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 12  

post #166 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asr View Post
 

So can I post now that I've heard the LCD-XC and LCD-X as well? (Although in prototype form, not the final production versions.) :p

 

Unlike mikemercer and warrenpchi though, I was totally unimpressed by both of them. They were both just more of the Audeze house sound to me without adding anything substantial. Not much to get excited about IMO. Don't get me wrong, I think the Audeze LCD-2 and LCD-3 are good, but I don't think they're particularly great, and I thought the same of the new models too. Although it's possible the production versions sound different/better, I'm not holding my breath for anything groundbreaking personally.

 

From what you've heard, do the X/XC have significantly different voicings relative to the 2/3's? Because that's the thing that's being boasted by Jude, that the X at least is much more neutral-sounding than the wood Audezes.

post #167 of 361

This reads like that akg tiesto thread.

post #168 of 361
Wallet zipped up until there are impressions that don't sound so bombastic smily_headphones1.gif

I made this mistake with the microstreamer thread and it was a mediocre purchase.
post #169 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

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.

 

Hi Warren!

 

Hmmm. I think we may have slightly different interpretations of plankton aka microdetail. Microdetail, even if it comes in spades, is never forced on you. It's also dependent upon a DAC being able to reproduce such low level information to begin with. In terms of microdetail, there are two cans which come to my mind which excel at this: the HD800, followed by the LCD3. Personally I feel those two cans are able to extract low level information even better than the Abyss. This fine detail extraction is actually there with the LCD3, but not presented as blatantly as it is from the HD800. 

 

It seems what you are describing is more along the lines of "macro" or gross detail, which the HD800 does tend to force upon you because of its uplifted treble. The "over-saturation" of colors or over-sharpened photo (my analog here) is what I would associate with gross detail. True resolution of the photo is what I would more associate with microdetail.

 

So using this definition and analogy, would you say that the LCD-X is better than the LCD3 or HD800 at resolving low level information? This Uber-Jesus-phone has definitely piqued my interest. I've wanted a neutral Audeze for several years now. 


Edited by purrin - 10/5/13 at 8:44pm
post #170 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerodeefex View Post

Wallet zipped up until there are impressions that don't sound so bombastic smily_headphones1.gif

I made this mistake with the microstreamer thread and it was a mediocre purchase.

 

sorry to hear that.

Sincerely.

 

I've been blown away at how many others loved it too - but we're all different, and what you love

won't always be loved by others!  

 

I was merely expressing my enthusiasm for something that moved me, after being around the block

for a bit...  I don't need to hype anything for anybody.  And my conclusions are my own, as are Judes.

 

That said: I'm pumped to hear the new Sennheisers as well!

I've had my HD 25-1 IIs for years cuz I DJ w/ em, and of course my HD800's - but I'm looking forward to

hearing their new cans.

post #171 of 361
No worries. I'm just not going to buy the jesusphone until it's out in the wild for a while smily_headphones1.gif
post #172 of 361
Just imagine if Sony brings the zx1 and the new XBA H line!!
post #173 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerodeefex View Post

No worries. I'm just not going to buy the jesusphone until it's out in the wild for a while smily_headphones1.gif

 

You going to end up with an Eddie Current Levi/445, Lampizator 4, and Abyss. You know it's true.

post #174 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post
 
 

You going to end up with an Eddie Current Levi/445, Lampizator 4, and Abyss. You know it's true.

 

I will avoid the Abyss like the damn plague. I am painfully aware of the fact that I will probably end up with the MSB Analog or equivalent, some version of that amp, and the Abyss and dump everything else.

post #175 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asr View Post

So can I post now that I've heard the LCD-XC and LCD-X as well? (Although in prototype form, not the final production versions.) tongue.gif

Unlike mikemercer and warrenpchi though, I was totally unimpressed by both of them. They were both just more of the Audeze house sound to me without adding anything substantial. Not much to get excited about IMO. Don't get me wrong, I think the Audeze LCD-2 and LCD-3 are good, but I don't think they're particularly great, and I thought the same of the new models too. Although it's possible the production versions sound different/better, I'm not holding my breath for anything groundbreaking personally.

Interesting. Do you happen to prefer AD2000 to LCD-2/3? Just asking based on your profile.
post #176 of 361

I hope LCD-X will be easier to drive.  

post #177 of 361

The more expensive it is the harder it is to drive.

post #178 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by warrenpchi View Post
 

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.

