[annar]

 

Well. if it's any consequence have also tried Audio Technica M50x and it's still crappy.
Retards Anna

 

[dsound]

  Well. if it's any consequence have also tried Audio Technica M50x and it's still crappy.
Regards Anna

FTFY 

 

[madwolfa]

  Could someone do me a favour and listen to Rihanna - Take A Bow

 
No.

 

[annar]

  FTFY 

Sorry, not familiar with this one- please elaborate

 

[madwolfa]

  I'm very concered with the 10khz peak that the lcd-2's have with fazer. I'm afraid it will be fatiguing, bright and a lot of sibilance. The 90% of the music I'm listening to i badly mastered and I'm thinking about buying the hd650 instead..

 
LCD-2 is no less forgiving than HD650. I'm enjoying poorly mastered music much more on LCD-2 than I did with HD650.

 

[madwolfa]

  Sorry, not familiar with this one- please elaborate

 
*giggles*
 
Retards.

 

[annar]

   
*giggles*
 
Retards.

REALLY??
Oh, who's a "retard "?

 

[madwolfa]

  REALLY??
Oh, who's a "retard "?

 
Dunno, you tell us. 

 

 

[annar]

   
No.

Come on, don't be like the guys on an Australian stereo site which will go un-named, dumped them as they were damn rude about my taste in music , 
Anna

 

[annar]

  FTFY 

 

   
Dunno, you tell us. 

 

Oh, damn-----SORRY !

 

[madwolfa]

  Oh, damn-----SORRY !

 
It's OK. 

 

[Ekul61]

Yup, selling them. Not a big fan of the spiky treble, I also much prefer the all day comfort I get with a worn in HD650. Very comfy and lots of room for the ears.

how abou he-400i. They sound good

 

[muad]

how abou he-400i. They sound good

 
I haven't tried them. They sound like something I would like but it seems the general consensus is the soundstage is lacking.
 
EDIT: I should add although I find the HD650 more forgiving than the LCD2F, the LCD2F is still more forgiving than many other audiphile headphones. Certainly more than the HE500, K712, Q701. I am very sensitive to high frequencies and no level of sibilance is acceptable to me. That is why I prefer the HD650. If I were the average person however, the LCD2F would be the superior headphone (except in comfort, soundstage, acoustic music)

 

[commtrd]

So there is really someone who would trade off a perfectly good headphone because of listening only to poorly mastered crappy music? Isn't the objective to have gear that can reproduce accurately by re-creating the music extracting the detail the way it was recorded [mastered]? Why not just go to Walmart and pick up a set of Logitech headphones for 38 bucks and plug it into your iphone? Or better yet just get some crappy earbuds for $10 and plug those into the phone and voila! there you have it... The perfect match for crappy unlistenable junk.
 
Not saying Rihanna or anyone else is not worth listening to at all; rather that if a recording is KNOWN to be sub-par quality then MAYBE shouldn't waste time and money on it?!? The whole conversation is ludicrous. Flame away. 
 
BTW when I had my LCD2r2 they were ANYTHING BUT SIBILANT. The main reason I traded those for the LCD3s was the lack of treble and what I considered inadequate sound staging. But they defintely had massive slam in the bass. Now I have the X and they are completely awesome. Lovin' these cans for sure. But I avoid crappy sounding recordings like the plague. Prolly going to buy the LCD3f someday but thats after I get my Ragnarok and then the Yggdrasil to finish the upstream first. And I won't be selling my gear because I like to listen to poorly recorded music.  

 

[madwolfa]

 Every studio uses different monitoring equipment. For all you know the were mixed using a pair of beats. That would make beats more accrate.

 
Every professional studio has to calibrate the monitoring equipment to a certain standard (flat FR). So on the neutral playback system it should sound as intended.
 
I don't experience sibilance with LCD-2F, neither I did with HD650, but LCD-2F is a better headphone overall, hence I've sold my Sennheisers.
 
To each his own.