to pick one to put my money down on it would be the r.2.  YMMV.
 
 
 
Nov 16, 2011 at 8:20 PM Post #1,424 of 11,521
Nov 16, 2011 at 8:23 PM Post #1,425 of 11,521

The 007tIi was considered inadequate for driving the 009 from day one before the 009 even came out of mass production according to Sasaki's impression on the prototype C32, that's why I got the SRM 727II despite my preference for tube sound. To me, the 009 has less upper bass weight, or bass "texture" as some would describe, but it has better sub bass compared with both my Rev 1 and LCD3 IMO. Everything else Audeze still has some serious catch up to do.
Quote:
alota said:
i add one thing.
today i listened one stax sr-009: where is the bass response???
the amplifier was the 007-tII
Click to expand...



 
 
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 12 (members: 0, guests: 12)
Back
Top