Originally Posted by TWIFOSP
So do you not think that there is a tier of performance above the LCD2? That all improvements, whether based on opinion or measurements, are near enough as makes no difference? I don't understand the resistance to classifying something as a "higher tier" than the LCD2 at all.
There is a tier above lcd2 just like there's a tier above 40,000 speakers(provided they sound like 40,000.00 speakers). Does that mean 40,000.00 speakers are no longer highend? Because there are 100,000.00(and way above that) speakers that sound a lot better than typical 40,000.00 speakers. Imo high end headphones qualifies headphones that sounds better than 80-90% of all headphones in existence. So for me lcd3, and he6 classify as high end because they sound better to me than the r10s, l3000, and 007's which in an above post were qualified as high end headphones.
There are contradictory posts being made. On one camp, someone post that the lcd2 are midfi because of how they sound, but there's another post about r10s and the like being high and because of how much they cost. For me midtier headphones are mid tier because of how they sound, and for me both the lcd3 and he6 deserves to be high end because I haven't heard none better....maybe just as good, but not better. So if the he6 and lcd3 are midtier, then so are the 007's and r10 since I prefer both to those. But this thread is already way off track, so I'm leaving it as that.
Edited by moodyrn - 6/25/12 at 6:36pm