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 602

post #9016 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldendarko View Post

Interesting, I had not previously heard the LCD-2 & LCD-3 are now more effficient, but I just noticed the they are both now rated as listed here on Audeze's website:

•Efficiency: 94dB SPL / 1mW


Am I mistaken, or were they previously rated at 91dB SPL / 1mW Efficiency ?

Does this have something to do with the Fazor's making them easier to drive? If so, I guess they are closer to the LCD-X now in ability to be driven more efficiently by portable headphone amps? Anyone have any more info. on this or am I mistaken with their previous efficiency ratings.

 

I also remember them being like this    LCD-2 = 90dB SPL/1mW   LCD-3 = 91dB SPL/1mW

post #9017 of 11396
The impedance listed on the Audeze site is also different between LCD-3s.

Now, with the Fazor, it is 110 ohm. It previously was listed as either 45 or later 50 ohm.

Also the listed diaphragm excursion has been restricted from 2.5mm to 1.5mm with Fazor.

Despite being told earlier that they were the same, Audeze appears to be using a new and different diaphragm/driver with the LCD-3 Fazor from earlier ones.
post #9018 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by goldendarko View Post

Interesting, I had not previously heard the LCD-2 & LCD-3 are now more effficient, but I just noticed the they are both now rated as listed here on Audeze's website:

•Efficiency: 94dB SPL / 1mW

I'm not a human SPL meter, but I'm thinking this has to be a mistake of some sort. My LCD-XC and LCD-3 (Serial 271X) purchased end of March 2014 seem noticeably different in terms of efficiency.

post #9019 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jones Bob View Post

The impedance listed on the Audeze site is also different between LCD-3s.

Now, with the Fazor, it is 110 ohm. It previously was listed as either 45 or later 50 ohm.

Also the listed diaphragm excursion has been restricted from 2.5mm to 1.5mm with Fazor.

Despite being told earlier that they were the same, Audeze appears to be using a new and different diaphragm/driver with the LCD-3 Fazor from earlier ones.
Hmm I wonder how this translates to the produced sound.
For me these seem like downgrades especially the excursion...
post #9020 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by citraian View Post


Hmm I wonder how this translates to the produced sound.
For me these seem like downgrades especially the excursion...

 

Not necessarily. Shorter excursion can lead to better transients and can improve transparency. That said, I would expect it to change the sound signature yes. But it appears there's a host of changes not just one...


Edited by negura - 4/27/14 at 12:38pm
post #9021 of 11396
Wow, these seem to be pretty drastic changes, the impedance, efficiency, and excursion all considered. I'm also curious as to how this affects the sound
post #9022 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post

Not necessarily. Shorter excursion can lead to better transients and can improve transparency. That said, I would expect it to change the sound signature yes. But it appears there's a host of changes not just one...
Yep, that might be true as well. For me a shorter excursion means less air moved > less body smily_headphones1.gif
post #9023 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by citraian View Post


Hmm I wonder how this translates to the produced sound.
For me these seem like downgrades especially the excursion...

I don't know about cause and effects of the changes.

 

This would be a good time for Audeze to post and tell us their thinking.

post #9024 of 11396
+1.

To sum up these posted changes - eek.gif

OTOH, my LCD3 FZ sounds superb and a significant improvement on my LCD2. However, I have not heard the previous LCD3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saraguie View Post

I don't know about cause and effects of the changes.

This would be a good time for Audeze to post and tell us their thinking.
post #9025 of 11396

Could it be said that the X is now the defacto top-of-the-line phone from Audeze? It seems that now all the comparisons are being made to the X and they seem to be moving the LCD3 closer to the X than the other way around. Fazors, etc. My LCD3 sounds very nice but still there is that part of me that really wants to audition the X and also the new LCD3 to compare with my existing 3s. The next "flagship" from Audeze to be the LCDX rev 2?

post #9026 of 11396

I still much prefer the 3's over the X's - superior in my books :)

Have compared them side by side over some time; the LCD-3's have a nicer midrange still - which is why i love them so.

 

I will most likely grab a LCD-3 successor if there is one - I don't want to buy another 3 just for the fazor's though~

post #9027 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by commtrd View Post
 

Could it be said that the X is now the defacto top-of-the-line phone from Audeze? It seems that now all the comparisons are being made to the X and they seem to be moving the LCD3 closer to the X than the other way around. Fazors, etc. My LCD3 sounds very nice but still there is that part of me that really wants to audition the X and also the new LCD3 to compare with my existing 3s. The next "flagship" from Audeze to be the LCDX rev 2?

 

LCD-3 has its place, for one, I like the wood better, and as it is already heavy enough, the LCD-X just adds weight. Second, the LCD-X is cheaper than the LCD-3, meaning it is supposed to be inferior, even though the LCD-X was made after the LCD-3. That membrane excursion reduction doesn't sound like a good idea in my book, but then I haven't heard the LCD-X yet, I'll have to ask the audeze dealer in the meet to see how it fares against the LCD-3, you know if it sounds better, I might just do the fazor "upgrade" (TBA if it's an upgrade) - but then there will also be an SR-009, which I'll hopefully try and listen to through my Vega ;) and hopefully, I won't think it's worth the money, otherwise, I'm sorry for my wallet ;)

 

Anyway, yeah, LCD-3!

post #9028 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by XVampireX View Post
 

 

LCD-3 has its place, for one, I like the wood better, and as it is already heavy enough, the LCD-X just adds weight. Second, the LCD-X is cheaper than the LCD-3, meaning it is supposed to be inferior, even though the LCD-X was made after the LCD-3. That membrane excursion reduction doesn't sound like a good idea in my book, but then I haven't heard the LCD-X yet, I'll have to ask the audeze dealer in the meet to see how it fares against the LCD-3, you know if it sounds better, I might just do the fazor "upgrade" (TBA if it's an upgrade) - but then there will also be an SR-009, which I'll hopefully try and listen to through my Vega ;) and hopefully, I won't think it's worth the money, otherwise, I'm sorry for my wallet ;)

 

Anyway, yeah, LCD-3!

How do you listen to an SR 009 through the Vega ? Unless I am completely misunderstanding your statement ?

post #9029 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by kothganesh View Post
 

How do you listen to an SR 009 through the Vega ? Unless I am completely misunderstanding your statement ?

 

As a DAC. He just didn't mention the rest of the chain.

post #9030 of 11396
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGimp View Post
 

 

As a DAC. He just didn't mention the rest of the chain.

My apologies. Of course its the DAC. Its the Taurus that's the amp. My bad..

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