Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Audeze LCD-3 Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-3 Impressions Thread - Page 57

post #841 of 2957

speaking of bass, i have been surprised by the bass impact on the lcd-3. you can hear all the notes with a great deal of presence which makes them wonderful for a large range of genres, however when i think about those that hold these as the holy grail for more modern day rap and the like, i can't help but think there's better options that i've never heard. i think i'm skewed because when i started getting into headfi i was using xb7000s that rattled your core with impact. i know now that isnt what good bass is like and the lcds absolutely massacre them in all areas. maybe some units have more bass impact than others? 

post #842 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post


That said, I am finding the LCD-3s very complementary to the HD800s so they're also a keeper.

+1 totally complementary, each with unique character. I wouldn't part with either one.
post #843 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by R Scott Ireland View Post


+1 totally complementary, each with unique character. I wouldn't part with either one.

 

+2

post #844 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

Open - Sound which has height and "air", relates to clean upper midrange and treble.

Airy - Spacious. Instruments sound like they are surrounded by a large reflective space full of air. Good reproduction of high frequency reflections. 

Soundstage - The area that appears to the listener to be occupied by sonic images. Like a real stage, a soundstage should have good width, depth, and height.

Instrument Separation - Each instrument has it's own space and can be easily picked out.

 

 

Closed - A closed-in sound lacking in openness, delicacy, air, and fine detail usually caused by Roll-off above 10kHz; in contrast to Open.

Congested- Smeared, confused, muddy, and flat; lacking transparency.

 

With regard to open, airy, soundstage, and instrument separation.  Maybe you could hold the opinion that those things are all different, but I think they are all referring to the same quality as they are kind of mutually inclusive.  I mean I don't know of any headphone, speaker, iem that has great soundstage but terrible airiness.

 

I would agree that the LCD2 has relatively poor soundstage (or whatever you want to call it).  But when you say that the LCD2 is not open because it has distorted or dirty upper midrange or treble, I disagree.  The LCD2 certainly has clean midrange and treble its just not as emphasized to the same extent as the rest of the spectrum, which gives it a warm or dark signature.  Maybe I'm misremembering (or misinterpreting lol), but the waterfall plots were pretty clean throughout and support this view.

 

When you look at it that way then the LCD2's only downfalls are a merely "good" soundstage and a non neutral warm sound signature, but still has many redeeming qualities, e.g. extension, dynamics, impactful, quick transients, natural timbre, and low distortion even at absurd volumes.  Also, just because the LCD2r2 isn't their flagship doesn't mean it can't compete w/ the HD800 and HE6, after all plenty of people thought the LCD2 was superior to these headphones before the LCD3 came out.


Edited by rrahman - 5/30/13 at 4:45pm
post #845 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrahman View Post

With regard to open, airy, soundstage, and instrument separation.  Maybe you could hold the opinion that those things are all different, but I think they are all referring to the same quality as they are kind of mutually inclusive.  I mean I don't know of any headphone, speaker, iem that has great soundstage but terrible airiness.

I would agree that the LCD2 has relatively poor soundstage (or whatever you want to call it).  But when you say that the LCD2 is not open because it has distorted or dirty upper midrange or treble, I disagree.  The LCD2 certainly has clean midrange and treble its just not as emphasized to the same extent as the rest of the spectrum, which gives it a warm or dark signature.  Maybe I'm misremembering (or misinterpreting lol), but the waterfall plots were pretty clean throughout and support this view.

When you look at it that way then the LCD2's only downfalls are a merely "good" soundstage and a non neutral warm sound signature, but still has many redeeming qualities, e.g. extension, dynamics, impactful, quick transients, natural timbre, and low distortion even at absurd volumes.  Also, just because the LCD2r2 isn't their flagship doesn't mean it can't compete w/ the HD800 and HE6, after all plenty of people thought the LCD2 was superior to these headphones before the LCD3 came out.

