Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Audeze LCD-3 vs Fostex TH-900?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audeze LCD-3 vs Fostex TH-900? - Page 8

post #106 of 229
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post

how different are LCD-2 and LCD-3 really? 

 

i heard them at the chicago meet but it wasn't for long enough to really notice a huge difference. the LCD-3 just seemed creamier in the midrange and smoother as well  as darker. didn't see how bass and treble where different though.

What I don't get is how the LCD3 can have better highs than LCD2s but be 'darker'. I've heard this several times from different people and don't get how that is possible. 

post #107 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by phototristan View Post

What I don't get is how the LCD3 can have better highs than LCD2s but be 'darker'. I've heard this several times from different people and don't get how that is possible. 

Think better details, layering and completely grain-free.

http://www.head-fi.org/a/comparisons-of-the-lcd-3-and-the-lcd-2-rev-2
post #108 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post


Think better details, layering and completely grain-free.

http://www.head-fi.org/a/comparisons-of-the-lcd-3-and-the-lcd-2-rev-2

 

This ^^^^  And yes, the highs / treble extends more.  Not "as" shelved, more clear, crisper..

post #109 of 229

I have been on the verge of purchasing the LCD-3's for awhile now, but I think I might be swaying towards the TH-900's after reading more about them.

 

I originally wanted the LCD-3's for having awesome bass and being open at the same time.  I love open headphones because they sound more natural, I like the out-of-your-head sound, I dislike sound being drilled into my ears, and it's easier to talk more naturally with open headphones on rather than closed ones.

 

But the more I've been reading about the TH-900's the more it sounds like it's one of the most open sounding closed headphones available.  This is very intriguing.  And the more I read about the bass, the more I want it.  A lot of bass-heavy headphones seem to compromise the rest of the sound, but it doesn't seem like this is an issue with the TH-900's.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Currawong View Post

 

I think this is it really: The LCD-3s with serious kit are highly detailed, yet impactful. The TH-900s are more "fun" with a big bass kick but don't have the micro-detail.  There is a lot of music I have more in the direction of modern and pop that sounds a bit bland out of the LCD-3s that the TH-900s made more enjoyable (as would the TH-600s or Ultrasone Sig DJs for similar reasons). Likewise my best recordings where you can hear how the players' clothes shift as they move and other uncanny stuff is better with the LCD-3s.

 

The problem I'm having right now is with music that relies heavily on bass, sounding dull.  There are so many rap, hip-hop, pop, and modern songs that are bass-focused and mastered to be played on club speakers and subwoofers, making them sound horrible on a lot of headphones.  Reminds me of eating a hamburger with lettuce, onions, pickles, and tomatoes, but no beef.  I'm really hungry for a full sandwich.  

 

I think I might be able to handle some uncanny micro-detail loss in exchange for some euphonic, big, powerful, impactful, fun bass.  I can still appreciate genres of music that aren't all about bass with bass-heavy headphones, but there is some modern music that I can't appreciate at all on headphones that don't have impactful bass.  That's kind-of the way I'm looking at it.   

 

Is the detail lost with the TH-900's only micro-micro-detail, such as the sound of clothes and whatnot?  

post #110 of 229

Detail is fine on TH900s, especially in the mids. 

post #111 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by rgs9200m View Post

Detail is fine on TH900s, especially in the mids. 

 

+1

 

sounds like he will enjoy the TH-900s quite a bit. the TH-900 and LCD-3 are both excellent headphones.

post #112 of 229

I'll take the LCD-3s over the TH-900s.  Only because I like open headphones better..  Also the mids are better on the LCD-3s  IMO

post #113 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

I'll take the LCD-3s over the TH-900s.  Only because I like open headphones better..  Also the mids are better on the LCD-3s  IMO

 

Don't forget the LCD-3 is a good work out tool. After a few months you'll have a neck stronger than a tree trunk. wink_face.gif

post #114 of 229

Ha ha...  Man, no headphone has ever bothered me as far as weight is concerned.  I'm lucky I guess..

post #115 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meremoth View Post

I have been on the verge of purchasing the LCD-3's for awhile now, but I think I might be swaying towards the TH-900's after reading more about them.

