or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Head-Fi Network & Industry News › CanJam at RMAF 2013 Preview (And Exclusive Early Reveals!) - Head-Fi TV
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CanJam at RMAF 2013 Preview (And Exclusive Early Reveals!) - Head-Fi TV - Page 10  

post #136 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

 

Thank you very much for your response! The way you describe it, I see no place for LCD-3 on the market unless they re-price them at 1300USD (and LCD-2 at 700USD).

 

Your impressions sound definitely promising... But in the end, these are going to be extremely expensive in Europe. I got my HD800 for 1200USD completely new but these LCD-X are going to cost over 2000USD here. So yeah, my interest in them is strictly "academical". Still, l am looking forward to read more impressions and especially see them measured :-)

post #137 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

First of all, thanks for sharing all of that mikemercer, I couldn't agree with you more.  Frankly, it's been hard having to keep our impressions under wraps - so I'm glad we can finally let some of this out.

 

 

Sure, perfectly understandable. :smile:

 

Secondly, guys we all have different (and sometimes multiple) ways of evaluating gear.  And having been at this for decades, mikemercer can definitely give you guys a more analytical breakdown.  But for him, the ultimate evaluation of gear is how it serves as the interface (or vehicle as he says) between us and the music.  So trust me when I say that, what he wanted to do was to cut through a lot of jargon to get to the heart of the matter with y'all.  :smile:

 

And though mikemercer and I have very different approaches (as well as preferences), we both arrived at the same conclusion.  I'll try to answer some specific questions below.  Please keep in mind that I am - of course - speaking IMO.

 


 

 

Yes.  I still hold the HD 800 as a reference for dynamic driver cans.  There will always be a part of me that appreciates the HD 800 for what it is.  And NO headphone in the world will ever make it sound worse than it does.  But comparatively, yes.

 

 

I would say a more accurate soundstage and imaging, if that makes sense?

 

The HD 800 (stock and without mods of course) has always been wonderfully enjoyable for me in terms of staging and imaging.  However, I would also have to say that it has a tendency to exaggerate a bit in that department.  Trust me though, I totally get why that euphoric feeling is, well, euphoric.  I'm enjoying the Tralucent Audio 1plus2 right now for that exact reason.  But at some point, it can just be a bit too much.

 

With the LCD-X, the soundstage seems far more accurate, appropriate, proper and somehow just feels right.

 

EDIT:  In case someone is wondering, yes I find that the LCD-X's staging and imaging to be superior to that of the LCD-3's.  For me, the LCD-3 always swung too far to the opposite extreme of the HD 800 in terms of staging.  Yes, the LCD-3 is wonderfully intimate with crazy immediacy.  But... I'm not the biggest fan of having the sound be that danger close.

 

 

Yes.  Call it what you like:  microdetail, low-level information, plankton, whatever.  Yes, it does.  And, it does so effortlessly and without embellishment or exaggeration.  There are certain cans that tend to throw that stuff in your face - I'm looking at you SR-009 and Abyss.  They almost force all of that micro-detail on you... much like a screen would over-saturate colors.  But real life is not like that.  There shouldn't be that kind of micro-detail bloom.  And so those cans always seem to be a bit gimmicky in that department for me. 

 

But the LCD-X simply presents it clearly and cleanly.

 

 

Yes.

 

 

It can be yes.  Or rather, the usage of that word often is.  Having said that, I believe that if we were to gather a reasonable sample size of experienced Head-Fiers for an audition, there would be a clear trend indicating that the LCD-X is more transparent.

 

 

I'm not a liberty to reveal any technical details that I may or may now have at this moment (or even ever now that I think about it).  But they perform significantly better for me technically.  They sound more accurate in nearly all respects.  And if I were asked which of the two that I perceived to be better from a technical performance standpoint, I wouldn't even need a moment's hesitation before pointing to the LCD-X over the LCD-3.

 

 

Hehe, see above (and below).  :smile:

 

 

As this treads uncomfortably close to certain technical details I an under NDA for, I will simply say this.  Based on your criteria above, I believe that you will find the "transparency" noticeably and significantly improved.

 

 

Great post. I think I am on the same train of thought with you on a lot of aspects. Yes, the HD800s are my technical accuracy dynamic reference too and fully agree the soundstage presentation can sound exagerrated. I think you're exactly right where you say the LCD-3s are a bit too congested in that respect. That's also where I feel the SR007s have a more natural life like soundstage presentation. My short list for fixes for the LCD-3 was: soundstaging, imaging and faster decays. That's enough to want to buy the LCD-Xs. :)

 

Really great to hear Audeze is taking the game up a notch! Should make for a very interesting 2014 (I am thinking Hifiman and Sennheiser here).


