Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › LCD3 Measurements
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

LCD3 Measurements

post #1 of 236
Thread Starter 

LCD3 Measurements

Not putting this in the usual CSD thread. This concerns a LCD# which deserves it own.

 

 

HOW DO I READ THESE?
Cumulative spectral decay (CSD) or waterfall plots measure energy content over time across all frequencies based on a "sound burst" that excites all frequencies. They are sort of like a FR over time (technically not really as they measure energy throughout the band in successively smaller windows over time.) These plots are a good tool to "see" driver ringing or resonances (seen as ridges), which typically sounds bad (piercing, glare, shoutyness, etc.); and how fast and cleanly the driver decays (speed and extraction of low level information.) 
 
This is what a perfect waterfall plot would look like:
c518b311_perfect.txt.jpeg
For a perfect or near-perfect response, the decay should be immediate. We first see a wall (meaning all frequencies are excited) at the beginning. The next few fractions of a millisecond, the wall collapses into silence (meaning the driver is no longer vibrating or sound waves are no longer bouncing around inside the headphone enclosures.) The back wall at time = 0 is basically an uncompensated frequency response. Success plots over time move toward us.

 

LCD3 CSD

These are not FR plots, although some idea of the FR can be gathered from t=0 plot.
The waterfall plots below only go down to 100Hz not 20Hz!
lcd3 l.txt.jpg lcd3 r.txt.jpg
 
Waterfall plots confirm subjective impressions that the LCD3 is extremely smooth in the upper midrange and treble. No ringing at all in the critical area between 6kHz to 10kHz. The upper midrange and treble FR is much smoother than r2 below. An rising response from a slight null 13kHz peaking near 17-18kHz. Most people can't hear well way up here anyways. Some minor hash (likely interaction with the pads) on the floor between 2 to 3kHz - not really audible.
 

LCD2r1 waterfall provided for reference

These are not FR plots, although some idea of the FR can be gathered from t=0 plot.

It should be noted that this was one of the better sounding (and better measuring) LCD2s that I've been able to get my hands on.

 

The waterfall plots below only go down to 100Hz not 20Hz!
lcd2 l.txt.jpg lcd2 r.txt.jpg
 
 

LCD3 Impulse Response

The amp I used reverses the phase of the impulse response.

LCD3 impulse.jpg

At a glance, this impulse response looks horrible. This is why we have to be careful when evaluating measurements, especially if we have no idea what they really represent, what they mathematically mean, or how they should be used. Anyone care to guess what's causing a high magnitude short duration oscillation after the initial impulse that takes about ~0.6E-04 seconds to cycle?

 

 

LCD3 Frequency Response

LCD3.gif

Left and right drivers are well matched and within measurement error and ear pad variation tolerances. The measurement in the bass area appears to be rolled off. The bass measurement probably needs compensation for lack a good seal.

 

LCD3 COMPARISONS WITH OTHER HEADPHONES

Clicky: http://www.head-fi.org/t/580283/lcd3-measurements/15#post_7892979

GRAPH OF THE TITANS: http://www.head-fi.org/t/580283/lcd3-measurements/45#post_7898177


Edited by purrin - 11/19/11 at 7:26pm
post #2 of 236
Thread Starter 

Zoom in comparison with a bad sounding LCD2r1:

The graphs below are normalized to reveal low level artifacts - hence the 17-18kHz peak on the LCD3 sticks out over the top. Peaks that high up are fairly innocuous for most people - or probably even beneficial. The r1 used for comparison is a really bad sounding sample and is not the same one above. These plots have undergone my super zoom process to exaggerate non-linearities, so things may look worse than they really are.

 

LCD3

Note frequency range: 1k to 22kHz

lcd3 l.txt.jpg lcd3 r.txt.jpg

Very clean in the critical 6kHz to 10kHz area.

 

LCD2r1

Note frequency range: 1k to 22kHz

LCD2-2-L.txt.jpg LCD2-2-R.txt.jpg

It should be noted that this sample is not the same as the r1 above. This r1 happened to sound horrible. The r1's FR in this critical region is not smooth. It didn't sound smooth either. In addition, there is ringing at 7kHz on the left channel and 9kHz on the right channel. Not good.

