Audeze LCD-2 Orthos
Jul 26, 2011 at 10:22 AM Post #15,511 of 18,459


Quote:
     Quote:


That sounds disappointing lol. I'm not sure I'd be able to discern differences between DACs as I find it hard enough between headphones which should be a lot more obvious. I'm using the Earth which I got for free and I believe it's meant to be "neutral" sounding. Perhaps the DAC in my Essence STX would be better? Isn't that meant to be a good chip?
 
I've already ordered the Lyr now so I hope I'm not making a mistake! In the LCD-2 amp thread there seems to be some disagreement over whether tube or SS is best.
 

I'm using a Wyred4sound DAC-2  and a Violectric V200.  It's an excellent combo for both the r.1 and the r.2.     I haven't seen any direct disagreement/dispute in the LCD amp thread over which is best for the LCD tubes or solid state. What are the arguments?   Are they the usual Tube vs Solid State camp arguments?  
 
EDIT:  Never mind. I went over to the thread and read the recent arguments.  Tube vs solid state rehash.  Same old boring endless argument.   A good amp is a good amp.  
 
Jul 26, 2011 at 12:34 PM Post #15,516 of 18,459
 
LCD2 versus STAX SR507
 
The LCD2 is remarkably good at handling only so-so produced pop and rock records, here I recall for example Modest Mouse's lo-fi stuff. I normally describe the LCD2's bass to others as akin to having a subwoofer in one's head. Bass lines in reggae and hiphop simply detonate down low. Mids stay nicely open and attack sharp. Personally I would describe the highs as recessed though reports vary so widely on head-fi I can't confidently state if this is the case across all LCD2s. The way the LCD2s locks on to the groove on tracks like Radiohead's "15 Step" or Neil Young's "Cinnamon Girl" is addictive. (A bit of bass detail and control is lost in my system because of the known limitations of my amp.) 
 
The SR507's acoustic bass excels; I would never call it lacking and it's easy to hear the air under the deepest notes. The lack of visceral attack on electrostatic phones takes some getting use to but once one fully appreciates their effortlessness owners will continue to return to them. Their perfect transient attack, perfect tone and texture and unflappability in complex passages are welcome qualities. I feel confident to declare - as was repeated to me years ago on head-fi - STAX are pretty much the perfect classical phone (except for solo classical piano which the LCD2 just edges it out because it nails an acoustic piano's weight, an instrument I already play). The highs are extended and effortless and utterly unfatiguing. But heaven forbid one should ever plays a substandard recording - it will make your ears bleed. Using a tubed amp with the 507 means even the solo violin recordings of Bach's Sonatas and Partitas come across realistically textured, warm and extremely detailed, proving one can have the best of both worlds.
 
A track on which both tie is The Nightmare Before Christmas soundtrack's "This is Halloween". The LCD2 seem to offer more PRAT, solidifying the lilting drum beat of the song while keeping the chorus' complex harmonies intact. On the other hand the 507 let the whole sonic picture breath with oddles of detail. Each instrument and vocal is in its own space, easily discernable to the ear, while playfully letting the song's melody weave and interact slightly more nimbly than the LCD2s.
 
Equipment summary: The LCD2 (w/ foam pads and angled inputs w/ APS cable) is used out of a Yamamoto HA-02 while the SR507 is plugged into a stock Wooaudio GES all out of a Marantz KI Pearl SACD player with power conditioning handled by a lower-range Shunyata unit.  
 
Jul 26, 2011 at 4:04 PM Post #15,518 of 18,459


Quote:
 
LCD2 versus STAX SR507
 
The LCD2 is remarkably good at handling only so-so produced pop and rock records, here I recall for example Modest Mouse's lo-fi stuff. I normally describe the LCD2's bass to others as akin to having a subwoofer in one's head. Bass lines in reggae and hiphop simply detonate down low. Mids stay nicely open and attack sharp. Personally I would describe the highs as recessed though reports vary so widely on head-fi I can't confidently state if this is the case across all LCD2s. The way the LCD2s locks on to the groove on tracks like Radiohead's "15 Step" or Neil Young's "Cinnamon Girl" is addictive. (A bit of bass detail and control is lost in my system because of the known limitations of my amp.) 
 
The SR507's acoustic bass excels; I would never call it lacking and it's easy to hear the air under the deepest notes. The lack of visceral attack on electrostatic phones takes some getting use to but once one fully appreciates their effortlessness owners will continue to return to them. Their perfect transient attack, perfect tone and texture and unflappability in complex passages are welcome qualities. I feel confident to declare - as was repeated to me years ago on head-fi - STAX are pretty much the perfect classical phone (except for solo classical piano which the LCD2 just edges it out because it nails an acoustic piano's weight, an instrument I already play). The highs are extended and effortless and utterly unfatiguing. But heaven forbid one should ever plays a substandard recording - it will make your ears bleed. Using a tubed amp with the 507 means even the solo violin recordings of Bach's Sonatas and Partitas come across realistically textured, warm and extremely detailed, proving one can have the best of both worlds.
 