Edited by negura - 10/5/13 at 2:52pm
post #138 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by emertxe View Post
 

 

Thank you very much for your response! The way you describe it, I see no place for LCD-3 on the market unless they re-price them at 1300USD (and LCD-2 at 700USD).

 

Your impressions sound definitely promising... But in the end, these are going to be extremely expensive in Europe. I got my HD800 for 1200USD completely new but these LCD-X are going to cost over 2000USD here. So yeah, my interest in them is strictly "academical". Still, l am looking forward to read more impressions and especially see them measured :-)

 

Considering the impressions, the place of lcd3 is indeed very foggy for me  in the future... Maybe they will be replaced by LCD-X entirely...in which case I can see a lot of LCD-3 sales on headfi :)) (and cheap also )


Edited by dan.gheorghe - 10/5/13 at 2:53pm
post #139 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.gheorghe View Post
 

 

Considering the impressions, the place of lcd3 is indeed very foggy for me  in the future... Maybe they will be replaced by LCD-X entirely...in which case I can see a lot of LCD-3 sales on headfi :)) (and cheap also )

 

That's certainly a great thing (cheap LCD-3 sales), though not as much for me... I just prefer HD800 over the current up to 2000USD flagships :-) Therefore interested in the LCD-X and K812 to see what they have to offer :-)

post #140 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by emertxe View Post
 

 

That's certainly a great thing (cheap LCD-3 sales), though not as much for me... I just prefer HD800 over the current up to 2000USD flagships :-) Therefore interested in the LCD-X and K812 to see what they have to offer :-)

 

I ended up with both the HD800s and LCD-3s and for a long time I could not decide between the two. They were both significantly better than the other in contrasting areas. The HD800s certainly allowed for tweaking them to my preferences. If this new LCD-X improves on the LCD-3s they could be the one dynamic headphone for me. :)

post #141 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post

 

Thanks for elaborating. I now understand the context better. Imo while I think the LCD-3s are very transparent and amongst the top headphones at this too (they are my favorite dynamic headphones and in my top 5), something was always missing compared to some other top flights for an even more refined connection with the music. Maybe because of the soundstage and imaging limitations or that they don't have the final couple of notches of clarity. My favourite headphones overall so far are the SR007s MKIs which truly connect me with the music in the way as you say, that makes you forget you're listening to gear, while also being excellent technically. If the LCD-X improve on the weaknesses of the LCD-3s and conserve the strengths well, they may indeed be a winner. Hearing they are closer to neutrality could be a very good thing, as long as they are not going too far the other way (e.g.: bright).

 

I know exactly what you mean, and I agree with regards to both the LCD-3 and the SR-007 above.

 

As I've said before, the SR-007 MkI (again with the proper amplification) is unparalleled in is ability to be naturally transparent.  I am not a fan of the current trend towards hyper-detail for the sake of being hyper-detailed.

 

For me, it's not all about hearing more and more of everything freakin' thing all of the freakin' time - it's also about hearing less of what distracts me from the music.  For example, would it be cool to hear a flutter in China Forbes's breath as she prepares for the next verse?  Sure, that's kinda cool I guess.  Would I have heard that flutter (or even wanted to hear that flutter) if she were singing on stage in front of me?  No, probably not.

 

Put it this way.  It's about the music, and not all about the sound.


Home of the Liquid Carbon, Liquid Crimson, Liquid Glass, Liquid Gold and
Liquid Lightning headphone amplifiers... and the upcoming Liquid Spark!

post #142 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post
 

 

I ended up with both the HD800s and LCD-3s and for a long time I could not decide between the two. They were both significantly better than the other in contrasting areas. The HD800s certainly allowed for tweaking them to my preferences. If this new LCD-X improves on the LCD-3s they could be the one dynamic headphone for me. :)

 

how does your electro-static converter sound?

post #143 of 361
Jude, outstanding preview! Very exciting new stuff; I can hardly wait to hear the new Audeze's and Fostex too!
post #144 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

 

I know exactly what you mean, and I agree with regards to both the LCD-3 and the SR-007 above.

 

As I've said before, the SR-007 MkI (again with the proper amplification) is unparalleled in is ability to be naturally transparent.  I am not a fan of the current trend towards hyper-detail for the sake of being hyper-detailed.

