[GrowthValue]

LugBug, I cannot agree with you more on your input here. 
 
Quote:

 
I think for peeps who love going to concerts and the thrill i gives, no hifi experience can recreate this. Headphones for e.g will give you a brilliant window onto the music to study more closely, but this is unrealistic in the sense that all the great symphonies/operas were written for a concert hall in mind. With no microphones, only room acoustic. If Beethoven could have used studio's and placed mic's would he have wrote in the same manner that he did, with massive layers of strings and timpani? Recording studios can do what they like to change/manipulate the sound to emphasize certain aspects or dull others but in the concert hall you get the orchestra in front of you (if you have good seat) warts n'all and the cellos come from where the cello's are and the soprano sounds where she is on stage. And when the crescendo builds with the orchestra in full swing, you feel the vibrations through your whole body and feel the music like you are part of it. It's real and tangible.
Oh well, back to my LCD2's ....

 

[GrowthValue]

I really love your analogies. When I see many posts here, I start to realize there are many guys listening to the tech side of musics rather than the music side of musics.
 
Quote:

??????????????????????????????????????????????.........REEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeally?  Did you say that listening to your headphones is better than a live show?  That's like saying that looking at a Van Gogh through a calibrated monitor is better than seeing it in person with your own eyes.  That's like saying virtual sex is better than the feeling of.... uh....You need to get out, bro. 

 

[GrowthValue]

Excellent point! I can see you understand music very well.
Quote:

 
Just my two cents here,
but at the end of the day, even a symphony orchestra is putting on a show.
IMHO, the point of that particular show is for the audience to hear the performance as best they can.
The performance is not for the musicians or the conductor, it is for the audience.
Which is what I think Aidee is alluding to.
And if the musicians and the conductor are enjoying the show and the audience is not, then the musicians and conductor are not projecting the essence of the performance.
Anything else borders on self indulgence.
 
Unfortunately, the musicians and conductor are also at the mercy of the venue.
So if the acoustics of the hall are "not so good", then the show suffers accordingly.
 
So what is a proper perspective for an orchestral performance?
There are two "proper" perspectives:
in a live performance - the audience
for a recording - the perspective of the microphones, i.e. the perspective which is optimum for the placement of the microphones, and since the microphone is not a perfect analog of the human ear, the optimum place for microphone placement will not be the physical perspective of the audience.
Pull the microphones too far back and the sound becomes too reverberant. Too close and it gets too dry.
 
In a rock or pop concert, the musicians perspective cannot be trusted or employed.
For example, from the perspective of the drummer the show sounds like (1) a drumset and (2) a monitor which is probably dominated by bass guitar, rhythm guitar and vocals and (3) any remaining ambient sound/noise.

 

[Chris J]

Quote:

When I saw you said "concert halls are typically poor places for listening to music", I know we belong to two totally different hi-fi group. For me, listening to music means listen to real life experience. I want to listen to music in a way that Beethoven wants his audience to hear. Many violin concertos have violin solo with extremely high frequency. The reason is the composers know the walls of concert hall will roll off the high frequency significantly. If you tell a composer to write something just for head-fi, I bet he will no longer use frequency as high.
 
Anyway, I agree there are many head-fiers like you who just love the unreal music experience. That's nothing wrong with it. However, as a joke, there are also many folks who will trade their very hi end music gears with you if you can provide unlimited concert tickets to them. 

 
Quote:

[size=10pt]Unfortunately, you miss a big point of classical music even though you have played in orchestras before. Classical music composers in 18th century have no idea about several hundred years later many people will just use their headphones to listen to their musics. As a result, those composers composed music that will be listened in concert halls, i.e. the music played in concert hall is the music that the composers want audience to hear. To do so, composers would write violins solos with significantly higher notes in order to let the concert hall walls roll off them.  [/size]
[size=10pt] [/size]
[size=10pt]Overall, I regret that as a former orchestra player you prefer technical side of the sound to the real feeling of the music. Also, when I saw you said "Listening at home conveys more accuracy than buying expensive tickets to see any orchestra, regardless of how talented it is", I suspect your short orchestra playing experience may be an unpleasant one, which makes you do not want to ever be present in a concert hall again. I can accept that many people prefer the hi-fi sound to the live concert, but downplaying the talent of an orchestra will not come from a real classical music fan. [/size]

 
Very well said.

 

[Chris J]

Quote:

Excellent point! I can see you understand music very well.

 
Thank you.
And so do you!

 

[JamesHuntington]

I don't think you can generalize what all composers wanted, I mean some probably wanted to get beyond the instrument and give the listener a feeling of something unnatural and futuristic. Maybe the point is to transport the listener to something beyond hearing, seeing and feeling. I still think a mastered recording has less flaws because it is a fixed entity and can be situated in such a way as to heighten the experience over a live performance. And how do we know how the original composer wanted the concert hall to look? The technology of making concert halls is a many times better than in the 1700's. The halls are bigger and hold more people than they did in the 1700's. They didn't have recording technology in the 1700's. The instruments were made differently in the 1700's. Were assuming a lot about the 18th century. If I was a composer I'd play to certain people in the audience and would know where they were, usually sitting in the box seats. Because the king might have been up there and if he had a bad experience then it might have been off with the composer's head. I feel like the best recorded music is mastered by classical music experts in order to give everyone the same perspective; and, are designed to be historically correct as far as what is believed to be the proper sound.      

 

[bsmith]

Looking for a solid state amp, <$1000, ideally <$750.  Per reading this thread, it appears the v200, soloist, ha-160, and mjolnir are the options that come to mind.  Difference between soloist and ha-160?  Same price.  Was also looking at the emotiva mini but per another thread here on headfi it appears to produce a noticeable buzz, which is a shame given its price and power output (assumed linear) at ~60 ohms.  Does anyone have suggestions for solid state amps that deliver adequate power (2W?) for less than $750?  Balanced would be a plus, but is not a necessity.
 
