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 435

post #6511 of 9536
Quote:
Originally Posted by K3cT View Post

 

Actually that's something I'm deathly curious about since you can get the LCD-3 AND a top of the line amplifier at the cost of the SR-009 alone so I wonder whether the former combination can close the gap against the SR-009 driven with a "basic" 727 amplifier? 

 

I still do think that if you have the money to burn then investing in a proper SR-009 setup is the way to go though since properly driven, its transparency and clarity is really something else so long you're ready to accept that it's not exactly a forgiving headphone, unlike the LCD-3 or SR-007. Both of these headphones do offer a unique property that is achieving a perfect balance between musicality/forgiveness and transparency, something that is becoming difficult to come by judging by the recent trend of headphone development AKA brightness war. 

 

There is no need to be curious. I have both setups in front of me (LCD3 driven by LF), and the gap is still huge, IMO. I would not call the SR009 unforgiving, just that the LCD3 does have its unique properties. The so called brightness of the SR009 that some mention is nothing like the ED10 or HD800 brightness, which is unbearable to say the least. I also consider the LCD-3 to be quite "unforgiving" when compared with my LCD-2 Rev 1, but I wouldn't call the LCD-2 to be the best headphone I have. Perfect balance is a subjective idea -  once in a while, if I put down my SR009, and put on the LCD3, or the W3000ANV, I can still appreciate how good they are, for different reasons. But it is not difficult, at least for me, to reckon that there is still a huge gap between the dynamics / orthos and the SR009 in terms of the fineness of sound, the transparency, the minute details, but most importantly, with the right source gear and source materials, the musicality which is simply brought out without feeling like there is a transducer at all.

 

If there is something like an "overall score", the SRM727II and SR009 combo still surpasses the LF/LCD-3 by quite a far margin, IMO, and it is utterly unfair to say the SR009 is not as good as the Omega or the LCD3 just because of a strong personal preference against even the slightest degree of brightness in poorly recorded music.


Edited by googleli - 9/7/12 at 5:15am
post #6512 of 9536

LF is not the amp I would grab if I wanted to swing an ortho to a stat sound ;)  The Mjolnir would be a good choice, but the LF is too laid back, flat, warm and fuzzy to bring an LCD-3 to 009 transparency and speed.

post #6513 of 9536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

LF is not the amp I would grab if I wanted to swing an ortho to a stat sound ;)  The Mjolnir would be a good choice, but the LF is too laid back, flat, warm and fuzzy to bring an LCD-3 to 009 transparency and speed.

Maybe on the LF you had, but I would bet that there was something wrong with your amp considering just how closely we tend to hear things. smile.gif My LF competes very well with my GS-X in terms of "tightness and attack". I find its dynamics unparalleled. As great as the GS-X is (and it is) with the LCD-3s, the LF is still my go to amp for the LCD-3s (as well, it is substantially better than the WA22 in this regard which can come off a bit soupy with complex passages). 

 

Not to mention with the right tubes (i.e. platinum Siemens E88CCs) the increase in quickness, airiness and resolution is even more apparent. To date, I have not heard a better LCD-2/3 amp (3 Ch. B22 included). 


Edited by MacedonianHero - 9/7/12 at 7:41am
post #6514 of 9536

I figured you'd speak up. Didn't want to say anything not having heard the LCD 3, but it sure was the best I've heard with the LCD 2.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

Maybe on the LF you had, but I would bet that there was something wrong with your amp considering just how closely we tend to hear things. smile.gif My LF competes very well with my GS-X in terms of "tightness and attack". I find its dynamics unparalleled. As great as the GS-X is (and it is) with the LCD-3s, the LF is still my go to amp for the LCD-3s (as well, it is substantially better than the WA22 in this regard which can come off a bit soupy with complex passages). 

 

Not to mention with the right tubes (i.e. platinum Siemens E88CCs) the increase in quickness, airiness and resolution is even more apparent. To date, I have not heard a better LCD-2/3 amp (3 Ch. B22 included). 

post #6515 of 9536

To be fair, the GS-1 and B22 are other amps I would consider laid back in comparison to others if seeking 009 attack.  Even my Peak would be too far removed if the goal is 009 like sound.

post #6516 of 9536
Quote:
Originally Posted by K3cT View Post

Actually that's something I'm deathly curious about since you can get the LCD-3 AND a top of the line amplifier at the cost of the SR-009 alone so I wonder whether the former combination can close the gap against the SR-009 driven with a "basic" 727 amplifier? 