 

I originally wanted the LCD-3's for having awesome bass and being open at the same time.  I love open headphones because they sound more natural, I like the out-of-your-head sound, I dislike sound being drilled into my ears, and it's easier to talk more naturally with open headphones on rather than closed ones.

 

But the more I've been reading about the TH-900's the more it sounds like it's one of the most open sounding closed headphones available.  This is very intriguing.  And the more I read about the bass, the more I want it.  A lot of bass-heavy headphones seem to compromise the rest of the sound, but it doesn't seem like this is an issue with the TH-900's.  

 

 

 

The problem I'm having right now is with music that relies heavily on bass, sounding dull.  There are so many rap, hip-hop, pop, and modern songs that are bass-focused and mastered to be played on club speakers and subwoofers, making them sound horrible on a lot of headphones.  Reminds me of eating a hamburger with lettuce, onions, pickles, and tomatoes, but no beef.  I'm really hungry for a full sandwich.  

 

I think I might be able to handle some uncanny micro-detail loss in exchange for some euphonic, big, powerful, impactful, fun bass.  I can still appreciate genres of music that aren't all about bass with bass-heavy headphones, but there is some modern music that I can't appreciate at all on headphones that don't have impactful bass.  That's kind-of the way I'm looking at it.   

 

Is the detail lost with the TH-900's only micro-micro-detail, such as the sound of clothes and whatnot?  

If you're going to stick with your O2, I'd definitely pass on the LCD-3s. wink_face.gif

post #116 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Meremoth View Post

I have been on the verge of purchasing the LCD-3's for awhile now, but I think I might be swaying towards the TH-900's after reading more about them.

 

I originally wanted the LCD-3's for having awesome bass and being open at the same time.  I love open headphones because they sound more natural, I like the out-of-your-head sound, I dislike sound being drilled into my ears, and it's easier to talk more naturally with open headphones on rather than closed ones.

 

But the more I've been reading about the TH-900's the more it sounds like it's one of the most open sounding closed headphones available.  This is very intriguing.  And the more I read about the bass, the more I want it.  A lot of bass-heavy headphones seem to compromise the rest of the sound, but it doesn't seem like this is an issue with the TH-900's.  

 

 

 

The problem I'm having right now is with music that relies heavily on bass, sounding dull.  There are so many rap, hip-hop, pop, and modern songs that are bass-focused and mastered to be played on club speakers and subwoofers, making them sound horrible on a lot of headphones.  Reminds me of eating a hamburger with lettuce, onions, pickles, and tomatoes, but no beef.  I'm really hungry for a full sandwich.  

 

I think I might be able to handle some uncanny micro-detail loss in exchange for some euphonic, big, powerful, impactful, fun bass.  I can still appreciate genres of music that aren't all about bass with bass-heavy headphones, but there is some modern music that I can't appreciate at all on headphones that don't have impactful bass.  That's kind-of the way I'm looking at it.   

 

Is the detail lost with the TH-900's only micro-micro-detail, such as the sound of clothes and whatnot?  

 

Very, very close to my situation. I found the LCD-2's better in this regard. Even my D2000 have a very good atmosphere of a club type sound. With O2, the D2000 are actually very tight. The one headphone the O2 does good with. The LCD-3 on my current setup are leaving me hanging a bit. I do think it will improve when I upgrade my setup, but the question that remains to be answered is "will it be enough?" I am currently missing the bass body that I need to be satisfactory with ALL genres. The LCD-2's bass satisfied me with more genres than the LCD-3.

 

A lot of people here say that the LCD-3 has better and natural bass, and to an extent that is true, although with some genres like electronic music, I don't know if it's the most suited. Don't know if a lot of these people even listen to that stuff. Like for jazz and stuff, I find the bass of LCD-3 really well suited and so do a lot of people. Although with dubstep and trance, if you don't have the right bass presentation, it's a bit unengaging.

