[stang]

Also, I forgot to mention, I compared the LCD-2 to the LCD-3 using my Buffalo II DAC (balanced with Sabre ES9018 chip) with a Bryston BHA-1 which is essentially beyond the limit of what I can afford for quite some time anyway. So if that didn't impress me compared to the LCD-2, I don't think anything that I can actually afford would. 

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

 
 
+1
 
IMO - No question the LCD-3 is the better headphone.  Just like some may consider the 009s better than the 007s.  This is if you leave cost out.  When you bring cost in the mix things change.  However, the better headphone still remains the better headphone.  
 
I lived with the LCD-3 and the LCD-2.2 at the same time for weeks.  The LCD-2.2 just stop getting the head time.  For me the LCD-3s was better in each and every way I could think of.  Sold the LCD-2.2s with no questions asked.  

Costs should always be left out. Preference is much more important than anything else. And plenty of people find the 007 preferred to the 009. Price > performance > no correlation.
 
When it comes to the LCD-2 and LCD-3 It's hard for me to see how/why some prefer the LCD-2 with the hard treble and more
closed in sound comparatively to the 3's smooth treble and more open sound. But to each their own.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

And plenty of people find the 007 preferred to the 009. Price > performance > no correlation.
 
 

 
I did say "some"  

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

 
I did say "some"  

You also said "However the better headphone still remains the better headphone."

 

[MattTCG]

Quote:

Costs should always be left out. Preference is much more important than anything else. And plenty of people find the 007 preferred to the 009. Price > performance > no correlation.
 
When it comes to the LCD-2 and LCD-3 It's hard for me to see how/why some prefer the LCD-2 with the hard treble and more
closed in sound comparatively to the 3's smooth treble and more open sound. But to each their own.

 
Quote:

 
I did say "some"  

 
 
Oddly, I'm one of those who preferred the 007. For one, I found the 007 more comfortable. Second, I really had a tough time telling them apart sonically. 

 And hey, 007 is the coolest name ever. 

 

[DefQon]

I personally preferred my Omega 1's to the 007 mk1's (underpowered at the time) and the 009 by a long shot. I also would not call the 009 completely neutral as well as there are aspects of sound my less expensive Lambdas do better.

@paradoxper: from what I've read and the measurements I've looked at the first batch of LCD3's were actually ass backedwards with the upper mids and treble compared to the rev.1's at the time. It was until some failure rates kicking in that Audeze decided to do a revisional/incremental patch update to fix things up and also fixing up the sound. Having finally heard the LCD3's I don't see anything special about them especially against my heavily modded rev.1's which no bs blows the stock rev.2's out of the water when paired right. 2 things that Audeze retained with the LCD3'S that I hoped they fixed but didn't:

1. Crappy soundstage.
2. Wall of bass, congestion.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

You also said "However the better headphone still remains the better headphone."

 
 
Yes - which ever is better to you...  Or "some" could also say better = technical performance.  To each is own..

 

[paradoxper]

Quote:

 
 
Yes - which ever is better to you...  Or "some" could also say better = technical performance.  To each is own..

That clears it up. I just misinterpreted your post.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 2 things that Audeze retained with the LCD3'S that I hoped they fixed but didn't:

1. Crappy soundstage.
2. Wall of bass, congestion.

 
They didn't fix?
 
They fixed it compared to the LCD-2s.  But your correct.  They still lack in these areas compared to "some" others..

 

[preproman]

Quote:

That clears it up. I just misinterpreted your post.

 

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

 
They didn't fix?
 
They fixed it compared to the LCD-2s.  But your correct.  They still lack in these areas compared to "some" others..

Well yeah that's the thing they are still lacking compared to other good headphones. I wouldn't exactly say it is fixed compared to the LCD2's I'd say it is masked over giving the impression of a substantial improvement but for myself, I'd probably nail the problem down to just the way the Audeze house sound signature is and being related to this slight problem. If only the LCD's had a bigger bigger soundstage that extends to the back of your head without putting glare and sibilance into the treble and mid range. Mods can you get you near this but not everyone is in a comfortable position of opening/modding $1000-2000 headphones. 

 

[Taliesin]

Has anyone tried the headphone out section on any of these products
Audiolab Mdac
Musical fidelity M1HPAP
Peachtree audio nova 125
I'm thinking about getting one of these for my speaker system but also want to be able to use headphones.
The headphones I'm looking at are either the lcd2 or HD700.

 

[Taliesin]

Has anyone tried the headphone out section on any of these products
Audiolab Mdac
Musical fidelity M1HPAP
Peachtree audio nova 125
I'm thinking about getting one of these for my speaker system but also want to be able to use headphones.
The headphones I'm looking at are either the lcd2 or HD700.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

Well yeah that's the thing they are still lacking compared to other good headphones. I wouldn't exactly say it is fixed compared to the LCD2's I'd say it is masked over giving the impression of a substantial improvement but for myself, I'd probably nail the problem down to just the way the Audeze house sound signature is and being related to this slight problem. If only the LCD's had a bigger bigger soundstage that extends to the back of your head without putting glare and sibilance into the treble and mid range. Mods can you get you near this but not everyone is in a comfortable position of opening/modding $1000-2000 headphones. 

 
I can never understand the saying "giving the impression of improvements" 

 
 
To my ears, the improvements are there and real when compared to the LCD-2.2.  I base this on the amount of time I put into comparing the two when I owned both for weeks. I must say the improvements are more than just an "illusion" for lack of a better word.  I wanted to make sure of this because of the 1K price difference and all.  However, in the grand scheme of things and as you pointed out - they still fall short in a few important areas "to some people" and not so much to others.

 

[DefQon]

Quote:

 
I can never understand the saying "giving the impression of improvements" 

 
However, in the grand scheme of things and as you pointed out - they still fall short in a few important areas "to some people" and not so much to others.

1. Some people want to believe big differences while the difference is there, it is only a small subtle or by a little marginal amount. Placebo, psychoacoustics and bias can all be judged for this matter. Which is why we have controlled ABX and blind testing to put things to the test.
 
2. Precisely.