[SemiAudiophile]

Quote:

So thanks to Jude's post last night, I jumped and picked up a pair of r2s today. They should be here on Monday (thanks to Headroom's fast shipping). I'll post my 2 cents when they arrive.

I plan to keep the one I prefer and sell the other.

x2. I ordered from Audeze direct and was surprised that they already had shipped. Was expecting 1-2 month wait time. Also really looking forward to what Audeze has planned for speakers. I think they are a really admirable company. Best of luck to them!

 

[K3cT]

After finally comparing the Rev 1 and Rev 2 side by side at least some things became clear to me:
 

• They are more similar than different. If you are asked to blind test both of them at the same time, chances are you won't be able to differentiate them on certain musical tracks. 
• The Rev 1 has a better midrange, this is not even a question for me and it was the first difference that I notice. The midrange in Rev 1 is more neutral ie. it's more natural and it conveys a better sense of texture and decay than the Rev 2. Vocals especially sounds more real and nuanced in Rev 1. The midrange in Rev 2 while still good now resembles the Hifiman HE6 more. It's slightly thin and a bit brittle/edgy in the upper midrange area. 
• While the Rev 2 is inferior in the midrange, it makes it up with an improved soundstage. Imaging is more or less the same to me but you definitely get a better sense of air in the soundstage. This significantly helps to clear the congestion in the sound as separate instruments gain their own spaces and do not blur into each other. 
• As for the treble, I would still classify both headphones in the dark side of things. The Rev 2 sounds slightly clearer than the Rev 1 which I attribute to the thinner midrange and airier soundstage so it's easier to pick out treble details. 

 
So honestly, I'm still not sure on what to feel about the Revision 2. You basically trade off some things to get another. Can't I have both? 

 
Systems used: Apex Peak/Volcano, CEC TL51Z CDP, Silver Dragon v3 cables for both LCD2s. 

 

[Equus]

I mostly agree with your points, K3cT, though I don't personally find the treble dark.  The midrange (particularly female soprano vocals) are a touch thinner on the rev 2 to me than the rev 1, though still very good.

 

[Windsor]

Quote:

So thanks to Jude's post last night, I jumped and picked up a pair of r2s today. They should be here on Monday (thanks to Headroom's fast shipping). I'll post my 2 cents when they arrive.

I plan to keep the one I prefer and sell the other.

Looking forward to your impressions.
 

 

[Windsor]

I stand by what I have said about the rev2. so far.
 
If I could have only one LCD-2, it would love it to have the clarity of the rev2 but with a slightly less shiny and more natural musical tone.
 
Right now, I love what I have though. 

 

[KingStyles]

Hey WA, dont worry about it. There is always those which are going to flame. Your findings have pretty much have lined up with mine and they are appreciated along with everybody else's that might not agree with our findings. You just need a better flame resistant barrier. 
I am not sure if the mids are thinner. I would say that because the stage is bigger, there might be a little loss of texture in the mids because the vocalist has taken a step back on the stage. This is still just as accurate. If you are listening to someone and you increase the space between you and them, there will be a loss of texture to there sound which is still accurately displayed.for where they are at on the stage. It is just different. I guess some might see this as thinner.

 

[Loevhagen]

 
​

After some time with the following three cans, I would rank them in this order (enjoyment / playtime):
 
1. LCD-2 rev. 1
2. HE-500
3. LCD-2 rev. 2
 
That might change. Don't know. 
 
The rev. 2, in my ears, is the best technically speaking. But I enjoy the sound from the 2 others more.

 

[Windsor]

     Quote:

 
​

After some time with the following three cans, I would rank them in this order (enjoyment / playtime):
 
1. LCD-2 rev. 1
2. HE-500
3. LCD-2 rev. 2
 
 

That might change. Don't know. 
 
The rev. 2, in my ears, is the best technically speaking. But I enjoy the sound from the 2 others more.
 
 

 
It'll be interesting to hear how the HE-300 sounds, too (I saw you just ordered one).
 
Also, what cable do you use with the rev1?
 
 

 

 

[wower]

Wow. This thread updates so quickly in days. Nice to see some LCD2 rev1 versus rev2 comparisons. (Thanks all btw.) The theories perposed for the change sound reasonable and I think I'll stay happy with my rev1 partnered with my house's STAX system for when I'm craving more soundstage/openess etc. 

 

[chesebert]

Very sensible post.
 
In my experience most well made dynamic headphones sound more alike (as in all sound good) than different when driven from a top-end amp with a high-end source. Sure, there are slight differences in how each phones present music, but they all sound good. I can't believe people are buying two or even three pairs of essentially the same phones so they can critically listen for those nuances. Fundamentally, headphones, no matter how well they're made or how hi-end, have a huge handicap in music making comparing to speakers. Does anyone remember when was the last they listened to any pair of headphones and felt a chill down their spine cuz the music sound so real they are in disbelieve? Enough said.

