[thefitz]

  The same thing happens with Schiit gear. There are a couple of guys that won't even pay attention to people that own Schiit gear as they believe they have heard the true, enlightened sound of whatever DAC they own and because Schiit is even a little bit subjective in their production they must be idiots. Elitism indeed.
 
I don't know why people feel the need to categorize people based on the gear they own, it's like music preferences don't even exist to some of these guys, probably because they only listen to the same 10 albums over and over again, trying to hear what Diana Krall's voice does as the humidity in their room changes.

Heh. I might start trolling a little bit, giving a percentage increase to how much more or less "holographic" the sound is during gear changes. "These new pads made the sound about 14% more holographic.
 
Anyway, I'm going to use the EL-8 balanced through Pono, and the LCD-2.2 through my amp. Can't wait!!

 

[meringo]

  All of the wood options are purely aesthetic. The wood does not contact the inside of the cup at any point. It is purely on the outside of the headphone as an aesthetic piece.
 
This question comes up all the time.

Thanks for the quick answer. So there is no news of any other changes? I didn't mean that in the sense of a new wood option, but more of is this new finish a sign of another incremental upgrade. It doesn't appear to be. 

 

[sludgeogre]

  Thanks for the quick answer. So there is no news of any other changes? I didn't mean that in the sense of a new wood option, but more of is this new finish a sign of another incremental upgrade. It doesn't appear to be. 

They never publicize what changes they make between versions. The only way you can tell is if any of the specs change, but then you don't even know why. Some people have called Audeze to ask, but they list a couple of things and not anything really specific, so who knows.
 
All I know is that I have preferred their sound changes over time and I think they are absolutely improving over time.

 

[Monsterzero]

  I don't know why people feel the need to categorize people based on the gear they own, it's like music preferences don't even exist to some of these guys, probably because they only listen to the same 10 albums over and over again, trying to hear what Diana Krall's voice does as the humidity in their room changes.

Funny stuff bro,very true too

 

[ravid350]

  I just ordered the new shedua finish LCD-2. Does anyone know if this new model is strictly aesthetic change? I kind of ordered blindly, without doing much research. I've just wanted an Audeze for some time and caught a deal. 

 
 

  Thanks for the quick answer. So there is no news of any other changes? I didn't mean that in the sense of a new wood option, but more of is this new finish a sign of another incremental upgrade. It doesn't appear to be. 

 
From what I read here on the forum all LCD2's manufactured post Nov 15 received the driver upgrades.
 
Audeze offered shedua cups for a short period of time when they ran out of bamboo cups in the past. Adorama seems to have aluminium cups on offer. Seems these cups offerings are purely based on availability of bamboo cups.

 

[PinkyPowers]

My Audeze is considered one of the worst of the bunch, LCD-2.2 Fazor from Nov 2014, and to my ears, it's simply breathtaking. I don't think they make anything other than exquisite products.

 

[ph58]

I have no complain with mine from December 2015 , i don't know it is 2.2 or 2.3 Fazor .

 

[jodgey4]

A lot of the bad reputation for the EL-8 comes from the first batches that were sent out, I'm told the newer EL-8's are much much better. The Sine is apparently kick-butt too... I'd love to see some of the latest Fazor graphs put up. Unless there was a driver change, I don't think these would be "2.3"s - there's been constant revision. But it's still the same driver as the 2.2.

 

[Ampeezy]

  I've got a current LCD-2F 2016 with the improved bass extension. I think if you own the HE-500 then there's no point getting the newer LCD-2 because it leans towards treble. The treble is quite rough, harsh and it's more obvious due to the elevation. The 2.1 and 2.2 also had a rough treble but because it was lower in level it didn't stand out as much. I think in terms of balance the 2.1 is the best model as the rest bring up the treble the leaves those lacking upper mids even more noticeable recessed.
 
The current LCD-2 is a good headphone but I feel the fazor is more of a downgrade in resolution to the older LCD-2's and it is also apparent in the LCD-3F. Comparing the current LCD-2F to my trusty HD650 I feel the 650 has better resolution and micro detail, better balance and a smoother response. I feel the HD650 has bass issues due to it's open design and technology so I love the LCD-2 for that. I feel that my HD650 is superior to all the Audeze's I've tried overall. 
 