 

For me, it's not all about hearing more and more of everything freakin' thing all of the freakin' time - it's also about hearing less of what distracts me from the music.  For example, would it be cool to hear a flutter in China Forbes's breath as she prepares for the next verse?  Sure, that's kinda cool I guess.  Would I have heard that flutter (or even wanted to hear that flutter) if she were singing on stage in front of me?  No, probably not.

 

Put it this way.  It's about the music, and not all about the sound.

 

I kinda like the extra details honestly, although even when speaking to people, I tend to listen to things that, for me it's part of the whole experince, every little detail is nice, and after a few months the details kinda fade back into the music, they are there when I'm looking for them, 

 

still though... I'm hoping the LCD Closed Backs prove to have a nice balanced sound! My w1000x needs something to replace it ;3  

 

that and the poteitnal for CHEAP LCD-3s  and 2 would be very nice 

post #145 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.gheorghe View Post

 

Thanks for the impressions. Can't wait to hear them :D  It looks like they will be cheaper and better... Isn't this very rare in audio world? :D 

 

You're welcome of course.  The better part is very understandable.  They have been working on this kind of a technological breakthrough fro quite some time - and have said so repeatedly in public show and to press.  It just so happens that they've achieved it - at this time - and we're able to enjoy it.

 

As far as cheaper, yes, that is remarkably rare.  Especially when you consider the current kilobuck trend that is going on elsewhere (IEMs).  There is always a good reason for everything of course, but I cannot say more than that.  I would like to point out two quick facts though.

 

  1. The LCD-X is not made of wood, much less premium wood, much less premium zebrawood or bamboo or whatever.
  2. For anyone that has ever spent any amount of time with Alex Rosson, it is clear that he appreciates Head-Fiers and the headphone enthusiast community at large.  If this pricing is his way of giving back, I for one will take it, gladly.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emertxe View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

 

Thank you very much for your response! The way you describe it, I see no place for LCD-3 on the market unless they re-price them at 1300USD (and LCD-2 at 700USD).

 

You are quite welcome!  I highly doubt that the LCD-3 will drop in price.  But as far as I am concerned, unless people TRULY love the LCD-3 for exactly what it is and find its particular type of presentation flawless, it should be considered obsolete next to the LCD-X.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by emertxe View Post

 

Your impressions sound definitely promising... But in the end, these are going to be extremely expensive in Europe. I got my HD800 for 1200USD completely new but these LCD-X are going to cost over 2000USD here.

 

I would simply say that there is a rich history of Head-Fiers helping other Head-Fiers and just leave it at that.  ;)

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post

 

Great post. I think I am on the same train of thought with you on a lot of aspects. Yes, the HD800s are my technical accuracy dynamic reference too and fully agree the soundstage presentation can sound exagerrated. I think you're exactly right where you say the LCD-3s are a bit too congested in that respect. That's also where I feel the SR007s have a more natural life like soundstage presentation. My short list for fixes for the LCD-3 was: soundstaging, imaging and faster decays. That's enough to want to buy the LCD-Xs. :)

 

Yeah, I'm beginning to see that we've got some alignment in terms of our preferences, lol.  :D

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by negura View Post
 

I ended up with both the HD800s and LCD-3s and for a long time I could not decide between the two. They were both significantly better than the other in contrasting areas. The HD800s certainly allowed for tweaking them to my preferences. If this new LCD-X improves on the LCD-3s they could be the one dynamic headphone for me. :)

 

I think that the LCD-X would negate having to make that specific choice (between those two specific units) if you know what I mean.  Also, planar.  :smile:


Home of the Liquid Carbon, Liquid Crimson, Liquid Glass, Liquid Gold and
Liquid Lightning headphone amplifiers... and the upcoming Liquid Spark!

post #146 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mshenay View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

 

I know exactly what you mean, and I agree with regards to both the LCD-3 and the SR-007 above.

 

As I've said before, the SR-007 MkI (again with the proper amplification) is unparalleled in is ability to be naturally transparent.  I am not a fan of the current trend towards hyper-detail for the sake of being hyper-detailed.

 

For me, it's not all about hearing more and more of everything freakin' thing all of the freakin' time - it's also about hearing less of what distracts me from the music.  For example, would it be cool to hear a flutter in China Forbes's breath as she prepares for the next verse?  Sure, that's kinda cool I guess.  Would I have heard that flutter (or even wanted to hear that flutter) if she were singing on stage in front of me?  No, probably not.

