[takato14]

  Well, the K1000 and Abyss also suck. 

I still have hopes for the K1000 but the abyss definitely does suck
 
I just didn't want to cause a complete ****storm

 

[troymadison]

The K1000 is the only headphone I really care about anymore. The SR-007 and HD800 are great but I think I like even my sextetts more. I think I am AKG all the way.

 

[HarleyZH]

What setup did you hear the Abyss on Takato14? When you listened to them, what stood out the most as weaknesses?

 

[nehcrow]

  What setup did you hear the Abyss on Takato14? When you listened to them, what stood out the most as weaknesses?

Doubt he's heard it

 

[JoeDoe]

In an effort to get this thread back on track, here's my most recent list:

1. SennGrado
2. DT880 Pro
3. D2000
4. ZMF V1
5. MDR 7506
6. HiFlight Modded KSC75

This ranking is totally based on percentages of head-time.

 

[kman1211]

  the Orpheus doesn't deserve to be up there 
 
and the R10 shouldn't be up there because they're all going to be dead very soon
 
but otherwise this

Have you heard the Orpheus and the other headphones mentioned before?

 

[ssrock64]

The only point without a real argument against it was Takato's observation that many R10s are now rotting away and might not be the best choice right now. However, everyone has his or her own tastes in audio and the K1000, Abyss, etc. all have their fans. They're all considered top-tier headphones in the community as a whole. There's no reason to simply reject a certain headphone from the TOTL category because it doesn't fit your sonic preferences.

 

[Hutnicks]

In an effort to get this thread back on track, here's my most recent list:

1. SennGrado
2. DT880 Pro
3. D2000
4. ZMF V1
5. MDR 7506
6. HiFlight Modded KSC75

This ranking is totally based on percentages of head-time.

Now that is a curious turn of events. What makes the GradHeisers outperform the 880pro's ?

 

[JoeDoe]

Now that is a curious turn of events. What makes the GradHeisers outperform the 880pro's ?

Good question. Lemme do some A/Bing and get back. It beats mentioning that the SGs have sentimentality on their side as I basically assembled them from scratch.

 

[Hutnicks]

Good question. Lemme do some A/Bing and get back. It beats mentioning that the SGs have sentimentality on their side as I basically assembled them from scratch.

Hey I think sentimentality has a place in the subjective reviewers arsenal. I have more than one phone I cannot (or will not) qualify beyond "I just like listening to them"
 
I will look forward to the AB comparo though.

 

[Doflamingo]

DT990 (600)
Philips X1
K702
 
My HD600 would be 2nd if they didn't have a driver fail recently. The DT990 is just such a fun sound, but it should be noted I listen at lower volume levels so loudness curves help here. The K702 is only last because I use them less because I usually only use them for acoustic and soundtracks which I listen to a lot less.

 

[Zoom25]

1) Sennheiser HD800
.
.
.
2) Audeze LCD-2 (Classic)
.
3.1) Audeze LCD-3 (Classic)…yes the 2's at #2 and 3's are at #3
3.2) Hifiman HE-500
.
.
4) Denon AH-D2000
5) KRK KNS 8400

 

[ssrock64]

3.1) Audeze LCD-3 (Classic)…yes the 2's at #2 and 3's are at #3

What's your reason for putting the LCD-3 lower than the LCD-2? I have yet to hear a pair of LCD-3s, so I don't know my own opinion of them at this point.

 

[Zoom25]

  What's your reason for putting the LCD-3 lower than the LCD-2? I have yet to hear a pair of LCD-3s, so I don't know my own opinion of them at this point.

LCD-3 is "technically" a better headphone. More transparency, more resolving, best mids heard on a planar (although HD800 beats it for me with ease). The sub bass on the LCD-3 is actually deeper with more body like Denon's. Imaging is better on LCD-3, although the 2's are more than enough. I lived with both for many months.
 
The problem is that I found the LCD-3 to kind of lag with fast paced music. I think the LCD-3 is more suited for slower and medium paced genres. The LCD-3 does vocals well. Although for anything fast paced like electronic over 100 BPM and it doesn't have that slam. The LCD-3 tends to bloom rather than punch. I found LCD-2 to sound just perfect with every genre, with no fatigue and better PRaT. LCD-2 if you listen to everything with all paced music. LCD-3 for that slower/medium paced music.
 
I missed the LCD-2's when I sold them for the LCD-3 as I kept feeling something was not right, despite still sounding audibly better in some regards (FR coherency, black space, treble extension) and more technically equipped. Also, LCD-2 pairs much better with all kinds of rigs at all prices. The LCD-3 on the other hand, I absolutely couldn't get it to sound the best without spending at least $4500 on a Luxman speaker amp. Not even a BHA-1 or Conductor did the trick with the LCD-3 for me. The LCD-2 had less hassles in amp pairings. Of course, price doesn't relate to performance, but with LCD-3s I sincerely couldn't find anything below $3k that sounded right with them.
 
Of course, both were Classic models and not the new Fazor models.

 

[MacedonianHero]

  LCD-3 is "technically" a better headphone. More transparency, more resolving, best mids heard on a planar (although HD800 beats it for me with ease). The sub bass on the LCD-3 is actually deeper with more body like Denon's. Imaging is better on LCD-3, although the 2's are more than enough. I lived with both for many months.
 
The problem is that I found the LCD-3 to kind of lag with fast paced music. I think the LCD-3 is more suited for slower and medium paced genres. The LCD-3 does vocals well. Although for anything fast paced like electronic over 100 BPM and it doesn't have that slam. The LCD-3 tends to bloom rather than punch. I found LCD-2 to sound just perfect with every genre, with no fatigue and better PRaT. LCD-2 if you listen to everything with all paced music. LCD-3 for that slower/medium paced music.
 
I missed the LCD-2's when I sold them for the LCD-3 as I kept feeling something was not right, despite still sounding audibly better in some regards (FR coherency, black space, treble extension) and more technically equipped. Also, LCD-2 pairs much better with all kinds of rigs at all prices. The LCD-3 on the other hand, I absolutely couldn't get it to sound the best without spending at least $4500 on a Luxman speaker amp. Not even a BHA-1 or Conductor did the trick with the LCD-3 for me. The LCD-2 had less hassles in amp pairings. Of course, price doesn't relate to performance, but with LCD-3s I sincerely couldn't find anything below $3k that sounded right with them.
 
Of course, both were Classic models and not the new Fazor models.

That lag you speak of is vastly improved with better amping in my experience. They (LCD-3s) are very quick (and quicker than the LCD-2s) when you have an amp with 2 W minimum into 50 ohms. The advantage of the LCD-2s is that they still sound great with lesser upfront gear.