 
 
Quote:

After finally comparing the Rev 1 and Rev 2 side by side at least some things became clear to me:
 

• They are more similar than different. If you are asked to blind test both of them at the same time, chances are you won't be able to differentiate them on certain musical tracks. 
• The Rev 1 has a better midrange, this is not even a question for me and it was the first difference that I notice. The midrange in Rev 1 is more neutral ie. it's more natural and it conveys a better sense of texture and decay than the Rev 2. Vocals especially sounds more real and nuanced in Rev 1. The midrange in Rev 2 while still good now resembles the Hifiman HE6 more. It's slightly thin and a bit brittle/edgy in the upper midrange area. 
• While the Rev 2 is inferior in the midrange, it makes it up with an improved soundstage. Imaging is more or less the same to me but you definitely get a better sense of air in the soundstage. This significantly helps to clear the congestion in the sound as separate instruments gain their own spaces and do not blur into each other. 
• As for the treble, I would still classify both headphones in the dark side of things. The Rev 2 sounds slightly clearer than the Rev 1 which I attribute to the thinner midrange and airier soundstage so it's easier to pick out treble details. 

 
So honestly, I'm still not sure on what to feel about the Revision 2. You basically trade off some things to get another. Can't I have both? 

 
Systems used: Apex Peak/Volcano, CEC TL51Z CDP, Silver Dragon v3 cables for both LCD2s. 

 

 

[KevinWolff]

I'll wager 2 dead hamsters that your list looks more like this in about 100 more listening hours:
 
1.LCD-2 Rev2 - For intense listening sessions
2.LCD-2 Rev1 - For headaches and laid back relaxing days
3. !! No longer a need for a number 3 !!
 

Just joking about dropping the he-500. I've read that it's a great can. 
 
 
Quote:

 
​

 

 

After some time with the following three cans, I would rank them in this order (enjoyment / playtime):
 
1. LCD-2 rev. 1
2. HE-500
3. LCD-2 rev. 2
 
That might change. Don't know. 
 
The rev. 2, in my ears, is the best technically speaking. But I enjoy the sound from the 2 others more.


 

 

[Windsor]

      Quote:

Very sensible post.
 
In my experience most well made dynamic headphones sound more alike (as in all sound good) than different when driven from a top-end amp with a high-end source. Sure, there are slight differences in how each phones present music, but they all sound good. I can't believe people are buying two or even three pairs of essentially the same phones so they can critically listen for those nuances. Fundamentally, headphones, no matter how well they're made or how hi-end, have a huge handicap in music making comparing to speakers. Does anyone remember when was the last they listened to any pair of headphones and felt a chill down their spine cuz the music sound so real they are in disbelieve? Enough said.

I agree with most of that, and in relation to the bold print, the title track of this record did that for me last night with the rev2:
 

 
But more on the LCD-2 music thread...
 

 

[googleli]

Just listened to the album "Ella and Louis" featuring Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong on the LCD2 via Leben. Although it doesn't produce the feeling of the voice of these legends being "just there" like the Stax SR009 does, it is still very very good especially given the mid range lushness, and still very transparent. But  transparent here implies there is still something "in between" rather than the sound being "just there" - I could not  imagine anything being more transparent when I got my LCD2 and before I got the 009. But I knew what the differene was the moment my 009 is on.  And once again, the very useful impression posted by k3ct above reinforced my decision - I am not giving up a single bit of that midrange lushness to chase for something which my SR009 can do much better. The R1 is a keeper. 
 

 

[Loevhagen]

Stock cable (ADZ5) or the Q-Audio.
 
Quote:

Also, what cable do you use with the rev1?

 
 

 

[chesebert]

I hope you are joking when you say "I could not imagine anything being more transparent when I got my LCD2 and before I got the 009." It was clear to me when I first got my LCD2 that this headphone is much less transparent than my Harbeth, which is itself not the last word in transparency. I think you are confusing transparency with high resolution (LCD2 has very high resolution, I am sure that's taken to the Nth degree with 009). Transparency, on the other hand, is the feeling that there is nothing between you, the performer and music. Do you feel like you can clearly "see" the performance? if not, your gear is not transparent.
 
Quote:

Just listened to the album "Ella and Louis" featuring Ella Fitzgerald and Louis Armstrong on the LCD2 via Leben. Although it doesn't produce the feeling of the voice of these legends being "just there" like the Stax SR009 does, it is still very very good especially given the mid range lushness, and still very transparent. But  transparent here implies there is still something "in between" rather than the sound being "just there" - I could not  imagine anything being more transparent when I got my LCD2 and before I got the 009. But I knew what the differene was the moment my 009 is on.  And once again, the very useful impression posted by k3ct above reinforced my decision - I am not giving up a single bit of that midrange lushness to chase for something which my SR009 can do much better. The R1 is a keeper.