 

Put it this way.  It's about the music, and not all about the sound.

 

I kinda like the extra details honestly, although even when speaking to people, I tend to listen to things that, for me it's part of the whole experince, every little detail is nice, and after a few months the details kinda fade back into the music, they are there when I'm looking for them,

 

Well, like I said, it'll still be there.  It's just not going to be forcefully injected into your face if you know what I mean by that sensation.


Home of the Liquid Carbon, Liquid Crimson, Liquid Glass, Liquid Gold and
Liquid Lightning headphone amplifiers... and the upcoming Liquid Spark!

post #147 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

 

I would say a more accurate soundstage and imaging, if that makes sense?

 

The HD 800 (stock and without mods of course) has always been wonderfully enjoyable for me in terms of staging and imaging.  However, I would also have to say that it has a tendency to exaggerate a bit in that department.  Trust me though, I totally get why that euphoric feeling is, well, euphoric.  I'm enjoying the Tralucent Audio 1plus2 right now for that exact reason.  But at some point, it can just be a bit too much.

 

With the LCD-X, the soundstage seems far more accurate, appropriate, proper and somehow just feels right.

 

 

Yes.  Call it what you like:  microdetail, low-level information, plankton, whatever.  Yes, it does.  And, it does so effortlessly and without embellishment or exaggeration.  There are certain cans that tend to throw that stuff in your face - I'm looking at you SR-009 and Abyss.  They almost force all of that micro-detail on you... much like a screen would over-saturate colors.  But real life is not like that.  There shouldn't be that kind of micro-detail bloom.  And so those cans always seem to be a bit gimmicky in that department for me. 

 

But the LCD-X simply presents it clearly and cleanly.

 

 

 

 

I would disagree that the SR-009 throws micro detail in your face. I can only assume you have a hyper detailed DAC or somewhat bright amplifier?  It is ruthlessly revealing of the source. I have the 007 Mk1 which is one of my favourite headphones of all but the 009 takes this to another level in terms of impact, soundstage, texture and layering of well recorded music.

 

I too was critical of the unnatural nature of the HD800's imaging and its tend to be over bright. I firmly believe now that the 800 was made to be driven balanced to really get the best from it. Having recently moved to balanced the soundstage has become coherent and integrated. 

post #148 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

First of all, thanks for sharing all of that mikemercer, I couldn't agree with you more.  Frankly, it's been hard having to keep our impressions under wraps - so I'm glad we can finally let some of this out.

 

 

Sure, perfectly understandable. :smile:

 

Secondly, guys we all have different (and sometimes multiple) ways of evaluating gear.  And having been at this for decades, mikemercer can definitely give you guys a more analytical breakdown.  But for him, the ultimate evaluation of gear is how it serves as the interface (or vehicle as he says) between us and the music.  So trust me when I say that, what he wanted to do was to cut through a lot of jargon to get to the heart of the matter with y'all.  :smile:

 

And though mikemercer and I have very different approaches (as well as preferences), we both arrived at the same conclusion.  I'll try to answer some specific questions below.  Please keep in mind that I am - of course - speaking IMO.

 


 

 

Yes.  I still hold the HD 800 as a reference for dynamic driver cans.  There will always be a part of me that appreciates the HD 800 for what it is.  And NO headphone in the world will ever make it sound worse than it does.  But comparatively, yes.

 

 

I would say a more accurate soundstage and imaging, if that makes sense?

 

The HD 800 (stock and without mods of course) has always been wonderfully enjoyable for me in terms of staging and imaging.  However, I would also have to say that it has a tendency to exaggerate a bit in that department.  Trust me though, I totally get why that euphoric feeling is, well, euphoric.  I'm enjoying the Tralucent Audio 1plus2 right now for that exact reason.  But at some point, it can just be a bit too much.

 

With the LCD-X, the soundstage seems far more accurate, appropriate, proper and somehow just feels right.

 

EDIT:  In case someone is wondering, yes I find that the LCD-X's staging and imaging to be superior to that of the LCD-3's.  For me, the LCD-3 always swung too far to the opposite extreme of the HD 800 in terms of staging.  Yes, the LCD-3 is wonderfully intimate with crazy immediacy.  But... I'm not the biggest fan of having the sound be that danger close.