A track on which both tie is The Nightmare Before Christmas soundtrack's "This is Halloween". The LCD2 seem to offer more PRAT, solidifying the lilting drum beat of the song while keeping the chorus' complex harmonies intact. On the other hand the 507 let the whole sonic picture breath with oddles of detail. Each instrument and vocal is in its own space, easily discernable to the ear, while playfully letting the song's melody weave and interact slightly more nimbly than the LCD2s.
 
Equipment summary: The LCD2 (w/ foam pads and angled inputs w/ APS cable) is used out of a Yamamoto HA-02 while the SR507 is plugged into a stock Wooaudio GES all out of a Marantz KI Pearl SACD player with power conditioning handled by a lower-range Shunyata unit.  

This is extremely well written and paints an auditory image that is understandable. 
 
 
 
Jul 26, 2011 at 4:07 PM Post #15,519 of 18,459
Quote:
EDIT:  Never mind. I went over to the thread and read the recent arguments.  Tube vs solid state rehash.  Same old boring endless argument.   A good amp is a good amp.  


No. What was discussed is what amps married well with the LCD-2, not topology vs topology.
 
 
Jul 26, 2011 at 4:32 PM Post #15,520 of 18,459
Jul 26, 2011 at 5:19 PM Post #15,521 of 18,459
Quote:
LCD2 versus STAX SR507
 
The LCD2 is remarkably good at handling only so-so produced pop and rock records, here I recall for example Modest Mouse's lo-fi stuff. I normally describe the LCD2's bass to others as akin to having a subwoofer in one's head. Bass lines in reggae and hiphop simply detonate down low. Mids stay nicely open and attack sharp. Personally I would describe the highs as recessed though reports vary so widely on head-fi I can't confidently state if this is the case across all LCD2s. The way the LCD2s locks on to the groove on tracks like Radiohead's "15 Step" or Neil Young's "Cinnamon Girl" is addictive. (A bit of bass detail and control is lost in my system because of the known limitations of my amp.) 
 
The SR507's acoustic bass excels; I would never call it lacking and it's easy to hear the air under the deepest notes. The lack of visceral attack on electrostatic phones takes some getting use to but once one fully appreciates their effortlessness owners will continue to return to them. Their perfect transient attack, perfect tone and texture and unflappability in complex passages are welcome qualities. I feel confident to declare - as was repeated to me years ago on head-fi - STAX are pretty much the perfect classical phone (except for solo classical piano which the LCD2 just edges it out because it nails an acoustic piano's weight, an instrument I already play). The highs are extended and effortless and utterly unfatiguing. But heaven forbid one should ever plays a substandard recording - it will make your ears bleed. Using a tubed amp with the 507 means even the solo violin recordings of Bach's Sonatas and Partitas come across realistically textured, warm and extremely detailed, proving one can have the best of both worlds.
 
A track on which both tie is The Nightmare Before Christmas soundtrack's "This is Halloween". The LCD2 seem to offer more PRAT, solidifying the lilting drum beat of the song while keeping the chorus' complex harmonies intact. On the other hand the 507 let the whole sonic picture breath with oddles of detail. Each instrument and vocal is in its own space, easily discernable to the ear, while playfully letting the song's melody weave and interact slightly more nimbly than the LCD2s.
 
Equipment summary: The LCD2 (w/ foam pads and angled inputs w/ APS cable) is used out of a Yamamoto HA-02 while the SR507 is plugged into a stock Wooaudio GES all out of a Marantz KI Pearl SACD player with power conditioning handled by a lower-range Shunyata unit.  

 
Thanks for the write-up--it is as Jamato said, excellent.  
 
Jul 26, 2011 at 5:44 PM Post #15,523 of 18,459
Thanks. It was fun writting it. It bares mentioning I also perfer pretty much all Radiohead and disks like Sharon Jones and the Dap-kings' 100 Days 100 Nights and the late Amy Winehouse's Back to Back exclusively out of my LCD2 - even though one could infer the air of the SR507s would play to the complexity and scale of those albums; certainly theres lots of detail to reveal, however, the LCD2 are just more soulful somehow. 
 
Jul 26, 2011 at 6:22 PM Post #15,525 of 18,459


Quote:
 
Must have your irrelevance and bulldust filters set too high.......


Ahh!  I'll tweek 'em...  Thx!
 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top