Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Mini-Review: Audeze LCD-3 (vs LCD-2 r2, SR-007, et al)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mini-Review: Audeze LCD-3 (vs LCD-2 r2, SR-007, et al) - Page 2

post #16 of 50

A very, very good and informative review. Pretty much mirrors my impressions of the LCD-3, though I lack the comparative electrostats experience for full context. I could never enjoy classical music on the LCD-2/3, something I readily did while I had the HD 800.

 

I can also relate to WA's feedback regarding stress on one's hearing by the LCD-3. While I never suffered from tinnitus, after about one hour of listening to moderate levels I can detect a faint hint of ringing in my ears, something that likewise I never experienced while using the LCD-2 or the HD 800.

 

I would be very curious to hear either the 007 or 009; any willful soul in South Florida? Perhaps even taking it as far as a mini meet?

post #17 of 50
Thread Starter 

I forgot to mention in the review a 3rd minor reason for selling the LCD-2 and LCD-3: I felt like a guinea pig with my Audeze headphone experience and didn't really appreciate the ongoing revisions & changes. When I buy any piece of audio gear, I prefer owning a product that isn't going to be rendered obsolete by future imminent revisions. The frequent product revisions that came out of Audeze ended up turning me off to their business and I doubt I'll be buying another Audeze headphone in the future.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elysian View Post

The problem with the LCD-3 is that if I never heard electrostats, I'd think it was a phenomenal headphone.

 

I definitely agree and my opinion of the LCD-3 would be a lot more positive if I didn't have any SR-007 experience.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Noirceur View Post
Why you try to compare two different vision of sound  ? (LCD-2/3 and Stax 007/009)

 

I did the LCD-3 vs SR-007 comparison because I thought it'd be of interest to some Head-Fiers, and because I could. wink.gif Also, for me personally, I was contemplating which headphones I wanted to keep long-term between the LCD-3 and SR-007, if either or both (though I had a definite bias towards the SR-007 over the LCD-3 going in). I wanted to find out if the LCD-3 was good enough to use as a "dynamic" headphone counterpart to my electrostatic system.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by catscratch View Post
P.S. I would really like to see you spend some quality time with the 009, and your thoughts on it vs the 007.

 

I'd really like to hear an SR-009 on my system too, but I don't really see it happening any time soon unfortunately, unless someone were to loan one to me maybe. I don't see myself owning another >$2K headphone (after my previous ownership of a Qualia 010).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AiDee View Post
Have you heard any other LCD3 than the one you bought? If so, noticed any differences?


Not yet, but I'll probably hear another LCD-3 at the SF Bay Area meet this weekend and if I think I hear a difference I'll report back in this thread.


Edited by Asr - 2/8/12 at 11:10am
post #18 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwilson View Post

A very, very good and informative review. Pretty much mirrors my impressions of the LCD-3, though I lack the comparative electrostats experience for full context. I could never enjoy classical music on the LCD-2/3, something I readily did while I had the HD 800.

 

I can also relate to WA's feedback regarding stress on one's hearing by the LCD-3. While I never suffered from tinnitus, after about one hour of listening to moderate levels I can detect a faint hint of ringing in my ears, something that likewise I never experienced while using the LCD-2 or the HD 800.

 

I would be very curious to hear either the 007 or 009; any willful soul in South Florida? Perhaps even taking it as far as a mini meet?

 

If that is the case, I really recommend you lower your listening volume. That is one sign of noise induced hearing loss, or at least the start of it. Prolonged listening in these conditions could lead to permanent hearing damage.

 

 

On a side note, it's weird that the LCD-3's are more laid back in certain respects than the LCD-2's, especially considering the LCD-2 Rev 2's are imo, already plenty laid back. They don't exactly have the high emphasis of say the HD800's or T1's, and add to that the more forward mids and solid bass extension draws away from the top end somewhat anyway. I'd have thought with the LCD-3's they'd have taken it further in the direction of the Rev 2's (which imo was a wise choice, but without sacrificing the Audeze house sound) as oppose to going back to the more laid back signature of the Rev 1's.

 

As such, I have the feeling that if I ever listened to the LCD-3's, I'd actually still end up preferring the sound signature of the LCD-2 Rev 2's.


Edited by Naim.F.C - 2/8/12 at 11:38am
post #19 of 50

I listen at an average level, maybe even less than most folks.    I think that another problem with the LCD-3 is the seal the pads make.  The leather is softer and more supple than the pads on the LCD-2 and from my experience there was almost a vacuum seal that occurred and I could feel the air pressure from the transducer interacting with my ear drums in a far stronger way than the LCD-2.    Personally had it not been for the veil I experienced on the LCD-3 and the odd pressure factor I would take the LCD-3 any day of the week.  Except for the veil it is superior to the LCD-2 r.1, and the LCD-2 r.2.  But in my opinion it is not worth $2K, but more in the range of $1400- $1500. I've stated that from the beginning concerning the price.

post #20 of 50

See kids this is how you do a review. Thanks ASr.

post #21 of 50

Asr, that is an excellent review. Thank you.

post #22 of 50

What a great review!

post #23 of 50

Thank you very much for sharing this review with us Asr.