 

LCD3 COMPARISONS WITH OTHER HEADPHONES

Clicky: http://www.head-fi.org/t/580283/lcd3-measurements/15#post_7892979

GRAPH OF THE TITANS: http://www.head-fi.org/t/580283/lcd3-measurements/45#post_7898177


Edited by purrin - 11/19/11 at 7:27pm
post #3 of 236

Awesome.  It's really cool that you got these up so quickly.  Nice work. 

post #4 of 236
Thread Starter 

I'm telling you, I think you will really like these.

post #5 of 236

Thanks purrin..

post #6 of 236
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post

I'm telling you, I think you will really like these.



redface.gif 

 

Has anyone sent you a rev2 yet?

post #7 of 236
Thread Starter 

Maybe I can find someone with an r2 around the area that I can trade with for a few days.

 

Honestly, I don't think the LCD3 are that much faster, tighter, speedier, or more detailed (if at all) compared to the r2s. From what I'm hearing, the primary difference is with the much more linear (smoother) frequency response and lack of ringing, which is very welcome. I am wondering if surgical EQ on a r2 could bring them very close to the r3s. Of course surgical EQ would require measuring equipment. I don't have any r2 measurements, but I can see why Anax preferred the r2 over the r3. The slight jagginess of the r2 treble brings it up a little bit on average and adds some edge compared to the r3.


Edited by purrin - 11/14/11 at 12:53pm
post #8 of 236

R2 is rev 2 and R3 is LCD-3? or is it reference to your various Rev1  LCD-2s?

post #9 of 236
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by oqvist View Post

R2 is rev 2 and R3 is LCD-3? or is it reference to your various Rev1  LCD-2s?


LOL! Sort of an subconscious slip there. r3 = LCD3.

 

post #10 of 236

^that's a good question, @oqvist.

 

@purrin, thanks for getting this up- I'm very interested in hearing these.  But, would you consider the L/R drivers well-matched?

 

(Also, I'm interested in your having a larger sample set- so hopefully as these get out into the field, more will head your way!)

 

 

Reply
post #11 of 236
Thread Starter 

Quote:
Originally Posted by CEE TEE View Post

@purrin, thanks for getting this up- I'm very interested in hearing these.  But, would you consider the L/R drivers well-matched?


Yes. The drivers are well matched.

 

The LCD3 ear pads are so squishy, therefore likely to cause quite some variability with the FR measurements. I pre-squished the pads a bit on the measuring rig to make sure results were as consistent as possible. The good thing is that the general pattern of the L and R FR plots follow each other. The real test would be removal of the drivers and directly testing them to isolate the effects of the ear pads.

 

The gold standard for driver matching still belongs to the SR009 and HD800.


Edited by purrin - 11/14/11 at 1:30pm
post #12 of 236

Marv, very nice! Answer to your question: the resonance at 1/.6e-4 ;). Wasn't convinced tyll I saw the bump at 17k in the frf. I am amazed they got rid of any visible resonance in the diaphragm even though it's so much finer from previous generation ! As for the impulse response looking bad, well that peak at 17k is pretty nasty (even though it might go unnoticed or even be appreciated).

1 thing I realized: your measurement noise floor is typically in the 30dB range? I thought you used to plot down to 36dB or 40?

post #13 of 236
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnaud View Post

Marv, very nice! Answer to your question: the resonance at 1/.6e-4 ;). Wasn't convinced tyll I saw the bump at 17k in the frf. I am amazed they got rid of any visible resonance in the diaphragm even though it's so much finer from previous generation ! As for the impulse response looking bad, well that peak at 17k is pretty nasty (even though it might go unnoticed or even be appreciated).

1 thing I realized: your measurement noise floor is typically in the 30dB range? I thought you used to plot down to 36dB or 40?


I was waiting for you to answer! biggrin.gif

 

I moved the floor up to 30db from 36db. I didn't feel I was getting anything useful going down that low - noise artifacts and extraneous hash that I didn't want people misinterpreting.

 

post #14 of 236
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post

Maybe I can find someone with an r2 around the area that I can trade with for a few days.

 

Honestly, I don't think the LCD3 are that much faster, tighter, speedier, or more detailed (if at all) compared to the r2s. From what I'm hearing, the primary difference is with the much more linear (smoother) frequency response and lack of ringing, which is very welcome. I am wondering if surgical EQ on a r2 could bring them very close to the r3s. Of course surgical EQ would require measuring equipment. I don't have any r2 measurements, but I can see why Anax preferred the r2 over the r3. The slight jagginess of the r2 treble brings it up a little bit on average and adds some edge compared to the r3.


Maybe, I don't know if it's so much I prefer the r2 to r3 but more that I couldn't actually get a proper impression of the r3.  We'll see.  =)

 

post #15 of 236

Good stuff Purrin! smile.gif

 

 

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 › LCD3 Measurements