First time I've read this.
- 1,466 Posts. Joined 8/2012
- Location: Honolulu
- Select All Posts By This User
The LCD-2s sound great from most gear...but the LCD-3s are quite a bit tougher to get "right". The HD800s are likely the toughest dynamic headphones to match with an amp. Likely due to the nature of dynamic vs orthos:
Maybe for the LCD-2.. But the LCD-3 are a tad bit different.
This concerns me because I'm about to buy the LCD-3's with the same assumption that the bass is better. One of the main reasons I'm getting the LCD-3 is because I want open-can headphones that have really good bass.
Keep us updated. Still looking forward to hearing what you have to say once you get your new equipment.
So, having burned in my Little Dot MK VI+ on stock tubes, and Yulong D18 to pair with, I hear quite a difference between the Soloist/Dacport LX (which sounded great on the LCD2s). Just goes on to show that you need better upstream gear with the LCD-3s. The sound is more cohesive now, a bigger soundstage, smoother highs and finally, the bass has improved a lot. While earlier, it lacked a lot of slam as compared to the LCD 2s, now the slam is only a little behind with all the extension of the 2s.
How many comments have you read? Widespread or concensus doesn't mean much here. To me the bass was pretty much the same, LCD-2's maybe have slightly more mid punch and that's what I even remember from comments that I've read. Main reason for upgrading to LCD-3's is the better soundstage/airyness etc.
The soundstage was the main reason why I upgraded to the LCD 3s in the first place. There are a numerous threads comparing the two headphones, and the more prevalent opinion here is that the bass is better in terms of resolution and presence is about the same in the 3s, so I went with them. I'm not going to sift through hundreds of pages on the forum, just to provide you with a head count of "How many comments have (I) read". If you think that consensus/public opinion doesn't mean much, why be on a public forum in the first place? Even with the help of educated opinions, it has taken me a while to tailor my system together. Trial an error on all gear can only get you so far.
As for the more mid-punch on the 2s, I sincerely doubt that. The graphs are very similar on the 2s and the 3s for the bass region and they are both very flat. Granted that you can't tell all from the graphs, but the LCD-2s do not have a mid-bass hump.
Of course not. You cannot get any better than ODAC + O2 anywhay.
As I said, you don't believe me... your loss!
Could "slam" be the added distortion and/or softer attacks for LCD-2? You don't see this in the frequency charts.
Maybe I should dig up my old LCD-2r2 and try them with HPA-21. The bass with HPA-21 + LCD-3 is nothing but amazing!
The way I hear it/understand the term is in the form of the impact when the bass hits on the track. I'm not saying the bass on a properly driven pair of LCD-3s is anything less than exceptional, but the visceral impact is more on the 2s.
We almost said the same thing - I think..
I've owned both at the same time for a while. I've found the 3s does have "a tad bit more" room to scale or more headroom as you call it.. While the 2s don't have much at all. I don't know what kind of gear you would call the Mjolnir, but that amp IMO made both sound their best. With the "LCDs" I would rate the Mjolnir a level above the any amp I've heard thus far.
Now my question is: Will the Statement amp be nothing more than a feature packed Mjolnir with more pwoer? IMO the more pwer part is not much needed.
It was intended as a generic joke I've seen others in this forum make. Meaning nothing is much better than let's say an ODAC + O2. That could of course be true for some people. YMMV.