Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Fostex TH900 Impressions & Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fostex TH900 Impressions & Discussion Thread - Page 302

post #4516 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundFreaq View Post

 

Oh man.... you just punched all my pet peeve buttons. I'll spare us both the tome to follow. 

 

Hum, let's see where this takes us popcorn.gif

 

Actually, the TH-600 has very good bass k701smile.gif 

post #4517 of 7815

You're a little instigator!

 

Yep, I'd agree TH600 has very good bass, but for what Oregonian is looking for, the TH900 is what he needs/craves/wants.

post #4518 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyhew View Post

Any other big hip-hops fans out there? Really enjoying these cans, gives the boom bap the right punch :O

 

 

 

 

Also Jazz, Classical and R&B..  

post #4519 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by zhunter View Post

Totally agreed! I don't think the bass of LCD-2/3 is that awesome that people are praising, or they haven't heard the TH900 with trance, electronic...

I think the LCD-3's bests the TH-900's bass by a reasonable margin. Sorry with any genre of music too.

post #4520 of 7815

MH I totally understand. The LCD3 bass is fantastic. So clean, so tight. Works great for an upright bass in a smoky jazz bar. You can hear that wood vibrating in the bass. It's just great. For modern electronic music, which I consider myself a collector, connoisseur, and producer of, the bass you want in this genre is different. Sure you want clean, but you want that extra kick the TH900 brings to the table. That sub-bass rumble, that pinch of bloat - it feels more visceral. 

 

I have yet to meet a diehard electronic music fan that prefers the LCD3 bass, as good as it is, to the TH900 bass. The LCD is proper, the TH900 is naughty. 

post #4521 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundFreaq View Post

MH I totally understand. The LCD3 bass is fantastic. So clean, so tight. Works great for an upright bass in a smoky jazz bar. You can hear that wood vibrating in the bass. It's just great. For modern electronic music, which I consider myself a collector, connoisseur, and producer of, the bass you want in this genre is different. Sure you want clean, but you want that extra kick the TH900 brings to the table. That sub-bass rumble, that pinch of bloat - it feels more visceral. 

 

I have yet to meet a diehard electronic music fan that prefers the LCD3 bass, as good as it is, to the TH900 bass. The LCD is proper, the TH900 is naughty. 

LoL,  nice way of putting it. Actually I've started to look into some electronic music...and I gotta agree that the TH-900s do come in handy! Heck, they're awesome with Metallica too.

post #4522 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

I think the LCD-3's bests the TH-900's bass by a reasonable margin. Sorry with any genre of music too.
Weird my TH-900 + ZDSE kills my LCD-3 + Mjolnir, bass wise. It's a lot closer race with them both on the Mjolnir but the TH-900 still edges out the LCD at least quantity wise. What are you amping them with?
post #4523 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by m2man View Post


Weird my TH-900 + ZDSE kills my LCD-3 + Mjolnir, bass wise. It's a lot closer race with them both on the Mjolnir but the TH-900 still edges out the LCD at least quantity wise. What are you amping them with?

Technically speaking, the LCD-3 has "proper" bass as Chris to eloquently stated. But if you're looking for a "naughty" bass, then I can see why you prefer the TH-900s. On all of the amps I heard both, technically, the LCD-3s have "better" bass in terms of control, naturalness and detail. But the TH-900s bring it for the "fun" factor (while still offer outstanding control and I can see why they're so enjoyed with electronic music (a genre I'm just starting into at the age of 41). But another factor is that there is too much bass as witnessed on the FR graphs on the TH-900s while the LCD-3s are linear down to 10Hz (and the 30 Hz square wave responses look "ideal" on the LCD-3s).

 

In terms of what I'm amping them with, please feel free to check out my sig. I'm pretty sure that the GS-X is up to par for either. wink.gif

post #4524 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

Technically speaking, the LCD-3 has "proper" bass as Chris to eloquently stated. But if you're looking for a "naughty" bass, then I can see why you prefer the TH-900s.

"Naughty" is an understatement. "Dirty" or even "filthy" is more like it.

post #4525 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3X0 View Post

"Naughty" is an understatement. "Dirty" or even "filthy" is more like it.

LoL, that paints quite the picture.

post #4526 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

Technically speaking, the LCD-3 has "proper" bass as Chris to eloquently stated. But if you're looking for a "naughty" bass, then I can see why you prefer the TH-900s. On all of the amps I heard both, technically, the LCD-3s have "better" bass in terms of control, naturalness and detail. But the TH-900s bring it for the "fun" factor (while still offer outstanding control and I can see why they're so enjoyed with electronic music (a genre I'm just starting into at the age of 41). But another factor is that there is too much bass as witnessed on the FR graphs on the TH-900s while the LCD-3s are linear down to 10Hz (and the 30 Hz square wave responses look "ideal" on the LCD-3s).

In terms of what I'm amping them with, please feel free to check out my sig. I'm pretty sure that the GS-X is up to par for either. wink.gif

More bass is usually better in the case of EDM. Flat FR is a fail :-)

I just thought u might have used 2 different amps was all I meant by the question on amping.
post #4527 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by m2man View Post


More bass is usually better in the case of EDM. Flat FR is a fail :-)

I just thought u might have used 2 different amps was all I meant by the question on amping.

Not sure I agree with that. But I can understand your pont.

 

I did have a few amps (Liquid Fire + GS-X), but sold the former to make room for my Stax rig.

post #4528 of 7815
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

Technically speaking, the LCD-3 has "proper" bass as Chris to eloquently stated. But if you're looking for a "naughty" bass, then I can see why you prefer the TH-900s. On all of the amps I heard both, technically, the LCD-3s have "better" bass in terms of control, naturalness and detail. But the TH-900s bring it for the "fun" factor (while still offer outstanding control and I can see why they're so enjoyed with electronic music 

 

Perfectly stated from my perspective. 

post #4529 of 7815

As an LCD-3 and TH900 owner, the best way I can describe the difference is as follows:

 

When I have someone listen to both, I have to EXPLAIN to them why the LCD-3 is better, and they all get it, but nobody has to be convinced that the TH900 is great. For first timers, the TH900 always gets a smile. The LCD-3 is better in every respect, but that is through critical listening and having tried so many different headphones.

 

The TH900 is the most fun you can have with headphones (IMO).

post #4530 of 7815

As much as I love my TH900 and prefer it to LCD-3 overall, I have to agree that the latter boasts better bass. At first listen, the TH900 may overwhelm the listener with its wow factor, but in the end it's more about quality than quantity, and when it comes to bass no headphone I've heard beats the LCD-3, period. Bass is better controlled, less boomy, and sounds just right. If I were to rank headphones by their bass performance alone, it would be LCD-3 > TH900 > LCD-2 > Stax electrostats.

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 › Fostex TH900 Impressions & Discussion Thread