[fabriciom]

The first one that where out. I do not remember if they had L + R on the grills. I believe I bought them in 2010.

 

[axtran]

Interesting that your experience probably is what people are referring to when they don't like newer pairs

Perhaps dissent is coming from the bassheads?

 

[Lohb]

Interesting that your experience probably is what people are referring to when they don't like newer pairs

Perhaps dissent is coming from the bassheads?

The original tuning is what launched the company. It was a unique deep and non-fatiguing sound.

 

[fabriciom]

 
The original tuning is what launched the company. It was a unique deep and non-fatiguing sound.

The sound is still deep and luscious. Its just not as dark, sound is more defined and levelled (high, mids, and lows), its more true.
 
If you want the older sound just use the EQ on the lows. Pro • Q 2

 

[MRC001]

  The sound is still deep and luscious. Its just not as dark, sound is more defined and levelled (high, mids, and lows), its more true.
 
If you want the older sound just use the EQ on the lows. Pro • Q 2

I agree on the first point. Each rev of the LCD-2 gets closer to neutral response. And more efficient.
 
However, if you want the old sound, I'd suggest buying an old used pair on eBay. EQ is a last resort if you can't do that. And if you must EQ, you might get better results shelving the highs, rather than boosting the lows.

 

[fabriciom]

  I agree on the first point. Each rev of the LCD-2 gets closer to neutral response. And more efficient.
 
However, if you want the old sound, I'd suggest buying an old used pair on eBay. EQ is a last resort if you can't do that. And if you must EQ, you might get better results shelving the highs, rather than boosting the lows.

You are correct on EQ usage. But boosting the lows will give you the dark distorted sound they are after. As long as you dont go crazy with it that is.

 

[MRC001]

 
You are correct on EQ usage. But boosting the lows will give you the dark distorted sound they are after. As long as you dont go crazy with it that is.

The original LCD-2 is dark with linearly dropping response from about 1.5 kHz on up. And that also impairs transient response. But THD+noise was always incredibly low, even in the early models.

 

[MRC001]

That brings to mind another thought about commenting vs. judging other people's preferences. It's always in bad taste, but especially in headphone listening where there are medical / scientific reasons people disagree on what is the "best" sound.
 
Everyone has a different HRTF, so there is no objective reference for headphone frequency response, like there is for speakers. Everyone's head, skin, outer and inner ear transform the sound a bit differently. The general effect is to boost the 2 - 5 kHz range by 10 - 20 dB, but HRTF also affects lower & higher frequencies to a lesser degree. Headphones bypass most HRTF effects, so if they had flat frequency response they would sound very dull, flat or warm to everyone. Headphones must reproduce an average HRTF curve in their own frequency response in order to sound normal. But HRTF varies quite a bit from person to person, so any headphone can at best use an accurate HRTF average that will never be perfectly correct for any specific person. Thus it's possible that a person whose HRTF boosts less than average finds the earlier LCD-2 to sound more realistic - that's how real-life sounds to that person. Conversely, it's possible that someone whose HRTF boosts more than average finds a bright headphone like the HD-800 to sound more realistic.
 
Put differently, I say the HD-800 melts my skull with that big HF response spike. But someone else might have a head or ear shape that is always creating that big HF response spike, so that's "normal" to him and the HD-800 sound great.

 

[fabriciom]

I compared my original LCD2 with a pair of dynaudio BM15A before I sold them. Result was darker, bass heavy, mids not as detailed and stereo image was off (using SPL Phonitor).
 
I do not have the monitors anymore but I can say that this new fazor drivers have improved in all these aspects the original lacked. By how much I could not say, but over all I would say its a huge improvement for me, my ears and body type .

 

[sikki-six]

I have 2.1's and have heard the recent Fazors this summer. Even though I didn't try them with my own gear, it was easy to tell they were more treble happy and not quite as punchy in the lows, not as smooth overall. Some might prefer this more neutral-like sig, but the new ones pretty much lost the smooth and punchy signature of the originals. They should have maybe changed the model name at some point. They were clearly a quite different headphone.

Btw, I'm not telling anyone that one is subjectively better than the other, glad to hear people like their Fazors.

 

[sikki-six]

One more thing, about the brightness. The pre-Fazor models aren't really all that dark - I find my pair to have slightly more present highs (cymbals etc.) than my HD600's. It's all relative, I guess.

Edit: frequencies around 3-4k might be more laid-back though.

 

[bavinck]

One more thing, about the brightness. The pre-Fazor models aren't really all that dark - I find my pair to have slightly more present highs (cymbals etc.) than my HD600's. It's all relative, I guess.

Edit: frequencies around 3-4k might be more laid-back though.

That's very interesting. The hd600 is definitely not dark to my ears.

 

[PinkyPowers]

I haven't heard the HD650, but I love my HD600. I use it all the time for TV, movies, games, YouTube, etc...

The only thing I don't use it for is serious music listening. Not because it's not capable of it. It most certainly is. But my LCD-2.2f is better. In every aspect. Detail, imaging, separation, highs, lows, mids... well, the mids might be equal. The HD600 has amazing mids.

 

[MRC001]

Page 607 disappeared... is it a site bug, or after 607 pages are we finally kicking a dead horse on LCD-2 impressions, or did the animals (us) get too rowdy and shut down by the zoo-keeper?

 

[droopy1592]

Page 607 disappeared... is it a site bug, or after 607 pages are we finally kicking a dead horse on LCD-2 impressions, or did the animals (us) get too rowdy and shut down by the zoo-keeper?

It's the forum software. A glitch.