Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Audeze LCD-2 Rev2, Audeze LCD-3 RMA and Sennheiser HD800 compared...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-2 Rev2, Audeze LCD-3 RMA and Sennheiser HD800 compared... - Page 8

post #106 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

Mississauga is who sent it to Richmond BC ;)

Well, there goes my credibility...

post #107 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

Well they entered Canada super fast, but have been going from Quebec to British Columbia and back since.  Currently sitting in Richmond BC which I think might be closer to Germany than Ottawa /facepalm  It was funny for a while, now not so much.  Not sure if its CanadaPost or some DHL information hand off mess up.

Well, that makes perfect sense to me. I mean, all of the letters that can be the first character of a Quebec postal code look exactly like the letter V in my handwriting.

/snark
post #108 of 121

SuperKnowva, While I agree with your choice of the 009s, I cannot afford them at the present time. I must pacify myself with the 507s and be happy with them. I can trust my opinion isn't shared by all, but whatever Stax headphone you choose to use, you can be certain that it will satisfy your desires given your pricepoint and musical preferences. I am quite certain that when I am able to afford them that they will find themselves( 009s) in my collection as well. Respectfully, Earhead1.

post #109 of 121

I was impressed by the Lambdas I've heard, and while they aren't as resolving as the 009s, I think they're much better than most of the headphones talked about in Summit-Fi.

post #110 of 121
Thread Starter 

Well my Senn 800 finally stopped bouncing from coast to coast and I'm currently listening casually/burning them in at night.  Should be able to run the A/B of the LCD-3 and 800 this weekend.  Will have to use the stock leash though since I only have the balanced Q since the original amp was the B22.

post #111 of 121
Thread Starter 

Should add, the Q is going to be ordered today and since I'm doing rolling amps until my Dynahi is built... I have lots of time to fully appreciate the two before one of them hits the For Sale.

post #112 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

The LF I had ran 4 GoldLions.  Oh and it substituted in the bell position on my drum kit.  Best $3200 bell ever :P

 

 

Need more cowbell

 

 

700

post #113 of 121
Thread Starter 

The comparison ended up being very similar to my LCD-2 on the WA22 and LF comparison.  Odd but for those that are scratching their head, read on.

 

System is as in my signature and the Peak is currently sporting a Sylvania Bad Boy.  I have an JAN 5692 on order as a better match for the HD800 but decided to go ahead anyway.

 

Throughout the comparison the overriding character of both cans was obvious.  Getting the similarities out of the way.  Both have great clarity and resolution but are voiced radically different.  For one even though they were dB matched the LCD-3 sounds a lot louder.  

 

The HD800 was consistently drier, dynamically flatter with superior sound-staging that had depth, width and unique to the HD800 as far as I'm concerned... height.  Not surprisingly and pointed to in just about every HD800 review, its imaging is precise and in a class all to itself.  Though resolution is high, compared to the LCD-3 its more primary or mid-range focused.

 

The LCD-3 on the other hand was consistently the more dynamic, fuller bodied and the more driven of the two.  It portrays the entire instrument and emotion better.  Which in turn makes it more engaging.  Soft background cues were more obvious on the LCD-3 as well.  Though both extend to 20Hz the LCD-3 is better at making sure you know it does.

 

On comfort its a no contest, the HD800 is lighter, floats on your head and just gets out of the way.  Going back to what I used to consider a 'comfy' LCD-3 really highlights its vice grip quality.

 

I was really hoping to have two great cans that were different but met my sonic goals but its not meant to be.  Though a Q cable and the 5692 tube might improve what I consider the HD800 weak points I can't imagine it morphing into something else.  I'd also add that the often mentioned treble peak on the HD800 wasn't an issue or even noticed to be honest.

 

Now if I prized sound-stage, speed and that mid to back of the hall feel the HD800 would be a no brainer.  But I prefer a full bodied, engaging while resolved presentation so... the LCD-3 stay and the HD800 goes.

post #114 of 121
Thread Starter 

Should add this is in comparison to each other, not global.  Ie the HD800 is drier not dry ;)


Edited by Solude - 7/29/12 at 9:07am
post #115 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

The comparison ended up being very similar to my LCD-2 on the WA22 and LF comparison.  Odd but for those that are scratching their head, read on.

 

System is as in my signature and the Peak is currently sporting a Sylvania Bad Boy.  I have an JAN 5692 on order as a better match for the HD800 but decided to go ahead anyway.

