Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Audeze LCD-2.2 vs LCD-3 ?!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-2.2 vs LCD-3 ?! - Page 2

post #16 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

Not having completed my comparison review ;)  My LCD-3 came back from RMA this week and I'll be running the comparison this weekend.  

 

If you have to buy another headphone, list what you want to change about the D5000 and adjust accordingly.  The Audeze cans are FLAT from 20-1000 and to great bass out of them takes a monster.  On lesser amps it will sound sterile compared to a D5000.  I wouldn't be surprised if what you didn't like in the T1 would have been different on say a Woo WA2.

I sold the T1 cause i hate listening to bright headphones, i think i'll prefer the LCD-2 to stax 009. don't get me wrong, i liked the T1 but i needed the cash to get the Audeze LCD-2 which known to be one of the darkest headphones on the market ( plus the T1 leak so much sound to the extent that anyone one in the room would be very annoyed ).

 

on a darkness scale from 10, how many points does the LCD-2\3,HD800 get ?! << regardless of the gear ...

post #17 of 49

They are fairly similar in a large picture tonal balance...

graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=3231&graphID[]=2033&graphID[]=853

 

As for darkness scale, I have not heard the T1.  But if the 650 is a 5, 1 being dark, 10 bright... LCD-2 Rev1 is a 6, Rev2 a 7, LCD-3 an 8 and the Senn 800 I haven't heard in a while but I don't remember it being bright so much as distant, rounded.  The Audeze cans have a way of having less treble energy but its speed and attack make up for it raising the perception of treble energy.  Clear as mud right ;)

post #18 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

They are fairly similar in a large picture tonal balance...

graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=3231&graphID[]=2033&graphID[]=853

 

As for darkness scale, I have not heard the T1.  But if the 650 is a 5, 1 being dark, 10 bright... LCD-2 Rev1 is a 6, Rev2 a 7, LCD-3 an 8 and the Senn 800 I haven't heard in a while but I don't remember it being bright so much as distant, rounded.  The Audeze cans have a way of having less treble energy but its speed and attack make up for it raising the perception of treble energy.  Clear as mud right ;)

hey you mean 10 is dark and 1 bright .. right !

post #19 of 49

Nope, RMAed/new LCD-3 is the brightest of all Audeze cans.  It doesn't drop off until around 2K and comes back up from 10-20K.  But it seals much more easily than the 2s so the sub bass is not lost into the air.

post #20 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

Nope, RMAed/new LCD-3 is the brightest of all Audeze cans.  It doesn't drop off until around 2K and comes back up from 10-20K.  But it seals much more easily than the 2s so the sub bass is not lost into the air.


Agreed here.

post #21 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

MEDO never said, until now, what he already had.  Just that it was $300.  At that level, stick with the D5000.

 

Personally I'm not into price equals quality. I get great result from an LCD-2 (Rev 1l) with a Muse amp that cost me less than $100. I've tried other amps, including the M-Stage, but none suited the LCD-2 as well. That's in fact what it's about: matching. Throwing money at the problem may or--just as often--may not pay off. As for going for a lesser phone based on the price of the amp, I just don't agree.

post #22 of 49

To each their own.  Price thing is correct though.  I thought the Trafomatic HeadOne was better than the Liquid Fire.  But that the WA22 and B22 were better than both.  Not in minor ways either.  Tonal balance will largely stay the same even on lesser gear if comparing the LCD-2 and 650 but the technical advantage is non existent on lesser gear.

post #23 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post

Is it being suggested here that an M-Stage is not good enough for an Audeze LCD-2? That the enquirer should rather drop back to an HD650? If so I strongly disagree. The LCD-2 is just not that hard to drive, and in quality terms I believe only marginal gains exist above the M-Stage, whatever the "amp is all" brigade may say. My advice to the OP: get the LCD-2, use it with your M-Stage and you're very unlikely to regret it.


     x 2

post #24 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

Tonal balance will largely stay the same even on lesser gear if comparing the LCD-2 and 650 but the technical advantage is non existent on lesser gear.