On a note about tube amps; was looking at the Lyr given its price, however the idea of quality tube prices continually rising is a bit off putting.
 
Thanks.
 
(All prices $ USD.)
 
 
Edit:  Per some more reading, it appears the LP G109 falls within my desired range, leaving me with room to spare.

 

[JamesHuntington]

Quote:

Looking for a solid state amp, <$1000, ideally <$750.  Per reading this thread, it appears the v200, soloist, ha-160, and mjolnir are the options that come to mind.  Difference between soloist and ha-160?  Same price.  Was also looking at the emotiva mini but per another thread here on headfi it appears to produce a noticeable buzz, which is a shame given its price and power output (assumed linear) at ~60 ohms.  Does anyone have suggestions for solid state amps that deliver adequate power (2W?) for less than $750?  Balanced would be a plus, but is not a necessity.
 
On a note about tube amps; was looking at the Lyr given its price, however the idea of quality tube prices continually rising is a bit off putting.
 
Thanks.
 
(All prices $ USD.)
 
 
Edit:  Per some more reading, it appears the LP G109 falls within my desired range, leaving me with room to spare.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Little-Dot-MK-VI-MK6-Balanced-Headphone-Amplifier-Pre-Amplifier-/170928324041?pt=US_Home_Audio_Amplifiers_Preamps&hash=item27cc1f3dc9
 

I know, but it is 5W per channel at 120ohm. Don't people like these little dot thingies? They say it's the flag ship at little dot.
 
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Little-Dot-MK-IV-4-SE-Headphone-Tube-Amplifier-Pre-Amp-/190785961717?pt=US_Home_Audio_Amplifiers_Preamps&hash=item2c6bbabef5
 
Hey, I'm a eBaybe. The #29 ranked desktop amp is the MKIII, so this one cant be bad.

 

[Barry S]

Quote:

Looking for a solid state amp, <$1000, ideally <$750.  Per reading this thread, it appears the v200, soloist, ha-160, and mjolnir are the options that come to mind.  Difference between soloist and ha-160?  Same price.  Was also looking at the emotiva mini but per another thread here on headfi it appears to produce a noticeable buzz, which is a shame given its price and power output (assumed linear) at ~60 ohms.  Does anyone have suggestions for solid state amps that deliver adequate power (2W?) for less than $750?  Balanced would be a plus, but is not a necessity.
 
On a note about tube amps; was looking at the Lyr given its price, however the idea of quality tube prices continually rising is a bit off putting.
 
Thanks.
 
(All prices $ USD.)
 
 
Edit:  Per some more reading, it appears the LP G109 falls within my desired range, leaving me with room to spare.

Welcome to head-fi and sorry for your wallet. Have you already got your LCD-2s and do you have an amp currently?  I ask because the LCD-2 signature can be shaped by your choice of amp.  The Lyr accentuates the warm and dark character of the LCD-2, while the Mjolnir pushes the upper-mids and highs forward, improves detail, and cranks up the dynamics of the LCD-2. 
 
I think the Soloist delivers more power than the HA-160.  I haven't heard the Soloist, but it sounds like a nice fairly neutral amp that can do a good job driving the LCDs.  For $750, the Mjolnir is probably a little brighter and is balanced--although it's hard to say if that makes any real difference by itself. I've only listened to the LCD-2 through the Lyr and Mjolnir from the following choices, but my impression from reviews is they roughly break as follows.  I threw in the BHA, since you can find a used one for $1K and it has a good rep--particularly if you want something on the agressive/bright side.
 
Warmer:  Lyr   V200   Soloist   Mjolnir   BHA-1 :Brighter

 

[wizia]

The warm/bright difference has a mayor relevance regarding the type of music you listen to or is it more of a personal taste?

 

[Barry S]

The warm/bright difference has a mayor relevance regarding the type of music you listen to or is it more of a personal taste?

A bit of both. For instance, orchestral music tends to sound more resolved and natural with a brighter headphone/amp combination. Ultimately, it's personal preference.

 

[wizia]

Okey, so maybe electronic, pop and rock benefit of a more warmer sound?

 

[Barry S]

Okey, so maybe electronic, pop and rock benefit of a more warmer sound?

There's probably an even split for those genres. No amp is going to turn the LCD-2 into a bright headphone like the HD800, but some people are very sensitive to treble energy--so it's best to audition some gear if possible.

 

[wewso]

OK, been reading about what amp I should get with my LCD2 and I currently feel like I'm playing chess with my wallet. Its a bit of a tough one really... my budget for the amp is $200 and that's already 100% up from the original budget. I do realize how much of a difference a proper amp can make to the sound of the LCDs but that doesn't change the fact that I simply can't afford it. That said I'm looking for an amp that will squeeze as much sonic juice out of my cans without going above my price limit. I work as a producer, making bass-heavy music so heavily rely on my monitoring system for my mixes. That means I'm aiming to get a balanced and dynamic sound with clear transients and minimal spectral distortion. Luckily I have a fairly decent audio interface so at least I don't have to worry about DAC.
I know it sounds like I'm trying to do the impossible here but I really am in a tough situation money-wise. 
I'm currently looking at Hifiman EF2A,O2, VCan, Little Dot, ect but I can't judge the sound without hearing them. Really hope you can help me with this as I'm pretty badly versed in amps. 
 
Thanks. 

 

[adydula]

wewso...
 
The O2 works wonderfully with the LCD2's...I have both, actually I have (2) o2 amps...!!
 
You can buy a working board for $99. or buy it in a nice box for a bit more at JDSlabs.com
 
 
Excellent product, excellent customer support...
 
All the best
Alex