I don't think that those areas being or not being related detracts anything from the overall reasoning. The lcd-2s are lacking in several areas compared to the top dogs and many have already been mentioned. I would also add dynamics to the list, compared to both Lcd-3s and hd800s. And finally there is better gear out there nowadays that fortunately or unfortunately adds to the gap between the Lcd-2s and the flagships.
Edited by negura - 5/30/13 at 4:58pm
post #846 of 2957

There is also one great thing about the LCD3 that gets so often swept under the rug.  Everyone heralds the HD800 for its incredibly sound stage, but truthfully its kind of a downside.  Large soundstages suck for techno, rap/hip hop, and dance/club music.  I imagine that 50 cent (or his recording engineer) wanted his hit "in Da club" sound like it was played in a auditorium lol.  The LCD3 widens the soundstage when it should be there on large orchestral music and narrows it when its not supposed to be there.

post #847 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post


I don't think that those areas being or not being related detracts anything from the overall reasoning. The lcd-2s are lacking in several areas compared to the top dogs and many have already been mentioned. I would also add dynamics to the list, compared to both Lcd-3s and hd800s. And finally there is better gear out there nowadays that fortunately or unfortunately adds to the gap between the Lcd-2s and the flagships.

Really? dynamics?

 

This is what Tyll said about the LCD2r1's dynamics and I agree whole heartedly - "Dynamics - These punch like a Louisville slugger. If there's dynamics to be had in a track, the LCD-2 seem very adept at bringing it out. Only the lack of the top octave to give it a bit of breathing room prevents these from being the most satisfactorily dynamic headphone of the bunch."

 

And he says that in references to the HE6, HD800, HE500, SR007 and SR009.


Edited by rrahman - 5/30/13 at 5:03pm
post #848 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrahman View Post

Really? dynamics?

 

This is what Tyll said about the LCD2r1's dynamics and I agree whole heartedly - "Dynamics - These punch like a Louisville slugger. If there's dynamics to be had in a track, the LCD-2 seem very adept at bringing it out. Only the lack of the top octave to give it a bit of breathing room prevents these from being the most satisfactorily dynamic headphone of the bunch."

 

And he says that in references to the HE6, HD800, HE500, SR007 and SR009.

 

In musicdynamics normally refers to the volume of a sound or note, but can also refer to every aspect of the execution of a given piece, either stylistic (staccato, legato etc.) or functional (velocity). The term is also applied to the written or printed musical notation used to indicate dynamics. Dynamics are relative and do not indicate specific volume levels.

 

I don't disagree at all the LCD-2s have punch. But that's not all there is to dynamics.

It's sufficient to listen to pretty much any classical music, for example, with the LCD-2s compared to the others and you will know what's meant by this.

post #849 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrahman View Post

There is also one great thing about the LCD3 that gets so often swept under the rug.  Everyone heralds the HD800 for its incredibly sound stage, but truthfully its kind of a downside.  Large soundstages suck for techno, rap/hip hop, and dance/club music.  I imagine that 50 cent (or his recording engineer) wanted his hit "in Da club" sound like it was played in a auditorium lol.  The LCD3 widens the soundstage when it should be there on large orchestral music and narrows it when its not supposed to be there.

I find a wide soundstage to "slow" down the music. I think there is such a thing as "too much" instrument separation. Which was my main problem with the HD650 and kept me from purchasing the HD800.

post #850 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawdawg3234 View Post
 "too much" instrument separation. Which was my main problem with the HD650 and kept me from purchasing the HD800.

 

We must hear very differently. Besides the Sennheiser name, there is very very little that's similar between those two headphones. To my ears if anything the HD650s should be compared with from amongst the higher end headphones, that's the LCD-2s.


Edited by negura - 5/30/13 at 5:16pm
post #851 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post

 

In musicdynamics normally refers to the volume of a sound or note, but can also refer to every aspect of the execution of a given piece, either stylistic (staccato, legato etc.) or functional (velocity). The term is also applied to the written or printed musical notation used to indicate dynamics. Dynamics are relative and do not indicate specific volume levels.

 

I don't disagree at all the LCD-2s have punch. But that's not all there is to dynamics.

It's sufficient to listen to pretty much any classical music, for example, with the LCD-2s compared to the others and you will know what's meant by this.

Thats not what I meant, I'm not talking about SPL contests here.  I agree with your definition and still agree that the LCD2 has its dynamics only bested by the LCD3 and SR009.

post #852 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post

 

We must hear very differently. Besides the Sennheiser name, there is very very little that's similar between those two headphones. To my ears if anything the HD650s should be compared with from amongst the higher end headphones, that's the LCD-2s.

