REVIEW – Audeze LCD-3 planar magnetic headphones - Page 9  

I know you directed this question at Skylab, but let me also give you my perspective, having heard all 3 of them - By far, the Q is the less microphonic and flexible of them all. It also has a cool retro look that matches the LCD style. Sound wise, ALO was the brightest, the Q a bit darker but with a more organic sound to it. I could blindly tell the ALO from the Q within 10 seconds. The stock cable was rather decent, no complaints at all. I liked their older stock cable (round vs. ribbon), though if I'm not mistaken internally they're both the same.

It also depends on the amp. With the RWA AE, the ALO has a decent synergy (after all, they were designed as such), but my personal preference was for the Q.

I'm curious as well to see Skylab's take on them.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarknightDK 

Skylab, I note in your review that you had the stock LCD-3 cables, the ALO and Q cables while assessing the LCD-3.

 

Is there a quantifiable difference in sound between these cables? Which cable sounds best on the LCD-3 in your opinion? 

 

Would appreciate your honest opinion on this as I'll be in the market for a cable upgrade for the Audezes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by complin 

So its a rather dangerous statement to make that "its the best headphone i've ever heard" .  While the statement is true it can give the wrong impression.

 

Also when you talk about electrostats its not just Stax but also Sennheiser.  I know they are not current, but like the Sony-R10 they can still hold their own today with the new kids on the block.

 

 

 

 

aH BUT TO HIM NOT HEARING THE OTHER MODELS IT IS THE BEST HEADPHONE HE HAS EVER HEARD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank I 

aH BUT TO HIM NOT HEARING THE OTHER MODELS IT IS THE BEST HEADPHONE HE HAS EVER HEARD.

Is this really quite necessary?

Rob, does the LCD-3 worth $1000 over LCD-2?  I know it is personal preference but a $2k headphone is threading on the STAX backyard and it is very hard to justify.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mwilson 

I know you directed this question at Skylab, but let me also give you my perspective, having heard all 3 of them - By far, the Q is the less microphonic and flexible of them all. It also has a cool retro look that matches the LCD style. Sound wise, ALO was the brightest, the Q a bit darker but with a more organic sound to it. I could blindly tell the ALO from the Q within 10 seconds. The stock cable was rather decent, no complaints at all. I liked their older stock cable (round vs. ribbon), though if I'm not mistaken internally they're both the same.

 

It also depends on the amp. With the RWA AE, the ALO has a decent synergy (after all, they were designed as such), but my personal preference was for the Q.

 

I'm curious as well to see Skylab's take on them.

 

 

Thanks for jumping in mwilson. Your input is appreciated. Sounds like the stock cable has been upgraded on the LCD-3? How much better were the Q in comparison to the stock cable?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skylab 

I did not listen at all to the stock cables.  They are still in the box.  I did not mention the stock cables in my review.  I liked the Q-audio best, as I did with the LCD-2, but the differences are not that big, IMO, and one of the main reasons I like the Q-audio the best is actually the ergonomics - it is the lightest and most flexible cable by a very wide margin.  This to me with a cable is more important than the somewhat small sonic differences.  I do think the Q-Audio is also the most transparent-sounding.

Great information there. Sounds like the Q represents superb value (and ergonomics) considering its price. You have made my decision a lot easier, thank you for your impressions Skylab! 

Thank you skylab for the review it was a great read!

tink97

I don't have the LCD-3 yet. Perhaps I didn't say it properly - the LCD-2 rev. 1 cable was round. When I got the LCD-2 rev. 2, the cable had been changed, from round to ribbon. If I recall correctly, Audez'e said it was simply the shielding that changed, that's why I said internally they should be the same. I said they had been changed, not upgraded. The Q cable was, to these ears, quite an improvement over the stock, which wasn't bad to begin with.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarknightDK 

 

Thanks for jumping in mwilson. Your input is appreciated. Sounds like the stock cable has been upgraded on the LCD-3? How much better were the Q in comparison to the stock cable?

 

Great information there. Sounds like the Q represents superb value (and ergonomics) considering its price. You have made my decision a lot easier, thank you for your impressions Skylab! 

 

After such high praise from some ears I trust I really want a Q cable. they were my first choice and now my only choice. price is excellent and it sounds like everything else is too.

Rob,

1) Do you keep the LCD 2  as well because it's like having another good headphones together with the LCD 3 or for other reasons?

2) How do you compare the LCD 3 to the AKG K1000?

thanks

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skylab 

Sorry buddy but I just cannot answer that question.  My value of money is different from yours, and everyone else's. 

no worries, i do kind of expected you will say that.  i guess i have to listen to it in person, time for a trip to Chicago...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank I 

 

                 your agenda is clear if its not a Stax product your going to attack.

I have nothing to gain by shilling Stax.  They are not a MOT and don't even pay attention to HF as far as I know.  Do I generally like their headphones?  Yep.  There are plenty of other headphones I like as well.  The HE90 and HE60 are made by Senn which I love, the R10 and Qualia are made by Sony which I love, and I've also recommended the K1000, HD800, and LCD2 to people depending on what they say they're looking for in a headphone.  

Yep, and I said this not once but twice already.

If those were weaknessses I wouldn't conclude they were "excellent" in those regards, but then I guess that's a word we all have a different meaning for.  As for the Leben, again I've never heard it and I'm sure it sounds great.  I never claimed to have heard it.  I never claimed he was inexperienced in writing reviews either...a quick search of his threads started will show quite the opposite.  I'm not even sure where you're getting half this stuff honestly.

As for my tone, James, this is just kinda how I post...maybe I'm not using enough smileys or something but it's nothing to get your feathers ruffled over.  Rob seems to get I'm trying to help (not necessarily him but buyers).