Jerg, so that is the dampening that sits behind the driver (felt and foam). I do notice the HE-500's have next to no damping then, as the driver can easily be seen via the grill.
Quote:
The "wall-of-sound" effect is because LCD2s are heavily damped, unfortunately that damping scheme is also what makes it sound like an Audeze headphone. I can make my HE400s sound quite LCD2-like with similar driver-back damping with foam and felt, without the properly tuned bass response / smooth mids ofc, but as a proof of concept.
In fact a mod that's rising in popularity fast in the HE400 owners thread is to replace the stock Hifiman grills with new ones cut out from more "open" steel mesh, which has a huge positive impact on the separation and openness of sound. Planars are notoriously sensitive to backwaves from anything in the way of the drivers.
OPR; Big orchestral works is not something I listen to often so I cannot comment on how 18 voilins would sound. I wouldn't expect to hear each and every one of the 18 voilins though but I do expect cohesion and clarity of the voilins being played. If one is slower, another is faster, it shouldn't come out as "mush". That's how it sounds to my ears.
Playing the same pieces of work on the K501's sound fantastic. The space, the instruments, it all comes together. The K501's tend to place the listener in the first row (as opposed to being the conductor or the instrument player). I simply adore them for classical and jazz work, they are stunning. They do share more similarities with the HE-500's then they do with the LCD2's in terms of instrument seperation and presentation, where as in terms of vocal presentation, the K501's are very similar to the LCD2's.
LCD2's vocal work is stunning and I cannot give it enough praise.
Quote:
Maybe I'm stating the obvious here, but it seems to me that things like soundstage with the LCD's are largely amp dependent. I don't think just any amp is capable of opening up LCD-2's, or at least that hasn't been the case in my experience.
Also, I've only observed the "wall of sound" phenomemon while listening to large, orchestral classical music. In those cases, what I'm hearing is similar to what I hear when I go to the symphony. I don't expect that I should be able to hear 18 distinct violins when they're all playing at once. I think this has been mentioned before in this thread.
That doesn't mean people shouldn't and/or won't enjoy phones that do deliver a higher level of instrument separation.
preproman: Running the HE-500's off of the ROC SA, I did not find them to sound hot, sharp or sparkly (even when listened to flutes or axel roses voice). Highs were sort of just there. Once I put them on the Auditor, it all changed. The highs became lively, in a different sort of way. The reason for their livelyness is that they became more clear and extended (never like the Grado RS1 extended, that's pure torture). This was a welcomed change to my ears, and really showed me what amp rolling can do for the HE-500's. Needless to say, its become my go-to setup with unprescended clarity and top end.
The bass also improved on the Auditor, with great detail extraction, followed by tightness. Whether it goes lower then the ROC SA, I'd say its on par.
Quote:
Yes I agree - our hearing is definatly different.
IMO the HE-500s can get a little hot / sharp / sparkly or what ever you want to call it > at times up top. The LCD-2.2s never, ever get hop up top - ever.
pp312: The LCD2's ability to extract details is great, its presentation of those details is a desired or not trait. As I stated earlier, the K501's which are praised for their ability to reproduce classical pieces have more in common with the HE500's then they do with the LCD2's when it comes to presenting said pieces. Based on what my ears hear. My own opinion.
Quote:
Good point, and links with what I've been saying about the obsession with detail. You don't hear much detail in a symphony concert (or probably any other kind as well). You mostly hear a homogeneity, a number of instruments blending together, with "detail" as we mean it appearing with the tinkle of a triangle, the clatter of a castanet or xylophone, the crash of a cymbal--but otherwise just a wall of sound, with the sound patterns changing according to the orchestral forces predominating (horns, trombones etc). As you say, this doesn't preclude people preferring a more etched sound where they can pick out detail more easily, but it's not natural, and it's unfair to criticise a phone for not presenting exaggerated detail.