I was merely comparing them as far as their expansive soundstage which is a HUGE similarity between the two and one that i'm sure the HD700 shares as well.  However the quality with which it's presented is far different you are correct.  HD800's are great cans but like I said before they are over hyped. They even stole the conversation in a thread meant for the LCD3's..

 

Shout out to the LCD3's whose lushness and silky smooth presentation is the best i've heard...

post #853 of 2957
"I was merely comparing them as far as their expansive soundstage which is a HUGE similarity between the two and one that i'm sure the HD700 shares as well. "

You know, I read this constantly about the HD-800 but don't understand the observation, at all. Recordings that have a large "soundstage" (recorded that way) come across with that quality even on my speaker system. Recordings that sound as if recorded in a small closet sound closed-in on the HD-800 as well as over speakers. The issue with most headphones is that the majority cannot reproduce the recorded ambience accurately. That the HD-800 and a few others are capable of delivering this is the norm, not the exception.
post #854 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by rrahman View Post

With regard to open, airy, soundstage, and instrument separation.  Maybe you could hold the opinion that those things are all different, but I think they are all referring to the same quality as they are kind of mutually inclusive.  I mean I don't know of any headphone, speaker, iem that has great soundstage but terrible airiness.

 

I would agree that the LCD2 has relatively poor soundstage (or whatever you want to call it).  But when you say that the LCD2 is not open because it has distorted or dirty upper midrange or treble, I disagree.  The LCD2 certainly has clean midrange and treble its just not as emphasized to the same extent as the rest of the spectrum, which gives it a warm or dark signature.  Maybe I'm misremembering (or misinterpreting lol), but the waterfall plots were pretty clean throughout and support this view.

 

When you look at it that way then the LCD2's only downfalls are a merely "good" soundstage and a non neutral warm sound signature, but still has many redeeming qualities, e.g. extension, dynamics, impactful, quick transients, natural timbre, and low distortion even at absurd volumes.  Also, just because the LCD2r2 isn't their flagship doesn't mean it can't compete w/ the HD800 and HE6, after all plenty of people thought the LCD2 was superior to these headphones before the LCD3 came out.

 

 

Well, for my musical enjoyment they displayed more than a few weaknesses.  A poor soundstage is just "one" of them.  The lack of treble extension is another.  Also, if you read my post closely you will see I always say "compared to"  So yes - compared to the other 3 headphones the LCD-2.2s lack in a few more areas that just one.  

 

When you get the HE-6, LCD-3 and HD800 right- the impact is just as or better than the LCD-2.2 - I would say better.  Also, the other 3 headphones IMO are much faster with transients when compared to the LCD-2.2.

 

I guess, for me that overly warm / dark signature is the opposite of what I like in a headphone.  When compared to the HE-6, HD800 and the LCD-3 - the LCD-2.2 are just to dark, slow and syrupy.  

 

Again, I'm only comparing the LCD-2.2s to the HE-6, LCD-3 and the HD800.

post #855 of 2957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mambosenior View Post

"I was merely comparing them as far as their expansive soundstage which is a HUGE similarity between the two and one that i'm sure the HD700 shares as well. "

You know, I read this constantly about the HD-800 but don't understand the observation, at all. Recordings that have a large "soundstage" (recorded that way) come across with that quality even on my speaker system. Recordings that sound as if recorded in a small closet sound closed-in on the HD-800 as well as over speakers. The issue with most headphones is that the majority cannot reproduce the recorded ambience accurately. That the HD-800 and a few others are capable of delivering this is the norm, not the exception.

Well this is just my observation but the first thing I noticed when I used the HD800's was the clarity and crispness of everything. I was blown away with the sheer quality of what I was hearing. I mean everything was so detailed it made static sound good. 

However I myself began to notice the soundstage and how far apart it made the instrument on almost every recording that I can remember sound.  What I also began to notice, probably because of my listening preferences, is that having that separation really and truly slowed down the music and broke up the whole rhythm just enough for it to bother me. Now this may have been because the recording or even my components just aren't up to par but nonetheless its there for me. 

Here's an easy and quick way to hear what i'm talking about. Listen to Judas Priest. Maybe the song Turbo Lover a few times on a different set of cans. Then switch over to the HD800's and tell me if you can still get behind the beat. It'll prob sound great but something will be missing. At least for me it was.

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 › Audeze LCD-3 Impressions Thread