 

Throughout the comparison the overriding character of both cans was obvious.  Getting the similarities out of the way.  Both have great clarity and resolution but are voiced radically different.  For one even though they were dB matched the LCD-3 sounds a lot louder.  

 

The HD800 was consistently drier, dynamically flatter with superior sound-staging that had depth, width and unique to the HD800 as far as I'm concerned... height.  Not surprisingly and pointed to in just about every HD800 review, its imaging is precise and in a class all to itself.  Though resolution is high, compared to the LCD-3 its more primary or mid-range focused.

 

The LCD-3 on the other hand was consistently the more dynamic, fuller bodied and the more driven of the two.  It portrays the entire instrument and emotion better.  Which in turn makes it more engaging.  Soft background cues were more obvious on the LCD-3 as well.  Though both extend to 20Hz the LCD-3 is better at making sure you know it does.

 

On comfort its a no contest, the HD800 is lighter, floats on your head and just gets out of the way.  Going back to what I used to consider a 'comfy' LCD-3 really highlights its vice grip quality.

 

I was really hoping to have two great cans that were different but met my sonic goals but its not meant to be.  Though a Q cable and the 5692 tube might improve what I consider the HD800 weak points I can't imagine it morphing into something else.  I'd also add that the often mentioned treble peak on the HD800 wasn't an issue or even noticed to be honest.

 

Now if I prized sound-stage, speed and that mid to back of the hall feel the HD800 would be a no brainer.  But I prefer a full bodied, engaging while resolved presentation so... the LCD-3 stay and the HD800 goes.

 

So after all of that trouble getting the HD800s... oh well, I hope you at least had fun doing the comparison. 

 

I'm guessing that your tube amp calmed the HD800 treble.  I auditioned them with SS amps, and while the sound stage was large, I found the high end harsh and difficult to listen to after a while, even using my Carver tube CD player.  If my primary choice of music was classical where the big sound stage is particularly impressive, and if I had a tube amp to take out the harshness, I might have liked them more.  Unfortunately I'm more into rock and jazz, and I'm not plunking down big bucks for a tube amp in the near future. 

 

I definitely agree with you that the HD800s are REALLY comfortable, particularly compared to Audeze products.  After 3+ hours with the LCD 3s on tonight, I think my head will need the next several hours to expand back to its natural shape, so yeah, I also agree that they clamp on tight. 

 

However, I don't mind the clamping force that much, or rather it's a trade-off I'm willing to make to get the LCD-3 sound.  Even on rips of "Best of" CDs of 60's and 70's groups, it makes you feel like you are listening live in the recording studio.  Sometimes I hear things in songs and look around to see if that was a noise coming from my room, or just something I'd never heard before on the recording.  So far it's always been something on the recording, but it can be pretty startling at times listening to stuff I've played hundreds of times in the car or even on my Vandersteens and now hearing sounds in the background like paper rustling at the beginning or end of songs, or percussion that sounds like it is coming from somebody a few feet from me.  Damn I love high fidelity sound.

post #116 of 121
I went the other way. Keep in kind that I had the LCD-2 Rev 1. It was heavy, both in weight of the phone and in sound. On my system (beta 22) it was a bit too much of a muchness, especially in the lower spectrum. Maybe I have high frequency hearing loss because I can tolerate the HD800.

You make me want to try the LCD-3 now wink.gif. I still have all my Norse Audio cables.
post #117 of 121
Thread Starter 

Having gone from the LCD-2 Rev1 to Rev2 to LCD-3 and now revisiting the HD800... the LCD-3 sits right in the middle of the HD800 and LCD-2.  More alive and bottom tilted than the HD800 but drier and more top tilted than the LCD-2.

post #118 of 121
Hmm it could be my perfect phone....
post #119 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by MomijiTMO View Post

Hmm it could be my perfect phone....

It's my perfect headphone. smile.gif

post #120 of 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solude View Post

Having gone from the LCD-2 Rev1 to Rev2 to LCD-3 and now revisiting the HD800... the LCD-3 sits right in the middle of the HD800 and LCD-2.  More alive and bottom tilted than the HD800 but drier and more top tilted than the LCD-2.

 

Sounds about right to me.

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 Rev2, Audeze LCD-3 RMA and Sennheiser HD800 compared...