[purrin]

 
Quote:

When people are making comparisons of the 2s and 3s, are they listening on their own equipment with a familiar sound signature and familiar music selections or is it random equipment that they are not familiar with?  If it is the latter then the think the impressions are somewhat tainted because it becomes far from a controlled experiment.  Just my opinion, of course.

It's my preference to use completely random equipment that I'm not familiar with at all.

 

[visualguy]

Quote:

Jude and Skylab must had the LCD-5
 

Or maybe hand-picked LCD-3...
 

 

[purrin]

Quote:

Jude and Skylab must had the LCD-5
 

LMAO!
 

 

[TheWuss]

by my calculations, LCD-5 will cost $8141. 

(at 2.05x increase with each successive model).  

 

[wink]

It seems by all accounts that Audeze does not have the quality control and driver matching of other companies.
 
There seems to be too much variation in different phones and even in different drivers on the same phone....
 
It's not like the AKG K1000 which changed over time with manufacturing equipment wear and tear, and changes in material used changing the quality of the output.

 

[mwilson]

That's why I rotate gear on a regular basis. At the slightest hint I'm about to become familiar, out it goes and new comes in

 
Quote:

 

It's my preference to use completely random equipment that I'm not familiar with at all.

 

 

[M-13]

LOL, let me know when you want to rotate your Cantata out; I have a disposal facility located in Seattle, WA that I can refer you to...

 
Quote:

That's why I rotate gear on a regular basis. At the slightest hint I'm about to become familiar, out it goes and new comes in

 


 

 

 

[Skylab]

Just so people don't start allowing this sort of thing to get blown out of proportion, while I said in my review that the LCD-3 were a "big improvement" over the LCD-2, and I remain convinced that this is the case in at least the way I hear it, I never said this was in any way revolutionary, or anything of the sort.  The context, which I made very clear in my review, is that I already felt the LCD-2 were one of the best headphones out there, in terms of sonics (as opposed to comfort).  I have had them for a long time ranked just a little below the Sony MDR-10 in the list of headphones I own.  The LCD-3 is enough better for me that I prefer it, taken as a whole, over the R-10.  But that does not make it's improvements over the LCD-2 "revolutionary".  For me, the differences are very plainly audible. and sonically meaningful. 
 
When we get to the rarefied air of the high end, however, such differences don't immediately impress.  They come out over long listening sessions.  They are details, and nuance.  They are not "OMG the bass!" type of things.  So the comments I have been reading from people so far seem right in line with what I would expect.

 

[WarriorAnt]

Skylab, just out of curiosity I'm wondering how many LCD-3's are in production.  Since you have one of the first what serial number do you have?  I'm thinking Audeze started at 600 and went from there.

 

[cAsE sEnSiTiVe]

Quote:

Just so people don't start allowing this sort of thing to get blown out of proportion, while I said in my review that the LCD-3 were a "big improvement" over the LCD-2, and I remain convinced that this is the case in at least the way I hear it, I never said this was in any way revolutionary, or anything of the sort.  The context, which I made very clear in my review, is that I already felt the LCD-2 were one of the best headphones out there, in terms of sonics (as opposed to comfort).  I have had them for a long time ranked just a little below the Sony MDR-10 in the list of headphones I own.  The LCD-3 is enough better for me that I prefer it, taken as a whole, over the R-10.  But that does not make it's improvements over the LCD-2 "revolutionary".  For me, the differences are very plainly audible. and sonically meaningful. 
 
When we get to the rarefied air of the high end, however, such differences don't immediately impress.  They come out over long listening sessions.  They are details, and nuance.  They are not "OMG the bass!" type of things.  So the comments I have been reading from people so far seem right in line with what I would expect.

Rob,
 
In your review of the LCD-3's, were you making direct comparisons between them and both the LCD-2 rev 1's (which I know you own), and the LCD-2 rev 2's? It's been awhile since I read the review, but I don't recall you making the distinction. I have never listened to the rev 1's, but from what I have read they are of a slightly different "flavor" from the later revision.  
 
Thanks,
Bob

 

[M-13]

I ordered a LCD-2 Rev.2, after the annoucement of the LCD-3s and even after Skylab's review and I was order number #594. My guess is that Auduz'e is just counting orders without distinguishing between 2 and 3. Of course this is just pure conjecture.
 
I completed 200 hours of burn in and oiled up the wood today... very nice. Love the darker, smoother look. She's ready to go. Very pleased with the sound so far.

 

[visualguy]

Skylab - There was a significant improvement in sound between the LCD-2r1 and the LCD-2r2, but I don't hear a significant further improvement with the LCD-3.
 
By the way, I don't agree that the differences in the high-end don't immediately impress. Take the leap made by Stax from the SR-007 to the SR-009 as an example. The SR-009 aren't perfect, but they improve pretty radically on the SR-007 in many ways, and you hear it right away.
 

 

[Skylab]

Quote:

Skylab, just out of curiosity I'm wondering how many LCD-3's are in production.  Since you have one of the first what serial number do you have?  I'm thinking Audeze started at 600 and went from there.

I'm in Tokyo at the moment so it will be a while before I can answer with my S/N, sorry.


Quote:

Rob,
 
In your review of the LCD-3's, were you making direct comparisons between them and both the LCD-2 rev 1's (which I know you own), and the LCD-2 rev 2's? It's been awhile since I read the review, but I don't recall you making the distinction. I have never listened to the rev 1's, but from what I have read they are of a slightly different "flavor" from the later revision.  
 
Thanks,
Bob

 
I have never heard a pair of LCD-2 R2.  All my review comments on the LCD-2 refer to R1.


Quote:

Skylab - There was a significant improvement in sound between the LCD-2r1 and the LCD-2r2, but I don't hear a significant further improvement with the LCD-3.
 
By the way, I don't agree that the differences in the high-end don't immediately impress. Take the leap made by Stax from the SR-007 to the SR-009 as an example. The SR-009 aren't perfect, but they improve pretty radically on the SR-007 in many ways, and you hear it right away.
 

Well I have, as above, never heard R2, so for me the comparison was LCD-2 R1 to LCD-3.
 
And I still believe that many of the things that are important in performance require some time to appreciate.  But anyway, JMO, YMMV, etc etc.
 

 

[visualguy]

Quote:

Well I have, as above, never heard R2, so for me the comparison was LCD-2 R1 to LCD-3.
 
 

I would agree with your impressions in that case, but I think the more interesting comparison is LCD-2 rev. 2 to LCD-3 where I find the differences to be minute at best other than the fact that my LCD-3 are slightly darker.
 

 

[cifani090]

Quote:

Skylab, just out of curiosity I'm wondering how many LCD-3's are in production.  Since you have one of the first what serial number do you have?  I'm thinking Audeze started at 600 and went from there.

I can answer this, as far as i know, their were an initial 5 prototypes with Jude, Skylab, i think Steve Guttenberg (cant confirm this), and the other's must be owners in Japan/China as they were at the Audio shows over there. There is a S/N of 000 (im not sure how many zero's

) and its Sankar's at Audeze.