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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hoax 

 

 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,

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEDO 

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

Wow, I don't seem able to agree with anyone tonight. The soundstage of the LCD is perfectly fine and I listen to epic music like the soundtrack to Ben-Hur all the time without ever feeling I'm missing anything at all. And yes, I've listened to many, many headphones in my time.

And no, elevated treble is not to be considered positive in classical/jazz or any other genre; that is not hi-fi. Sorry, guys, I seem to be out of synch with the general tone of this thread, or maybe I'm just getting grumpy in my old age.   

Quote:

Originally Posted by pp312 

 

Wow, I don't seem able to agree with anyone tonight. The soundstage of the LCD is perfectly fine and I listen to epic music like the soundtrack to Ben-Hur all the time without ever feeling I'm missing anything at all. And yes, I've listened to many, many headphones in my time.

 

And no, elevated treble is not to be considered positive in classical/jazz or any other genre; that is not hi-fi. Sorry, guys, I seem to be out of synch with the general tone of this thread, or maybe I'm just getting grumpy in my old age.   

I'll come right out and say the sound stage on the LCD2 is actually pretty bad.  For electronic music, this never bothered me much.  For vocal focused music or classical music, it introduced so much fatigue from sounding incorrect that I eventually gave up on them.  The problem is they sound like there are two speakers on the side of your head and they never quite create a central image.  You are constantly reminded you are listening to headphones, instead of listening to music.  

I even went so far as to buy a SPL phonitor and a lavry DA11 so I could tune the image.  While that helped tremendously the LCD2s still fell way short in sound stage presentation when compared to other headphones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MEDO 
treble and of course i'd love it more if its sound stage is bigger with touch of sparkling treble but that can never be in a headphone; bass + big sound stage + elevated treble = identical headphone to DT990 + f***ed up midrange.

A proper sourced & amped HD800 actually fits that bill quite nicely.  If the recording renders it, they will put out deeper and better bass than the LCD2.  The LCD2 on the other hand puts all that bass right inside your ear canal, so I can understand where you are coming from.  It's easy to get excited about it because, let's face it, it is visceral and fun.  But to be honest, when you compare it to other headphones, it's kind of a parlor trick.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWIFOSP 

 

A proper sourced & amped HD800 actually fits that bill quite nicely.  If the recording renders it, they will put out deeper and better bass than the LCD2.  The LCD2 on the other hand puts all that bass right inside your ear canal, so I can understand where you are coming from.  It's easy to get excited about it because, let's face it, it is visceral and fun.  But to be honest, when you compare it to other headphones, it's kind of a parlor trick.

How is linear bass down to 10Hz and 30/50 Hz square wave plots that look like square waves a parlour trick? Based on how it measures, it's what's on the recording.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacedonianHero 

How is linear bass down to 10Hz and 30/50 Hz square wave plots that look like square waves a parlour trick? Based on how it measures, it's what's on the recording.

The LCD2 rev 2 certainly has boomier bass than what is on any given recording.  I record both myself and my tutor playing the cello for teaching reference.  If you compare the recording back on the LCD2, low frequencies have a bunch of extra weight and reverb to it that is not present when you listen to the instrument live.  Other headphones in my collection don't add this weight.  One might be quick to blame my recording setup, and that's fair, it's hardly professional.  But when I play the same file back with the HD800s, it is a much closer match to the tonality of what my teacher plays when I sit right near the microphone.

The frequency response can be measured a hundred different ways.  I'm not the only one that will say this, the audeze sound really crams all those sound waves right in your ear drum.  It's why the sound stage is so pinched in.  It's part of the fun.

Don't mistake me for a hater, I still haven't sold my LCD2 rev2s because I like them.  I'm just stating my opinions on their sound reproduction.  They are fun to listen to, and if you really just want to rock out, they have few peers.  But they aren't accurate or natural sounding by any stretch.

I think its fairer to say the LCD-2 shelves the top than to say it amplifies the bottom ;)  From 20-1000 its ruler flat, no arguments it is, after that it drops.  The cello occupies 60-7000 so a lot of its character exists outside the LCD-2 ruler range.

I'm still bouncing between the LCD-3 and LCD-2Rev2 because although the LCD-3 has better resolution, better sound stage, more natural tonal balance... the added presence at 1K-2K sounds off on some recordings.  On the other side the LCD-2Rev2 can be overly dark or wooly on others.  I'm left thinking the LCD-3 is better but still well into diminishing returns compared to the LCD-2 which is a bargain for what it brings to the table.

I haven't had the opportunity of hearing the LCD3 yet, so maybe that's where our opinions differ.  

They come up fairly often on the FS so if patient they can be had for $1600.