[Shazb0t]

OMG, I've found the thread, you guys do exist!  I have the HE-500 but like to go on over to the LCD's but the consensus at least in this thread likes the 500.  Just wondering for those of you who have the 500, does the microphonics bother you at all?  It just bugs me so much when I move my head.

What am I giving up on the 500 if I move over to the lcd's?  I can only imagine the upper end but will gain that sub bass and upper bass quantity and quality.  Can you all confirm that for me because I have been going out of my mine trying to decide to go for it or not.  Most of the music I listen to is acoustic guitar and vocals i.e. Diana Krall and Pat Metheny.

Should I even bother for the move and spend an additional $300 +  (I have a buyer for my 500 already!)?  I am only imagining more liquid warmth with full body in the vocal range more so than the 500 with the lcd2.2's. Yes?

Jeez, curiosity will always get us...

If you end up with the LCD 2.2 let us know what you think comparatively.

 

[knights]

Quote:

Don't agree with you on the he-500..

It does not have a deeper sound stage. It does not have tighter bass either.

 
We just had our monthly local meet here; im very certain with my findings.
about the bass; you wont notice this on most tracks or genre; try these two "Body Thrill" by Mike Francis and "Visions of Nasca" by Astral Projection (Raja Ram)… 

 

[davidsh]

Quote:

 
We just had our monthly local meet here; im very certain with my findings.
about the bass; you wont notice this on most tracks or genre; try these two "Body Thrill" by Mike Francis and "Visions of Nasca" by Astral Projection (Raja Ram)… 

Just can't agree on the sound stage. The bass is kinda relative, though. I do find the lcd bass to be more liquid and more 'black', but I'd say it is at least as tight and tactile despite being more liquid. The HE-500 bass is like a bit more wooly and perhaps seem a bit more textured too.