I do love the 2.1 though I think it was the most resolving Audeze LCD-2 along with the 2.2. I think if you can get ahold of the older models it would be worth trying but the HE-500 is a fantastic headphone and even found it a near side grade to my trusty HD650 that's how good the HE-500 is but it has a bit of an unnatural treble. 

Treble rough and harsh? damn I might say that for the older fazor models but my 2016 revision i just awesome with treble...very well extended with no obvious roughness, unless of course the song itself is badly mastered which are few and far between imo. Resolution on my pair is stellar, and i have heard my friend's HD650 so i honestly dont know what you're talking about. You must have a special set of ears really, otherwise you need to send your pair in for replacement.

 

[meringo]

The roughness is pretty obvious I'm not sure what to tell you if you can't hear it. I've always found the 650 to be superior to the Audeze headphones unless it's on entry level gear.

Welcome to headfi. Congrats on your 9th post!

I don't know if that's so clear cut.. When I test drove in store, I didn't see them being noticeably inferior in any way.

 

[DavidA]

The roughness is pretty obvious I'm not sure what to tell you if you can't hear it. I've always found the 650 to be superior to the Audeze headphones unless it's on entry level gear.

I don't perceive any roughened in the highs of my LCD-2, to me its smoother than my HD-650's.  Can you give an example of song that will show the roughness?  If might just be what I listen to that could be masking the roughness.

 

[marcan]

Yes LCD2 is not really legendary for his roughness but rather for is smoothness.
So maybe it comes from source/dac/amp. Do you have enough power? It might make it anemic.

 

[Ampeezy]

right

 

[sludgeogre]

  Every single song I've heard that has treble presence has treble roughness with the LCD's, it emphasises the treble in the newest editions so it's more prominent.

 
This just isn't true at all. Look at the FR graphs and really listen, the treble is recessed compared to many headphones in this price class. If we were talking about the LCD-3 or 4 there is a bunch of talk about peakyness in the 6-10 kHz range, but the LCD-2 doesn't show this at all, and I certainly don't hear it at all.
 
The LCD-2 is the smoothest headphone I've ever heard. You want to talk about harsh treble, compare the LCD-2 to a Grado. I own a 325is and there is a night and day difference between them. The Grado has some bitey attack and tone, but it really can be harsh as hell and will bother my tinnitus after a while. I've never, ever had that issue with my LCD-2. If there was roughness in the treble, my head would hurt.
 
Look at Tyll's measurements for comparison. Treble is down below the bass and mids throughout the FR. This is what I hear as well. There is a raise at the 6-10 kHz range, but it doesn't come above the mids at all.
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2.pdf

 

[sludgeogre]

  You are looking at graphs wrong. Firstly having a treble that is below the bass and mids doesn't account for treble roughness. Measurements also don't tell the whole story especially with treble..look at an HD800 graph and it will show a lower or equal treble to the mid range..but anyone who has mixed with an 800 will know it's treble is elevated above the rest of the response.  Also like I said in the studio with tracks that I've mixed with the current LCD-2 and LCD-3  shows elevated treble and I've mixed these tracks myself. Without sounding rude,  I don't know how good your ears are...I can tell you I've met a lot of people who can't even tell the difference between a rough treble or a smooth one.
 
I can confirm that the current LCD-2 has a boosted treble that is on the rough side. A lot of graphs show the spikes and rough areas but I confirm if everyone will hear it. Everyone I've met so far has agreed the fazor models are boosted in the highs and recessed in the upper mid range. 

I was just using the graph as a point of reference for what I am hearing. I understand that the graph must be taken with a grain of salt and can only be compared to other measurements by Tyll. The rough areas also depend on what smoothing and compensation they used, as well as the microphone and measurement head. Obviously the LCD-2 FR graphs that come from Audeze are absurdly smoothed, so much so that I didn't even care to get one from them.
 
If you go back through this forum you won't find a lot of people calling the LCD-2 rough in the treble. It is a very perplexing stance to me.