 

 

Yes.  Call it what you like:  microdetail, low-level information, plankton, whatever.  Yes, it does.  And, it does so effortlessly and without embellishment or exaggeration.  There are certain cans that tend to throw that stuff in your face - I'm looking at you SR-009 and Abyss.  They almost force all of that micro-detail on you... much like a screen would over-saturate colors.  But real life is not like that.  There shouldn't be that kind of micro-detail bloom.  And so those cans always seem to be a bit gimmicky in that department for me. 

 

But the LCD-X simply presents it clearly and cleanly.

 

 

Yes.

 

 

It can be yes.  Or rather, the usage of that word often is.  Having said that, I believe that if we were to gather a reasonable sample size of experienced Head-Fiers for an audition, there would be a clear trend indicating that the LCD-X is more transparent.

 

 

I'm not a liberty to reveal any technical details that I may or may now have at this moment (or even ever now that I think about it).  But they perform significantly better for me technically.  They sound more accurate in nearly all respects.  And if I were asked which of the two that I perceived to be better from a technical performance standpoint, I wouldn't even need a moment's hesitation before pointing to the LCD-X over the LCD-3.

 

 

Hehe, see above (and below).  :smile:

 

 

As this treads uncomfortably close to certain technical details I an under NDA for, I will simply say this.  Based on your criteria above, I believe that you will find the "transparency" noticeably and significantly improved.

 

I'm so grateful that @warrenpchi understands me so well!  Guess that's why he's become one of my closest friends in what seems like a minute!!

We met at The Headphonium at T.H.E Show Newport, at our little Head-Fiers breakfast, and here we are!

 

I'm also grateful that he brought my honest intent to light for those of you unfamiliar with my approach to evaluating Hi-fi!  He actually did it in a way

that I couldn't even pull off!  Well done sir.

 

I'm in agreement with all of his responses to your technical questions w/ regard to the performance of the LCD-X vs. the LCD3 - but I'm a bit more

timid about saying I believe all the answers with my whole heart until I live with all these cans in my reference system for a longer period of time! 

Which I believe Warren also conveyed.

 

I also felt the soundstaging and imaging of the LCD-X had a technical edge on the LCD3 - and I say that because when I heard it for the very first

time at CAS in the morning (thankfully using my own MacBook/Amarra rig as source - into my dCs Delius DAC + Sonicweld Diverter that I lent them 

+ their Eddie Current Balancing Act  - very nice) I thought I was hearing the next evolution of the LCD series!  And that was because my immediate

impression of the soundstaging and imaging (thinkin' of my LCD3) was that it was far wider AND deeper, but completely controlled - and no so controlled

that it sounded technical itself.  Does that make sense??  It just seemed to reach farther.  So I'm DROOLING to have them all in the reference system 

for a decent period of time to truly eval!!

 

ALL good stuff

post #149 of 361
The new Audeze headphones may indeed sound fine, but this two man hype train, bouncing off each other, making it more powerful with each bounce, is excessive. You've said your piece, move on.
post #150 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by magiccabbage View Post
 

 

how does your electro-static converter sound?

 

The convertor itself sounds like nothing at all. Very neutral/transparent. They SR007s get the sound signature of the various components likes tubes on the amplifier (which in turn is very transparent) and that of the PWD2. I was trying to decide whether to go for a BHSE or Electra and this was supposed to be a solution for the meanwhile. Surprinsingly, maybe due the negative atitude in the Stax threads towards converters, I am very very pleased. Imo the SR007s sound significantly more transparent (the sound is VERY emotionally engaging, clean, clear, drivers well controlled and precise attack/decays, none of that lenient laid backness you can sometimes get with SR007 on lesser gear) than either of the HD800s and LCD-3s on the same rig, it can't be a bad solution for the stats. The Taboo is a VERY good SET speakers amp. I know this as I am also driving my horns with it.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

I think that the LCD-X would negate having to make that specific choice (between those two specific units) if you know what I mean.  Also, planar.  :smile:

 

 

I know what you mean. I admit to a preference to the planar sound (is it that texture?) more so than many/most dynamics.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxvla View Post

The new Audeze headphones may indeed sound fine, but this two man hype train, bouncing off each other, making it more powerful with each bounce, is excessive. You've said your piece, move on.

 

Yes. Let's talk about the all new high-end Sennheisers. :wink_face:


Edited by negura - 10/5/13 at 4:11pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Head-Fi Network & Industry News
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Head-Fi Network & Industry News › CanJam at RMAF 2013 Preview (And Exclusive Early Reveals!) - Head-Fi TV