 

No. Despite quibbles with the 727, any LCD3+(insert any TOTL dynamic amp) never be the equivalent of an 009 + 727 in terms of resolution, transient response, resolution, etc. if that is what you are looking for.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by K3cT View Post

I still do think that if you have the money to burn then investing in a proper SR-009 setup is the way to go though since properly driven, its transparency and clarity is really something else so long you're ready to accept that it's not exactly a forgiving headphone, unlike the LCD-3 or SR-007. Both of these headphones do offer a unique property that is achieving a perfect balance between musicality/forgiveness and transparency, something that is becoming difficult to come by judging by the recent trend of headphone development AKA brightness war. 

 

If you have money to burn or can DIY, either the SR009 or SR007 (which has a FR more similar to the LCD3 and should NOT be discounted by the way) is the way to go. My issue with many of the STAX, was that they were light on bass impact and in the case of the SR007, slightly uncontrolled compared to the LCD#s. I promptly got rid of my LCD3 after hearing what the SR007 could do with top-shelf amplification at a local micro-meet. The LCD3 was simply outclassed in every way.


Edited by purrin - 9/7/12 at 12:09pm
post #6517 of 9536
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnaud View Post

I use the 009 with the Stax 727II amp and it walked all over the LCD3 in terms of resolution when I compared the two out of the same source (sorry, don't recall the LCD3 amp). You don't need to spend that much money on the amp to start enjoying the 009.

 

As for comfort, you're in for a shock coming from the HD600. Personally, the lack of comfort / heavy weight is a major turn off for the LCDs. I actually enjoyed them a lot for rock music but the comfort just kills it (have to admit I am sissy though and suffer from sore shoulder staring all day at computer screen and severely lacking exercise ;). The 009 is supremely comfortable, as best as I have experience from Stax gear, along the same lines as HD800 for me (I have a small head btw).

I agree. I bought the 009/727II combo and I am very happy with it. For a 3rd of the price of the "big boys" the 727II does a great job.

post #6518 of 9536
Thread Starter 

Has everyone seen the AV Guide review?  Forgive me if this has been posted.  What an endorsement!

 

http://www.avguide.com/review/audeze-lcd3-planar-magnetic-headphone-playback-60

post #6519 of 9536

HMMM... to buy the LCD-3 or the TH900???confused_face_2.gif

Any comments?

post #6520 of 9536

For me personally it was no contest - the LCD-3 is much, much better.  BUT: the TH900 has a LOT more treble energy while still having quite robust bass.  It's the standard Fostex house sound to these ears - very similar in sonic signature to the Denon D7000, but with a bit better transparency.  If you don't like the Audeze slightly laid back treble, then the Fostex might be the way to go.

 

JMO, and for full disclosure I only heard the TH900 at a meet.

post #6521 of 9536
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skylab View Post

For me personally it was no contest - the LCD-3 is much, much better.  BUT: the TH900 has a LOT more treble energy while still having quite robust bass.  It's the standard Fostex house sound to these ears - very similar in sonic signature to the Denon D7000, but with a bit better transparency.  If you don't like the Audeze slightly laid back treble, then the Fostex might be the way to go.

 

JMO, and for full disclosure I only heard the TH900 at a meet.

 Thanks Rob. Your opinion mirrors the one from another local and trusted member.

post #6522 of 9536
Thread Starter 

6 Moons has a new review of the LCD3's.  Says best headphone ever listened to.

 

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/audeze2/1.html

post #6523 of 9536

The actual statement is:

 

The Audeze LCD3 are the best headphones I've listened too, period

post #6524 of 9536
Thread Starter 

smily_headphones1.gif

post #6525 of 9536

Although I love the LCD-3s, I don't always love the 6 Moons reviews. Sometimes they seem to lack credibility. For example, the LCD-3 review says they're "supposedly the best headphones manufactured." Um, no they're not.

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