jibzilla
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2013
- Posts
- 1,475
- Likes
- 161
-
(By the way, in case you're confused by the company name as it's pronounced in the video, it's supposed to be pronounced AWW-diz-zee.)
If it helps, I have the XC and the 3.And its the XC I use in the office with a tube amp. Ummmmm..........
I'm thinking of buying a used pair of MG12 or a new pair of MMG. I'm not sure how well it will work with my setup though. I'm using my Touch 5G as a DAC and preamp (equally as good, if not slightly better than my Dragonfly), Emotiva UPA-200 as power amp (200 W/channel into 4 ohms), and Energy ESW-C8 as a subwoofer.I bought a set of maggies and I thought I was getting away with murder for the price, until I started with the amp and the room treatment, etc.
I'm thinking of buying a used pair of MG12 or a new pair of MMG. I'm not sure how well it will work with my setup though. I'm using my Touch 5G as a DAC and preamp (equally as good, if not slightly better than my Dragonfly), Emotiva UPA-200 as power amp (200 W/channel into 4 ohms), and Energy ESW-C8 as a subwoofer.
Could you please let me know whether you think I should bother with such high end speakers on my setup? I'm concerned that my setup isn't up to par.
Yeah good point. Sorry for thread jacking guys . I'll look around speaker forums and see what others have to say .I think we're already hijacking this thread. You might want to start up something in the sound science area. There are going to be people with much more experience than I have to answer that question.
I would not start with diffusers. If your room is small, you may not want to scatter that energy as much as absorb some of it. I'd start with the early reflections. This is a seriously big topic, though.
Everyone always compares high-end headphones to speakers in the tens of thousands. I think people are afraid to admit that there are limitations with headphones that speakers overcome. With tens of thousands of dollars I would buy an acoustically perfect room and pick equipment carefully.
I think the turning point for speakers becoming better than headphones is when you get into high end dynamic, or low end planar/electrostatic speakers. In terms of presence and imaging headphones can't compare even a little bit. Mind you, it takes more money to get detail out of speakers... but with tens of thousands of dollars you can truly get whatever you want in speakers. But headphones even high end planars such as Audeze will always have limits.
Yeah I was just hoping Alex would not be like everyone else. I also think his 25-40x more preferable opinion is way too liberal. I will go 10-20x but that's about it and like I said before lots of different variables makes it not a good comparison to begin with even if everyone else is making the comparison.
Interesting... I don't recall seeing a designation (e.g. LCD-2F, or 3F) to indicate the Fazor versions on the Audeze website. Would be good to be able to confirm which model is which. perhaps this is indicated on the headphones themselves. otherwise, how do you know which model you are listening to when you try them in a store ?
I think your being a little hard on him. He had like 15-20 seconds to justify a beats loving mass audience to pay over a thousand for a set of headphones. Also while I agree comparing a set of headphones to speakers is awkward because of inherent differences. It's not unreasonable to have a preference for one or the other. After all they both have the same goal of accurate sound reproduction and audeze competes w/ high end speakers for a fraction of the price.
HI Mike, hmm... thought Fazor was new in the LCD-XC and X. Didn't know it was used in the LCD-2. Is this a recent upgrade?
also, congrats on the gear listed in your post (.. Macintosh, Cavalli, Audeze .. well done!)