 

Hi Warren!

 

Hmmm. I think we may have slightly different interpretations of plankton aka microdetail. Microdetail, even if it comes in spades, is never forced on you. It's also dependent upon a DAC being able to reproduce such low level information to begin with. In terms of microdetail, there are two cans which come to my mind which excel at this: the HD800, followed by the LCD3. Personally I feel those two cans are able to extract low level information even better than the Abyss. This fine detail extraction is actually there with the LCD3, but not presented as blatantly as it is from the HD800. 

 

It seems what you are describing is more along the lines of "macro" or gross detail, which the HD800 does tend to force upon you because of its uplifted treble. The "over-saturation" of colors or over-sharpened photo (my analog here) is what I would associate with gross detail. True resolution of the photo is what I would more associate with microdetail.

 

So using this definition and analogy, would you say that the LCD-X is better than the LCD3 or HD800 at resolving low level information? This Uber-Jesus-phone has definitely piqued my interest. I've wanted a neutral Audeze for several years now. 

 

Hey Purrin!  :smile:  Okay, lemme take a moment to clarify what I mean, with the definitions you mentioned.  And I think Mshenay had a comment along these lines earlier, so this can cover his thoughts as well.

 

Because the Abyss (and the SR-009 to a certain extent) are so resolving to me, they end up presenting far more microdetail above and beyond what I've heard from other cans.  Or to put it another way, at the very least, far more than I am used to.  This occurs to the point where it's well outside of my expectations, and as a result I find it to be somewhat unnatural and almost exaggerated.

 

Lol, now I know this is widely considered a good thing.  But in terms of just how far it surpasses my expectations, I find it a little unnerving and quite distracting.  Okay, let be be even more succinct... too much ear candy.  And I - admittedly - have a hard time ignoring that.  Know what I mean?  This could be something exclusive to me (and a few other people I've talked to), but I get sucked into that pretty hard... I mean I just get waaayyyyyy lost into that... like a moth to a flame.  And before I know it I'm having a hard time seeing (hearing) the forest (music) from the trees (detail).

 

::cue a Keanu Reeves "whoa..."::

 

Now, with that forced and in-the-face thing... that might have been hyperbole is as far as degree, but I gotta stand by the underlying meaning and sentiment.  :smile:  And as far as analogy goes... I say over saturation because I tend to experience micro-detail as a pervasive and engrossing thing.  It's not something that I perceive precisely as I almost swim in it so to speak.  I can definitely see what you mean with the over-sharpening analogy though... and yeah I can get with that.

 

As for the HD 800, OMG yes, the macro-detail is grossly exaggerated there IMO.  And to the extent that I occasionally like this - in the same way I occasionally like food that is far too spicy for me - it can be quite enjoyable in spurts.  But this is also why I don't get sucked into micro-detail with the HD 800 nearly as much.  The macro there smothers much of the micro for me.

 

Anyway, to answer your question, would I say that the LCD-X is better than the LCD3 or HD800 at resolving low level information?  Yes I'd have to say so... with the caveat that I may not be hearing what you're hearing in the HD 800 (again, stock configuration as I don't recall ever hearing a modded HD 800).

 

Oh one last thing before I forget - and I'm sorry if anyone else interpreted it this way - but no it's not an uber-Jesus-phone.  But for me, it is astonishing.  It is by far the best Audeze I have heard.  And now that I think about it, it's the first Audeze that I have an emotional attachment to in terms of what it is able to deliver for me musically.  And when I think al the way back to what the LCD-1 sounds like, man, I just can't help but be terribly impressed with this thing.

 

BTW, are you in town?  I gotta talk to you about something, slightly different, but somewhat related.  PM incoming.

post #179 of 361
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

I hope LCD-X will be easier to drive.  
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

The more expensive it is the harder it is to drive.

t = 23:22 cool.gif
post #180 of 361

Wait, I missed something...

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by purrin View Post

 

followed by the LCD3. Personally I feel those two cans are able to extract low level information even better than the Abyss.

 

Wait, really?  LCD-3 > Abyss in terms of micro-detail?  Not doubting or anything, but I definitely want to A/B this sometime if I can.  I've got an LCD-3 here, but not the Abyss.  :(

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by gevorg View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

I hope LCD-X will be easier to drive.  
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

The more expensive it is the harder it is to drive.

t = 23:22 cool.gif

 

That's for the LCD-XC though... I think he meant the LCD-X?

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