[MRC001]

They're both great headphones. The HE-500 picks up more subtle detail in the music, the LCD-2 has more natural, realistic voicing of instruments. Choose your poison.

 

[bagwell359]

Well, guess I'm late to the dance. I've had the HE-500 for about 4 months now. Balanced, with the original silver plate wire cut into a 5' length. Fazor mod, none other.

Got my hands on a late '14 Fazor LCD-2. Also with balanced and a 6' length of the original flat cable. 3 hours a day for 12 days solid.

I'll cede the bass overall to the LCD-2. HE-500 went a bit fat on the bass and 2 cello test track. Soundstage and comfort too.

But the bass seemed to seep into the lower mids and make male singers chestier than they should be. I found female vocals to be more nuanced, deep, and detailed on the HE-500, and I found more inner detail retrieval in the HE-500 in the mids overall. The treble? The HE-500 is brighter, but not annoying, in fact overall its a bit soft and suave. The LCD-2 treble seems to be an afterthought - clean, flat and decidedly recessed. Where is it? Where are the overtones? Ever hear a DBX expander/compander? Well the LCD-2 treble is like that, leeched of overtones. I've heard the term "dark" tossed around on these, way more than dark.

I've heard the LCD-3 and it kills both of these, maybe the sample is bad?

 

[MRC001]

Yes the HE-500 was brighter sounding, more treble detail than the LCD-2. But to my ears it had some midrange suckout that made acoustic instruments and voices sound less natural, less realistic.

Part of the reason the LCD-3 had better mids & treble than the LCD-2 was it used thinner, lighter diaphragms. The 2016 revision of the LCD-2 also uses thinner, lighter diaphragms. It has faster transient response, even in the bass, if you can imagine virtually perfect bass
getting even better, also in the mids & treble with more neutral response overall. With these newest drivers, there's less difference between the LCD-2 and LCD-3. Worth a listen.

I bought a second pair of LCD-2 and it happened to be a 2016 Fazor version. I liked it enough that I had them upgrade my 2014 Fazor to the newest drivers. It's not a huge difference, but it is a noticeable improvement.

 

[bagwell359]

Yes the HE-500 was brighter sounding, more treble detail than the LCD-2. But to my ears it had some midrange suckout that made acoustic instruments and voices sound less natural, less realistic.

Part of the reason the LCD-3 had better mids & treble than the LCD-2 was it used thinner, lighter diaphragms. The 2016 revision of the LCD-2 also uses thinner, lighter diaphragms. It has faster transient response, even in the bass, if you can imagine virtually perfect bass
getting even better, also in the mids & treble with more neutral response overall. With these newest drivers, there's less difference between the LCD-2 and LCD-3. Worth a listen.

I bought a second pair of LCD-2 and it happened to be a 2016 Fazor version. I liked it enough that I had them upgrade my 2014 Fazor to the newest drivers. It's not a huge difference, but it is a noticeable improvement.

Interesting. I believe you. The sample must have been bad, I read that gen had some QC issues. Even my friend that owns those LCD-2's had to agree he liked my 500's better.

 

[bagwell359]

Year and a half later, and my modded HE-500's are still my favs - over the HEX v2, HD-600, HE-5LE, HE5SE, Aeon's and others.

The bass is very good to 25 Hz, and very tight - in part due to the muscle amp - Rag 1, and the Black Dragon XLR cable, and dynamat. The mids are lush AND accurate - thanks to the fuzzor mod, and screen removal. I've tamped down the long cymbal note ringing too. Now that the HE6SE can be had for $899 new I can cede to something under $1k being better than the HE-500. However, haven't heard the Verum, ERA-1, and others.