[Radio_head]

Quote:

Does the toilet paper mod give the LCD-3 a more organic sound?

 
You already answered your own question at the other place.

 

[Jian]

Well, the LCD3 is Audeze sound style gets perfected. And if one doesn't like the audeze flavour, why pays 2K in the first place? Makes me wonder. Audeze certainly can't satisfy everybody, but they certainly successfully satisfies me and members who like their style very much.

 

[Jian]

Quote:

Any link to the website of the Chinese headphone community? Is it erji.net? I'd be interested to read your review.

 


Quote:

 
http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/index.php

My little Chinese review on LCD3 is on, check it out if you want.

 

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

Well, the LCD3 is Audeze sound style gets perfected. And if one doesn't like the audeze flavour, why pays 2K in the first place? Makes me wonder. Audeze certainly can't satisfy everybody, but they certainly successfully satisfies me and members who like their style very much.

You're confusing not liking the sound with slightly altering the sound to make it better.

 

[koonhua90]

Quote:

My little Chinese review on LCD3 is on, check it out if you want.

 
Thanks man. So your name there is "guts"? Am reading it now.

Since coming from few earphones, and now after about 1 week owning the LCD-3, what I dislike about it is the strong clamping force on my small head, which I hope will loosen soon. Even though the clamping force is pretty strong, I could wear it for 4 hrs easily without much discomfort, due to the thick soft pads. Used to the JH16, the LCD-3 has less bass quantity but equally good speed and attack. Actually, due to the nature of big driver, the attack is better felt, and I feel that the bass texture might be better on the LCD-3. Not to discount the JH16, but the low notes on the JH16 don't really linger that long.
 
There is something about the coherency of single driver earphones/headphones, which I heard from both the JVC FX-700 (a wooden open-backed earphone, for those who don't know what it's) and the LCD-3, that I don't heard on the multi BA drivers earphones (only heard the SM3, Westone 4, JH16). Like the JH16, LCD-3 is slightly dark sounding, but the latter is smoother sounding, and do not sound so analytical. The JH16 present details up front (in your face kind of) even though it's pretty smooth and slightly warm, which to me can be a bit weird. The LCD-3 is transparent, coherent and detailed, but the details aren't push that up-fronts. So in a very technical sense, I think due to the presentation of the headphone, one can probably say that LCD-3 is not extremely detailed as headphones that has elevated treble.
 
Sometimes I would wish that the midrange is more intimate on the LCD-3. When I do, I can swap in the warmer sounding Amperex tubes into the Lyr. I think the shelf on the upper mid and low treble works in reducing listening fatigue. I don't think I can listen to it for 4 hrs non stop if the treble is anything more sparkly and aggressive.
 
I thought my neck is strong, but after wearing it for a few hours, the weight does set in, especially when the sound is too glorious and I bob my head too much. 

Depth is really good, something that I need to mention too. This might differ between people, but the LCD-3 consistently portray the vocals in front of me, and put it at a good distance too (due to the slightly dark nature). This gives very good sense of space for the human voice. I don't get the feeling that I am on stage like I do with some other earphones, rather I feel like I am somewhere between the front rows and the middle rows. One thing to note, the soundstage and imaging change depending on how you set the headphone on your head, subtle but in a noticeable way.

I will try out the famous toilet paper mod these two days when I free up my work. I can sort of get a sense of how it will change the sound by cupping the metal grill slightly with my hands: lifting the lower mid, upper treble slightly, and giving it stronger punch.
 
So TLR of my impression? The LCD-3 is pretty much perfect sounding, but there are reality checks, the weight, the strong clamping force (for me at least), the smooth and slightly dark sound (strongly dependent on personal preference, this might be good or not good), the way it presents details (again, depending on personal liking), the soundstage width(It's slightly focused sounding, the width is good, but could be wider when listening to classical music. From memory I think that the FX-700 has wider width, ridiculous isn't it. But who needs that much width anyway 

)

Take my impression with a grain of salt, as I am an amateur here, and I do not own high-end multi-thousand dollars amps nor dacs. All my listening is done through the modest DACmini feeding the Schiit Lyr. No fancy cables or anything, but I found that the stock cable couples in RF noise from my cellphone, which is extremely annoying, I think I have to get an aftermarket cable for the headphone....

 

[Jian]

Quote:

You're confusing not liking the sound with slightly altering the sound to make it better.

 
The preference of "better" is debateable, I'm sure lots of member won't call it "better" to down grade the LCD3 sound to R2 sound. I for one way prefer LCD3 over LCD2 R2, but that's just me.

 

[Jian]

Quote:

 
Thanks man. So your name there is "guts"? Am reading it now.

Since coming from few earphones, and now after about 1 week owning the LCD-3, what I dislike about it is the strong clamping force on my small head, which I hope will loosen soon. Even though the clamping force is pretty strong, I could wear it for 4 hrs easily without much discomfort, due to the thick soft pads. Used to the JH16, the LCD-3 has less bass quantity but equally good speed and attack. Actually, due to the nature of big driver, the attack is better felt, and I feel that the bass texture might be better on the LCD-3. Not to discount the JH16, but the low notes on the JH16 don't really linger that long.
 
