Quote:

googleli said:

Listening to Justin Bieber's "Baby" on the LCD3. Can't say it is the best experience...

Click to expand...

 
What do you mean by this? Are you saying the LCD-3 is revealing the flaws/simplicity of the recording?

lol...poor JB...
 

Quote:

googleli said:

Oops. How about Lady Gaga?

 


 

Click to expand...

100% f*d. God help us all...
 

I finally had the opportunity to listen to the LCD3s some weeks ago and I'll just keep my impressions brief since I believe everything that needs to be said in regards with these headphones have been said. 
 
First of all, I do think it's a significant upgrade compared to my own LCD2 R1 especially in treble details and soundstage width/depth. The LCD3 simply sounds more spacious and 3D-like. Other than that, the midrange to upper mid / lower treble is very, very smooth. It's completely free of quirks and peaks but I guess this extreme smoothness can be a double-edged sword to some people since some of them may perceive this as lacking of bite or edge. 
 
Unfortunately not everything is fine and dandy as I detected some anomalies in the midrange to lower midrange regions. There is some sort of a "blanket" that cover the midrange which is especially evident with vocals and as the result, midrange is a bit lacking in clarity and immediacy is lost. I would perhaps even comment that midrange seems a bit recessed as the result. If midrange in LCD2 is black in color, I would say that the midrange is LCD3 is gray-ish. Anyway, I don't think it's resonance issues though as this sounds different from that. 
 
Lastly, I would comment on how the LCD3 compare with the Stax O2. This comparison is interesting to me because in my opinion both of these headphones share the same DNA and both aim for the same direction sonics-wise. Ultimately, I would say that in terms of refinement, technicalities ie. detail retrieval and soundstage, the O2 (MK1) still has an edge but I would also say that the LCD3 is really not that far behind in these areas. The LCD3 on the other hand is better in terms of immediacy/impact and bass articulation.
 
I would conclude that if you are willing to go the effort of owning something better than the SRM-717/727 then perhaps the O2 is a wiser choice. Otherwise, the LCD3 is more flexible in its supporting amplifiers and there are very good sub-$2500 commercial amplifiers around, like Apex Peak or ecp audio DSHA-1 and I'm fairly sure that the LCD3 paired with one of these is competitive with the Stax pairing. 
 
One of these days I would like to listen to a LCD3 without the veil to reassess my judgement because I believe the midrange blanket does result in a rather bottom-heavy frequency balance. A clearer LCD3 with a more even tonal balance will be very interesting to evaluate. 

perhaps the bottom-heavy frequency balance is a result of improper impedance matching with
the ouput impedance of the amp? leading to a perceived "blanket" or "veiled" mid? i've noticed
that sometimes, but not always, that improper driven hps are mostly affected in the bass but
not the high freqs. electrical dampening from an amp with very low impedance give better bass
control and focus for bass-centric cans, imo. so maybe, the discrepancies regarding the mids
of the lcd3 are not so much rooted in the variations in the production, but an amplification issue?

I don't think it's an amplifier issue as I set my β22 to have 2 headphone outputs, allowing easy A/B between two headphones. The midrange veil/blanket only manifests itself in the LCD3. 

parallel outputs should lower the impedance and the b22 is already known for a very low output impedance...
it would seem like variations in the production is fairly certain.

Perhaps. I think the LCD3 has a lot of potential though so I would like to hear a "fixed" version in the future (if there is any) because I thought the midrange veil does result in an uneven tonal balance that kinda messes everything up. It's also a shame that the local dealer who was kind enough to provide us with the LCD3 had only one stock left so it was impossible to compare with other LCD3s.

Quote:

k3ct said:

Unfortunately not everything is fine and dandy as I detected some anomalies in the midrange to lower midrange regions. There is some sort of a "blanket" that cover the midrange which is especially evident with vocals and as the result, midrange is a bit lacking in clarity and immediacy is lost. I would perhaps even comment that midrange seems a bit recessed as the result. If midrange in LCD2 is black in color, I would say that the midrange is LCD3 is gray-ish. Anyway, I don't think it's resonance issues though as this sounds different from that. 

Click to expand...

 
This exactly matches my impression of the LCD-3. The listener immediately hears the improvements in these cans over the previous model -- smoother treble, soundstage, etc. -- but longer listening sessions reveal the midrange "blanket."
 
My cans are currently at Audez'e. I've been advised that a new batch of drivers is arriving in another week or so, and that my LCD-3 will get drivers from the new batch and be returned. We'll see what (if any) difference it makes.

The improvements arent that big if you are coming from the lcd2r2. To go from the 2r1 to the lcd3 would have significant improvements. To go from the lcd2r2 to the 3 resulted in very little improvement. At times going between headphones when testing the two last night I found myself bobbing my head just to realize that I had the 2r2 on and not the 3. If anything, I have found out not how good the lcd3 are, but how good the lcd2 r2 actually is.

I think by the end of the day I may be 1 day wiser and $2000 richer.

I agree that the differences are certainly not 2x between the LCD-3 and LCD-2r.2, but the smoother treble on the LCD-3s (instead of the somewhat peaky LCD-2r.2) and opened up imaging and sound stage where greatly welcomed improvements to my ears. I found both LCD-2 revisions too closed in for my liking. The more visceral bass on the LCD-3s was also a welcomed improvement; though not night and day over the previous model(s). I do agree with you that both the LCD-2r.2 and LCD-3 show more improvements over the LCD-2r.1.
 
I think the price point (as I stated back in Nov. when I first got my LCD-3s) should be closer $1400-$1500. That said, if one wants the absolute best sound that Audeze has to offer, the LCD-3s do fit that bill IME. Whether that's worth the extra $, that's up to the potential owner. For me, I'm very happy with them and haven't looked back. They enabled me to sell my HE-6s with their improved imaging as well, they (LCD-3s) get approximately 50% of my head time from the rest of my headphones/IEMs.
 
 

$1400-$1500.

Is it possible that the supposed mid range veil is non-existent but perceived because the 3's have greatly improved high and low end diminishing the mid range?

Has anyone bought the Cardas Clear headphone cable yet?  No reports I can find.

Quote:

icenine2 said:

Is it possible that the supposed mid range veil is non-existent but perceived because the 3's have greatly improved high and low end diminishing the mid range?

Click to expand...

Nope. we've been done that road already.  Something is clearly not right with the veiled 3's.  And there is one head-fier who has a veiled version and a non veiled version at the same time.