 

I was interested to see that you placed the JH13's in your excellent category along with the 0II and Qualia.  After going back and reading your thoughts on the JH13 vs LCD-2 in your previous review thread I see that you stated "Despite sounding more similar to each other than any other headphones should sound (not that they were identical-sounding though, just relatively close), I'd say the JH13 and LCD-2 serve separate functional purposes".

 

So do the JH13's get the bump in to your excellent tier simply because of their convenience and portability, or were there actually some areas where it excelled over the LCD-2 other than the lower more powerful bass that you mentioned?  Which is astonishing to me considering how good I find the bass coming from my LCD-2 r.1.  Your impressions have me considering a trip to the audiologist for molds.

post #24 of 50

Great review, Asr!

 

Give the man a medal!

 

post #25 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by carm View Post

Great review, Asr!

 

Give the man a medal!

 

Give the man two medals!

 

Before pulling the trigger on my BHSE order, I did briefly consider going down the Audeze path as a simpler, lower cost alternative to the end game, but didn't really get very far.

In fact, I've yet to try one, as I just knew that I would forever miss that Stax O2 magic - hopefully more magical with the BHSE. So hang the expense - no more side steps for me!
 

 

post #26 of 50
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by subtle View Post
So do the JH13's get the bump in to your excellent tier simply because of their convenience and portability, or were there actually some areas where it excelled over the LCD-2 other than the lower more powerful bass that you mentioned?  Which is astonishing to me considering how good I find the bass coming from my LCD-2 r.1.  Your impressions have me considering a trip to the audiologist for molds.


The convenience/portability of the JH13 is definitely one part of it but not all - I also thought the JH13 was more balanced-sounding than the LCD-2 and was more "adaptable" to different recordings too. There are times when I think I could live with just the JH13 - something I could never say for either the LCD-2 or LCD-3. I can listen to any music genre on the JH13 and not be dissatisfied - it really is that versatile for me.

 

Not that I'd really recommend the JH13 anymore though - keep in mind that I didn't buy mine and won them in the raffle at CanJam 09. If I had to buy a pair of custom IEMs today I'd get the Ultimate Ears IERM, as I've since been turned off to JH Audio's business practices after their handling of the JH-3A situation.


Edited by Asr - 2/14/12 at 2:26pm
post #27 of 50

So , is the UE better sounding than the JH 13 .

If so , no qualms , but if not , then beware of cutting your nose to spite your face . 

One's ethical view of a brand should be expressed in hushed tones , objective quality and subjective musical enjoyment first, then sad side comments .

Thanks for the review.

What I got from it splendidly affirms that there are horses for courses , sorry for our wallets

 

Enjoy the music

post #28 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by wild4sound View Post

So , is the UE better sounding than the JH 13 .
If so , no qualms , but if not , then beware of cutting your nose to spite your face . 
One's ethical view of a brand should be expressed in hushed tones , objective quality and subjective musical enjoyment first, then sad side comments .
Thanks for the review.
What I got from it splendidly affirms that there are horses for courses , sorry for our wallets

Enjoy the music

Think you got that backwards, bro.
post #29 of 50

Don't get me wrong on this .

I find this review very good and helpful.

Asr praises the JH 13 and places it very high up the ladder.

What I am asking is, does he recommend  the UE because it betters the JH13 on sound quality .

From his post he clearly states he does not like the brand JH and their dealings.

He does not state that UE is better sounding than the JH13 , to him. 

If he thinks the UE sounds better, then I have to go give it a listen.

 

I don't think I have it backwards.

Are you suggesting we research the brand business practises  before we listen to their products?

No flames on , I really would like his take on the UE sound .

post #30 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by wild4sound View Post

Don't get me wrong on this .
I find this review very good and helpful.
Asr praises the JH 13 and places it very high up the ladder.
What I am asking is, does he recommend  the UE because it betters the JH13 on sound quality .
From his post he clearly states he does not like the brand JH and their dealings.
He does not state that UE is better sounding than the JH13 , to him. 
If he thinks the UE sounds better, then I have to go give it a listen.

I don't think I have it backwards.
Are you suggesting we research the brand business practises  before we listen to their products?
No flames on , I really would like his take on the UE sound .

I think it's fine if you ask for pure performance, but you should buy from vendors that serve their customers properly before ones who don't. The JH-3a system from JH Audio was in research and development for 2+ years taking pre-order money up front, and as the release neared units started going out with odd problems, they were all sent back, the design was changed to be inferior, promises were not kept, and the whole thing was just not good.
Edited by Maxvla - 2/18/12 at 6:55am
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 › Mini-Review: Audeze LCD-3 (vs LCD-2 r2, SR-007, et al)