That's the stange thing. My LCD-3's seem to have more mid bass kick than my LCD-2's. But then again they have a mid bass hump on the graph...
Oh I looked at your graph again and I see that small hump around 50 Hz.
I'm not using any eq but I sometimes do just for the sake of "trying". So, if you have the possibility to do so with your equipment, tame those 50 Hz by 3 dB with a narrow filter and see what it does (just out of curiosity I would say).
Mmmmh, I see :( That's what I meant by "I don't use any eq (but just for trying)": it can always cause frequency (wanted of course but also unwanted) and phase distorsion ...
All I can say is: kudos to the small and overlooked Cowon X9 (or i9 or ...) for its more than decent DAC/pre-amp quality, especially when used with an amp, and for its fairly transparent eq. But the eq doesn't allow you to go below the 80 Hz setting, so it's pretty much useless for what we were intending to do in your case for example.
My LCD experience would concur that the LCD-2 has more drive down low, the LCD-3 more extension. More impact or deeper, pick your poison. My money is the difference being the pad softness of the LCD-3 creating a better seal and therefore deeper bass.
It's well known to be bad. Try this for example: http://www.foobar2000.org/components/view/foo_dsp_xgeq
Lucky man. Although I am not complaining about by pair...yet.
I have the opposite...
My LCD-2's were like that, with a mid bass bump, sort of a zig-zag with a cut in the sub-bass. Speaking strictly of the bass response, and only from my first listening session with the LCD-3's last night, I can say the 2's had a bit more punch in the bass. The 3's certainly have more sub-bass. I was noticing sub-bass parts in music that jumped out at me. I didn't get that with the 2's. The 3's don't have as strong as punch, but the entire bass response seems more even and neutral.
It's hard to say if the 2's had that same sub-bass, maybe it was there, just masked by the hump in the mid bass? Both presentations are enjoyable, just different. Maybe also the thicker membrane on the 2's just are more efficient at moving bass notes. ?? hmm. Who knows. I do like the more even bass presentation of the LCD-3. I thought the bass on the 2's was a bit much at times. Between the LCD-2 carrying more weight in the bass (as I've read) plus that mid-bass bump...a bass-heads dream, though!
The graphs from my 2 pairs correlate with this....and the listening differences/observations are certainly real and noticeable. Not just an artifact of suggestion by seeing the charts first. Most LCD-2 charts I've seen are very flat through the bass, I hadn't seen a lot like mine with that zig-zag.
I don't put too much into the treble measurements on these charts, though. I read they are very susceptible to change due to headphone placement during testing, etc.
If the pads do not make a good seal around the ear, the mid bass starts to be over pronounced and a bit loose. I wonder if those citing the LCD-3 as having more mid-bass kick are not getting the good seal from the pads they should have. This could be due to the shape of their head, hair position, or the pads not being so well formed. If I pull the cups slightly away from my ears when listening the mid bass gets a boost. However, it is at the expense of the sub bass. My experience as that the LCD-2.2 had more bass punch and the LCD-3s more extension (and definition), as others have stated.
I already heard it (because of the earpads I mean, and that's what you mean too, don't you ?). But that's none of a concern as soon as there is some music playing, and it's not necessarily always audible even when no music is playing.
Yeah, I meant because of the seal caused by these earpads. It's not a concern really, more of an observation in comparing the LCD-2 (Bamboo) to the LCD-3.