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 572

post #8566 of 9391
Quote:
Originally Posted by walakalulu View Post
 

I'm new to this thread but as a lcd 3 owner I thought I'd chip in. Like a few others I do love the sound but find the upper frequencies too rolled off to the extent that some high frequency detail was missing. The cans are only 3 months old and I asked Audeze to check the frequency graph with the serial no. to make sure all was ok which they confirmed. So I've now replaced the stock cable with Toxic Cables Silver Widow. This has definitely given the upper frequencies a boost without any harshness at the expense of a small decrease in 'body' in the bass which seems a little tighter but less full. For me it's a good trade off. I'm surprised that there is little discussion on 'best' cables for the Audeze in comparison to the variety of headamps that are debated, as I reckon both affect the sound to equal extent.

tnx for the info.  the only way to find out is to try different cables out , either in a meet ( but wont be your gear ) or buy the cables and lose money as u sell some of them , 

post #8567 of 9391

The treble roll-off is so subjective. I have extended high frequency hearing so find the LCD-3 perfect for me and find headphones like the HD-800 overly bright. I am curious how I would find the LCD-X. As you get older your treble hearing reduces, so I wonder if I will prefer HD-800s when I get to 60 :)

 

Either way, right now, I certainly do not feel any detail is missing at all with the LCD-3 and I use my LCD-3s for music production as well as casual listening.

post #8568 of 9391

Good point - I'm 61 so guess the ears are losing some HF info ;)

post #8569 of 9391
Quote:
Originally Posted by walakalulu View Post
 

Good point - I'm 61 so guess the ears are losing some HF info ;)

is it related on how long u have been married? when the wife constantly nags with high frequency - u get used to it so much it does not register that much anymore.everything seem to be rolled off.

post #8570 of 9391

@screwdriver:

 

Hilarious comment :-)

post #8571 of 9391
Quote:
Originally Posted by walakalulu View Post
 

I'm new to this thread but as a lcd 3 owner I thought I'd chip in. Like a few others I do love the sound but find the upper frequencies too rolled off to the extent that some high frequency detail was missing. The cans are only 3 months old and I asked Audeze to check the frequency graph with the serial no. to make sure all was ok which they confirmed. So I've now replaced the stock cable with Toxic Cables Silver Widow. This has definitely given the upper frequencies a boost without any harshness at the expense of a small decrease in 'body' in the bass which seems a little tighter but less full. For me it's a good trade off. I'm surprised that there is little discussion on 'best' cables for the Audeze in comparison to the variety of headamps that are debated, as I reckon both affect the sound to equal extent.

 

Wouldn't say equal. I have 3 different cables for Audeze. They make a bit of a difference but nothing like amps.

post #8572 of 9391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoom25 View Post
 

 

Wouldn't say equal. I have 3 different cables for Audeze. They make a bit of a difference but nothing like amps.

what cables do u have and how do they affect presentation ?

post #8573 of 9391
Quote:
Originally Posted by screwdriver View Post
 

what cables do u have and how do they affect presentation ?

 

Audeze stock Cable - actually liked this cable a lot for casual listening. Nothing jumps out at you. Both single ended and balanced.

 

Silver cable from Headphone Lounge - Slightly faster sounding, improves the treble roll off. Used mainly for balanced connections

 

Norse Copper Cable - Almost like the silver cable, but slightly relaxed. Single ended only

 

Overall, I've found that with better cables, the only thing that really improves is transparency, which CAN lead to better perception of highs. So it might not be that silver 6N/7N is better at highs or adds anything, but the fact that it improves transparency all around only translates in the highs is due to how your Central Auditory Nervous System works. Interaural Time Difference vs Interaural Level Difference. and the properties of tonal/audio masking with respect to the improved transparency ....I'll stop it right here.