 

 

Nothing much to be said here except no, that doesn't equate with my experience at all and I couldn't disagree more. A quality amp is reached with good design, not a high price, and the two are by no means inseparable. Beyond that it's a question of matching, and the LCD-2 needs as open sounding (read bright if you like, but bright suggests a false resonance) an amp as possible. To sound like the 650 the LCD-2 would have to be driven by a 1972 HMV 8 + 8--and I'm actually an admirer of the 650 in its price range. .

post #25 of 49

I've now had 6 amps with the LCD-2.  From the Burson to the Cavalli.  And yes price doesn't mean results.  But each better, not pricey, not powerful, amp brought more speed, clarity and control to the otherwise wooley LCD-2.  My favourite is actually one of the darker ones.  Not for its tonal balance but its clarity and detail retrieval over the other 5.

post #26 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

I've now had 6 amps with the LCD-2.  From the Burson to the Cavalli.  And yes price doesn't mean results.  But each better, not pricey, not powerful, amp brought more speed, clarity and control to the otherwise wooley LCD-2.  My favourite is actually one of the darker ones.  Not for its tonal balance but its clarity and detail retrieval over the other 5.


that is just great, and you didn't say what is it your favorite ?! i'm welling to selling the M-stage so i could afford one of your amps but i'll have to play the LCD-2 straigt from my laptop for a couple of weeks and i'm sure you know how it sound unamped, i really hope the volume isn't so low. from what i've heard they're easy to drive but i'm not sure if it means either it's easy to drive unamped or with mid-fi amps !!

post #27 of 49

I use a B22.  A used 2ch should be around $700-$900.

post #28 of 49

Obviously not heard either but the new Burson Soloist and Schiit Mjolnir look interesting too.

post #29 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEDO View Post

I sold the T1 cause i hate listening to bright headphones, i think i'll prefer the LCD-2 to stax 009. don't get me wrong, i liked the T1 but i needed the cash to get the Audeze LCD-2 which known to be one of the darkest headphones on the market ( plus the T1 leak so much sound to the extent that anyone one in the room would be very annoyed ).

 

on a darkness scale from 10, how many points does the LCD-2\3,HD800 get ?! << regardless of the gear ...

 

Hmm I got a DT 990 PRO from Beyer, the way you describe your T1 thats how i feel about my DT now, I used to love it but after hearing the LCD-2 there was a huge difference, certain sounds and voices were suddenly not harsh anymore and the sound of the LCD's is so much thicker .. I dont listen to classical music but I did watch a piano solo in HD and I thought that was the perfect test to compare how all those notes felt to me so i switched the plugs back and forth a few times and the piano deffinately felt more real and so warm .. while on the DT's more harsh and thin. But if you're into orchestra / opera and all that kind of music then the LCD is not for you .. the soundstange is not big enough to give you an epic feeling, its still good though but there are better choices for that in the 1000/2000 USD price range

post #30 of 49
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoax View Post

 

Hmm I got a DT 990 PRO from Beyer, the way you describe your T1 thats how i feel about my DT now, I used to love it but after hearing the LCD-2 there was a huge difference, certain sounds and voices were suddenly not harsh anymore and the sound of the LCD's is so much thicker .. I dont listen to classical music but I did watch a piano solo in HD and I thought that was the perfect test to compare how all those notes felt to me so i switched the plugs back and forth a few times and the piano deffinately felt more real and so warm .. while on the DT's more harsh and thin. But if you're into orchestra / opera and all that kind of music then the LCD is not for you .. the soundstange is not big enough to give you an epic feeling, its still good though but there are better choices for that in the 1000/2000 USD price range

your experience is similar to mine. but i gave the DT990 to a friend as soon as my D5k burned in, it sounded so thin and cold against my D5k. i used to love the soundstage on the DT990 and now i love the soundstage on the D5k more, it's deeper than DT990 though the DT990 has much more air and sharp edge on the treble that makes you think it's clearer but the fact is the D5k have more details but it's not harsh and cold and slightly less pronounced but It Is there... >> it's like the HD800 and LCD-2 competition, irrespective to the DT990 - mids and + bass.

 

the only thing the elevated treble is considered positive is in classical\jazz and the genres you mentioned, other than that, the LCD-2 is truly the best ... :P

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-2.2 vs LCD-3 ?!