Audeze LCD-3 Appreciation Thread - Page 16

I'm afraid to have to say this too in this thread, but right now, I can attest to the HE-6 not being peaky from what I'm driving them, while the LCD-3 clearly are having a hard time in comparison. The wimpy cymbal splashes are off the instrument's timbre

I hope it's just my pair 

Ahh - and you know what.  There seem to also be some variations on HE-6s as well.  Happy Camper and my own are different.  In fact Happy Campers is from the first run.  His has way less bass and is "bright".  Ah ha.  I just got a brand new pair from Justin this year.

The other question is at what dB?  I tend to listen to the LCD-3 around 80dB and its certainly not veiled.  For my gear it approaching bright but I'm sensitive to that.  Ten years ago, the HD650 did it for me, then the 007 MkI, followed by the LCD-2 Rev1 so... ya.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacedonianHero 

Interesting. Do you know when he got them? Was it before or after April of this year?

 

BTW, when I was your age, I spent most of my $ on girls. 

 

 

 

Listen carefully to the cymbals. While they are indeed lively on the HE-6s, but listen carefully....to my ears the and with certain recordings, cymbals are placed in front of the sound stage. How many drummers are in front of the band? 

 

I suggest you listen to some female vocals and trumpet...I found the HE-6's treble bothersome most in these instances. YMMV of course.

Don't worry, I have enough money to spend on girls, and don't necessarily have to spend on them often either, I rotate a lot ;)

As for the staging, the HE-6 don't have as much depth as the lcd-3, but the staging is fine. Soundstaging is one of the most important thing for me, I would not accept anything inaccurate. To me the lcd-3, hd800 and he-6 are all fine, whereas something like a T1 may sound strange (staging also changes depending on placement on ears).

Maybe your experience with the odd instrument placement on the HE-6 was in fault of a certain album or recording? Or maybe a rev1 HE-6

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rawdawg3234 


I was thinking that perhaps you were under amplifying them..
I've been using my wa6se and with the stock driver tubes the HD 800s blow the LCD 3s out of the water, that soundstage is just impressive.
However when I use my 6GL7/6EM7 tubes the LCD 3s really sing. I mean wow. Same with my Ed 10s. Those tubes match up great with them. Now with the HD 800s there's a huge problem with static and distortion. Same with my "lesser" cans.

Extensively on mjolnir/bha-1. Also on ef-6, dynahi, wa22, wa2, phonitor and b22. I think the headphones are acting up, you guys would have to hear them.

They are likely fine.  Some people, mostly HD800, simply don't care for the LCD line.  Staging on either LCD is junk compared to the HD800.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacedonianHero 

 

I guess you've mentioned that you really preferred the brighter sound of the HE-6 (and less bright HD800s); and conversely disliked the LCD-2s for not being as bright as you'd like them to be. So I'm figuring that the Audeze "sound" if I could use that phrase, isn't to your liking. But technically, both are outstanding headphones with the nod going to the LCD-3s in terms of a flatter FR response, better square wave responses, being a faster driver, and even lower distortion (I'm of course referring to the post-RMA versions of the LCD-3s). Sound stage wise I found them about on par; which for me was a great improvement over the LCD-2s (either revision). Just to confirm, my comparisons were done with the LCD-3s on my (now sold WA22) and on my brother's McIntosh speaker amp. I personally think the HE-6s do sound best from a good speaker amp, but the difference isn't as huge as many have stated (again IMO).

 

While I can happily live with the 6kHz peak on the HD800s, I found that the wider peak (over a wider frequency range) on the HE-6s a bit too much for me to truly enjoy them fully. In that regard (along with Tyll's measurements) I can see why some (like Tyll) actually prefer the HE-500 to the HE-6s.

I dont think you can really say that one of "technically" better than the other Macedonian Hero. The HE-6s for instance have quite a bit better decay plots

edit: not to mention how wonky the LCD-3 impulse response looks

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacedonianHero 


There is an issue with that waterfall plot. Unfortunately the January time frame LCD-3s had issues (at least a good number of pairs). So comparisons are difficult. If we're purely talking technical measurements, heck the HE-500s measure a wee bit better than the HE-6s, but most prefer the latter (including myself).
In terms of decay plots, there are much better ones out there of "good LCD-3s". My technical comments were purely based on the innerfidelity data and my first hand experiences owning both for six months or so at the same time. There's a reason that many ( including myself and many seasoned Head-fires) think the LCD-3s are the second best cans out there. YMMV of course and I can totally get how some can prefer the HE-6s, or HD800s, etc.

Why do you assume theres an issue with the plot? Im pretty sure thats a plot of the best of 4 LCD-3s that Purrin has heard, the scale is quite a bit different than most, it goes all the way down to -55db.

Im not trying to say that the LCD-3 is bad, i still havent gotten to hear an unveiled pair, just that you cant point to some of the data that shows the LCD-3 being better, but not look at other data where the HE-6 might be better, and say that the LCD-3 is "technically" better. And yes i would still love to hear the LCD-3s, maybe someone will let me borrow them?? :D i promise to take the best care of them