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 16

post #226 of 316

yes you already succeeded with the bug planting earlier, plus i have more bug planters locally, looking to try some tube gear next, but the fact that the th900 have "tesla" drivers, which i found nailed for rock, metal and such, with the beyer t1 the speed and energy delivery with those genres, even after quite a lot of hi-end cans, is still unbeaten, so i really wonder what kind of magic is the th900 capable of with the lower impedance, better build and quality tuning (the t1 really are spartan, half baked, in that regard, maybe that's why they go well with "violent" genres, ofc treble peaks aside)

post #227 of 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by SP Wild View Post
 

So you guys think the TH900 can separate acoustic instrument timbre and tone at middle C bettert than the LCD3?

 

 

 

I don't. :smile:

post #228 of 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

I don't. smile.gif

+1
post #229 of 316
Lower mids are one of the TH900s weak points. It just sounds too thin there. Most acoustic instruments might be better on the LCD-2 if they weren't hampered by its inferior imaging & lack of air.
post #230 of 316

I own both Hedaphones , for me Lcd 3 better than fostex TH900 in everyway.

post #231 of 316

Very unlikely. Isolation and comfort is miles better on the Fostex.

Sound-wise that will be mainly a matter of taste although they are both outstanding headphones.

Personally,  poor fit and lack of comfort means  that I sadly won't own a LCD3.

post #232 of 316

LDr 3 fazor better than all dynamic HP..huh how about that.

post #233 of 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by zenpunk View Post
 

Very unlikely. Isolation and comfort is miles better on the Fostex.

Sound-wise that will be mainly a matter of taste although they are both outstanding headphones.

Personally,  poor fit and lack of comfort means  that I sadly won't own a LCD3.

+1, comfort is horrible, I never looked back on Audeze. Glad I sold.

post #234 of 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by agooh View Post
 

LDr 3 fazor better than all dynamic HP..huh how about that.

I am not sure what the Fazor does to LCD-3, but the classic LCD-3 can't match the HD800 in any aspect for me.

 

Also, comfort is terrible on Audeze's, so TH-900 for me.

post #235 of 316

The comfort never bothered me.  Just feels just headphones.  The mids on the TH900's did bother me - more than the overwhelming bass on the LCD-3s.  I'm going to give the LCD-3F a shot.  

post #236 of 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post
 

The comfort never bothered me.  Just feels just headphones.  The mids on the TH900's did bother me - more than the overwhelming bass on the LCD-3s.  I'm going to give the LCD-3F a shot.  

 

+1

As what another poster mentioned, lower mids are one of the weak point for TH900.

To me, female voice sounds thin and not enough body.

post #237 of 316
I heard the piston 2s....the low mids are like my d7000s but doesn't sound as bad because the uppermids are more integrated into the treble than d7000s. The uppermids are a tad more dominant as well so masks the low mid smear better. In fact this low mid smear is consistent with the piston 2s and a recordings that suit this perspective is looking for this low mid smear to create this perspective.

Once again the fr graph does not show this smear or recession. I am looking firmly at the 300hz squares.
post #238 of 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post
 

The comfort never bothered me.  Just feels just headphones.  The mids on the TH900's did bother me - more than the overwhelming bass on the LCD-3s.  I'm going to give the LCD-3F a shot.  

LCD 3 has overwhelming bass? I would of thought that the TH900 had more bass

post #239 of 316

With regards to differing comments and opinions on LCD-3 bass, keep in mind that not all LCD-3s are the same. There are some good measurements over time (i.e. manufactured date) of the LCD-3 and LCD-2 on innerfidelty. Tyll's theory is that newer LCD-3s have less bass than the original LCD-3 (apologies if this has already been posted here):

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/audeze-lcd-x-fazor-and-fresh-listen-current-lcd-2-and-lcd-3-page-2

post #240 of 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by magiccabbage View Post
 

LCD 3 has overwhelming bass? I would of thought that the TH900 had more bass

Agreed completely.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sonance View Post
 

With regards to differing comments and opinions on LCD-3 bass, keep in mind that not all LCD-3s are the same. There are some good measurements over time (i.e. manufactured date) of the LCD-3 and LCD-2 on innerfidelty. Tyll's theory is that newer LCD-3s have less bass than the original LCD-3 (apologies if this has already been posted here):

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/audeze-lcd-x-fazor-and-fresh-listen-current-lcd-2-and-lcd-3-page-2

 

There may be some issues with some of the pre-RMA LCD-3s from several years ago in the upper mids. But from 1kHz down to 20Hz, they're all fairly flat.

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?