 

Better cables = better transparency <<<<------- that's the most you can make out of the whole cable situation. Found the same thing with HE-500 and LCD-2 as well (Also, some people might think silver is bright because of it's shiny colour).:D 

post #8574 of 9391
Sorry for the abrupt change in topic but I was curious if anyone noticed any changes with LCD-3's with post 1/13 production dates compared to previous ones?

I'm particularly interested in the bass response. I bought a used one a few months back and it sounds great except I heard one at a meet from a previous year and I somewhat remember the bass being a bit more pronounced and bolder. Mine feels a bit more subdued and not much body although it's certainly decent.

Wondering if some tweaking was applied to it or is that just the signature sound. Anyone else experienced this or has older date models and sampled newer ones and heard a difference?

Also, this is my frequency graph.



I've never seen a hump between 30 and 40HZ like this, it usually starts off straight in the ones I've seen of others. Anyone else have this? Not particularly good at reading graphs but in which way would this affect the sound?

Any help would be appreciated.
Edited by Aural1 - 1/6/14 at 7:13pm
post #8575 of 9391

My first set of LCD3's bought in Jan 2013 exhibited that 20 Hz bump, but it is not wide enough to really be audible, Plus there is not much information down there on most recordings, especially pre-1990 recordings.

 

Those LCD3's crapped out on me and both drivers were replaced under warranty. The second pair of LCD3's do not have that bump.


Edited by IH8RDNX - 1/7/14 at 4:40am
post #8576 of 9391
Interesting. Wow. I hope that doesn't happen to me. It's a hassle to ship it back but I think I'll eventually have to.

It has a certain manufacture flaw which allowed me to get a good deal but I wanna get fixed.

post #8577 of 9391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aural1 View Post

Sorry for the abrupt change in topic but I was curious if anyone noticed any changes with LCD-3's with post 1/13 production dates compared to previous ones?

I'm particularly interested in the bass response. I bought a used one a few months back and it sounds great except I heard one at a meet from a previous year and I somewhat remember the bass being a bit more pronounced and bolder. Mine feels a bit more subdued and not much body although it's certainly decent.

Wondering if some tweaking was applied to it or is that just the signature sound. Anyone else experienced this or has older date models and sampled newer ones and heard a difference?

Also, this is my frequency graph.



I've never seen a hump between 30 and 40HZ like this, it usually starts off straight in the ones I've seen of others. Anyone else have this? Not particularly good at reading graphs but in which way would this affect the sound?

Any help would be appreciated.

This looks just like mine.

post #8578 of 9391
Came across this at Inner Fidelity. Apparently this bump, exhibited in the newer LCD-3's does affect the bass. This is what Tyll had to say about it....




"The slight bowing of the 30Hz square wave and slight drop-off in the lows of the LCD-3 when compared with the LCD-2 would indicate tighter bass performance of the latter. I didn't hear it that way in the listening tests, and both exhibit very good performance in the low frequencies of the THD+noise plots. (The LCD-3 THD+noise plot is a little noisy down low, but I think that was probably due to some environmental noise during tests and should be discounted.) I came to the conclusion that the bass in the LCD-3 was slightly more articulate and textured, but I think we'll find many who like the bass of the LCD-2 better. Either way, the measured low frequency performance of both these cans is stunning."


Guess that explains why the previous date ones with no bump I recalled had a better bass response
than the newer ones with the bump.
That sucks, wish they didn't mess with it and saved it for newer models like the LCD-X for people who preferred a shelved bass.
Edited by Aural1 - 1/7/14 at 8:43am
post #8579 of 9391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aural1 View Post


That sucks, wish they didn't mess with it and saved it for newer models like the LCD-X for people who preferred a shelved bass.

 

"I came to the conclusion that the bass in the LCD-3 was slightly more articulate and textured..."

 

I think this is why I like the bass in my LCD-3's better than from my LCD-2's.

post #8580 of 9391

A noobish question

 

top notch CIEM or LCD-3?

 

What would you take?

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