 

It's always good to have a good technical phone, but if it doesn't full satisfy you or at least pass a certain level, then is it worth it?

 

I am hoping that with some equipment I can get the LCD-3 to sound good. If not, looking very strongly towards the TH-900. Highly appealing ATM.

post #117 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoom25 View Post

 

Very, very close to my situation. I found the LCD-2's better in this regard. Even my D2000 have a very good atmosphere of a club type sound. With O2, the D2000 are actually very tight. The one headphone the O2 does good with. The LCD-3 on my current setup are leaving me hanging a bit. I do think it will improve when I upgrade my setup, but the question that remains to be answered is "will it be enough?" I am currently missing the bass body that I need to be satisfactory with ALL genres. The LCD-2's bass satisfied me with more genres than the LCD-3.

 

A lot of people here say that the LCD-3 has better and natural bass, and to an extent that is true, although with some genres like electronic music, I don't know if it's the most suited. Don't know if a lot of these people even listen to that stuff. Like for jazz and stuff, I find the bass of LCD-3 really well suited and so do a lot of people. Although with dubstep and trance, if you don't have the right bass presentation, it's a bit unengaging.

 

It's always good to have a good technical phone, but if it doesn't full satisfy you or at least pass a certain level, then is it worth it?

 

I am hoping that with some equipment I can get the LCD-3 to sound good. If not, looking very strongly towards the TH-900. Highly appealing ATM.

 

TH-900 would be better for electronic, even HE-500 imo. though i really enjoyed alot of stuff on the LCD-3 cause the midrange is so magical, yet they are forgiving, and the bass is still good. but it may not be enough for everyone. for me, they're an awesome headphone and certainly one of the best in my collection, however, i still enjoy my other headphones cause some do other things better or are better for different types of music. its just a different presentation.

 

and yeah, i think LCD-3 really need a good amp/source. the TH-900 would be easier to drive. 

post #118 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dubstep Girl View Post

 

TH-900 would be better for electronic, even HE-500 imo. though i really enjoyed alot of stuff on the LCD-3 cause the midrange is so magical, yet they are forgiving, and the bass is still good. but it may not be enough for everyone. for me, they're an awesome headphone and certainly one of the best in my collection, however, i still enjoy my other headphones cause some do other things better or are better for different types of music. its just a different presentation.

 

and yeah, i think LCD-3 really need a good amp/source. the TH-900 would be easier to drive. 

 

That's why I am hating the LCD-3's so much. At times with certain stuff, even on my current setup, they are soooo goood, yet with others, meh. I need them to do that with everything I listen to. At least as much as the LCD-2's did.

 

LOL who knows I might get the HE-500 again. They need more depth. Until I hear them on a setup with enough depth, I'll be holding out on them. Especially with their new lineup coming out in the next year (or this year?)

post #119 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoom25 View Post

 

That's why I am hating the LCD-3's so much. At times with certain stuff, even on my current setup, they are soooo goood, yet with others, meh. I need them to do that with everything I listen to. At least as much as the LCD-2's did.

 

LOL who knows I might get the HE-500 again. They need more depth. Until I hear them on a setup with enough depth, I'll be holding out on them. Especially with their new lineup coming out in the next year (or this year?)

That's because on good recorded stuff, you're hearing it and on poor recordings, you're hearing that too. The TH900s (while darn good) are coloured headphones and do work with poorly recorded music quite a bit better.

post #120 of 229
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

That's because on good recorded stuff, you're hearing it and on poor recordings, you're hearing that too. The TH900s (while darn good) are coloured headphones and do work with poorly recorded music quite a bit better.

 

im enjoying my LCD-3 even on crappy 128kbps and compressed cd's. i think its just the presentation, the bass isn't as fun as the TH-900s. they just don't have the oomph he likes with electronic music and rap/hiphop. 

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-3 vs Fostex TH-900?