There is something about the coherency of single driver earphones/headphones, which I heard from both the JVC FX-700 (a wooden open-backed earphone, for those who don't know what it's) and the LCD-3, that I don't heard on the multi BA drivers earphones (only heard the SM3, Westone 4, JH16). Like the JH16, LCD-3 is slightly dark sounding, but the latter is smoother sounding, and do not sound so analytical. The JH16 present details up front (in your face kind of) even though it's pretty smooth and slightly warm, which to me can be a bit weird. The LCD-3 is transparent, coherent and detailed, but the details aren't push that up-fronts. So in a very technical sense, I think due to the presentation of the headphone, one can probably say that LCD-3 is not extremely detailed as headphones that has elevated treble.
 
Sometimes I would wish that the midrange is more intimate on the LCD-3. When I do, I can swap in the warmer sounding Amperex tubes into the Lyr. I think the shelf on the upper mid and low treble works in reducing listening fatigue. I don't think I can listen to it for 4 hrs non stop if the treble is anything more sparkly and aggressive.
 
I thought my neck is strong, but after wearing it for a few hours, the weight does set in, especially when the sound is too glorious and I bob my head too much. 

Depth is really good, something that I need to mention too. This might differ between people, but the LCD-3 consistently portray the vocals in front of me, and put it at a good distance too (due to the slightly dark nature). This gives very good sense of space for the human voice. I don't get the feeling that I am on stage like I do with some other earphones, rather I feel like I am somewhere between the front rows and the middle rows. One thing to note, the soundstage and imaging change depending on how you set the headphone on your head, subtle but in a noticeable way.

I will try out the famous toilet paper mod these two days when I free up my work. I can sort of get a sense of how it will change the sound by cupping the metal grill slightly with my hands: lifting the lower mid, upper treble slightly, and giving it stronger punch.
 
So TLR of my impression? The LCD-3 is pretty much perfect sounding, but there are reality checks, the weight, the strong clamping force (for me at least), the smooth and slightly dark sound (strongly dependent on personal preference, this might be good or not good), the way it presents details (again, depending on personal liking), the soundstage width(It's slightly focused sounding, the width is good, but could be wider when listening to classical music. From memory I think that the FX-700 has wider width, ridiculous isn't it. But who needs that much width anyway 

)

Take my impression with a grain of salt, as I am an amateur here, and I do not own high-end multi-thousand dollars amps nor dacs. All my listening is done through the modest DACmini feeding the Schiit Lyr. No fancy cables or anything, but I found that the stock cable couples in RF noise from my cellphone, which is extremely annoying, I think I have to get an aftermarket cable for the headphone....

Cheers mate. Nice review.

 

[koonhua90]

^ Man, your vocab at describing sound in Chinese is incredible. Pretty much exactly what I'm hearing from the LCD-3, except that I do not own neither the R1 nor R2. People who can read Chinese should go read this:

http://bbs.headphoneclub.com/thread-172756-1-1.html

 

[rhythmdevils]

Quote:

 
The preference of "better" is debateable, I'm sure lots of member won't call it "better" to down grade the LCD3 sound to R2 sound. I for one way prefer LCD3 over LCD2 R2, but that's just me.

You can't change the 3 to the r.2 with damping changes.  The 3 has a different, thinner diaphragm which behaves differently and has different characteristics.  Damping can't change everything.  It's still a 3 diaphragm.  Being able to tune orthos is one of their best qualities, I've been wanting to see someone play with the Audeze damping for awhile.  I would have with my r.1 but I thought just taking the grill off would void the warranty. 
 
So you can think of it as a negative, or you can think that here you have a headphone with a great driver that is tunable to your preferred sound.  One of the reasons the HE6 sounds so different from the Audeze's is just because it is damped harder, which gives it that fast, clean treble and slightly "cold" tonality. 
 
TP is only the beginning of endless possibilities. 

 

[purrin]

Indeed, I'm considering shark fin next.

 

[Anaxilus]

I dunno, I could spend $100,000 on a car and still drop another 10-20k tweaking it to my liking.  In fact, not one of my cars is completely stock.  Do you buy a house and leave it alone?  Man up, stick some TP in your phones, it'll put hair on your chest!  Maybe even your nipples.  

 

[googleli]

Except you won't tweak your $100,000 car with tissue paper. If the Kirkland tissue paper makes your car faster or improves its handling but you have to stick the tissue paper on the windows will you do that?

 

[purrin]

There are fundamental differences between the r3 and r2. The r2's upper midrange and treble response is uneven. There is also a resonance node somewhere in the low treble. The r3's on the other hand have a very smooth midrange and treble. The resonance node on the r3 is very high up in the "air" region where its effects are benign. My disagreement with the r3 was only with the frequency response where the it was more shelved down than the r2.
 
Basically in the end after the mods, what I got was an headphone with a FR more similar to the r2, but with none of the disadvantages of the r2, and all the advantages of the r3 (faster, more detailed, smoother response, better treble extension, etc.)
 
I hope this makes sense and there should no need for anyone to see the TP mod as a threat to their sanity. In any event, I tend to modify headphones that I own, including the HD800 and W1000X. I've also modified almost every car I've owned too, but that is another story.

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

Except you won't tweak your $100,000 car with tissue paper. If the Kirkland tissue paper makes your car faster or improves its handling but you have to stick the tissue paper on the windows will you do that?

Actually, I modified my 1,000kg mid-engined sports car's intake using $5.40 worth of parts from Home Depot.  I've had people ask me what kind of Turbo I installed.  

 

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

If the Kirkland tissue paper makes your car faster or improves its handling but you have to stick the tissue paper on the windows will you do that?

Yes.  I guess that's where we differ.  

  If painting a giant 'L' on my forehead guarantees I'll win every race count me in.