Got it. So a unicorn is more just a lack of quality control back in the day that lead to something positive. That's pretty funny! I just thought that it was maybe just such a short window that they were rare due to the number that was actually produced. If the only way to know you have something special is to have your individual curve run to see? - yeah, not going through all that bother. I am happy with mine too and I'll just leave it at that!
When I bought my 2.2PF, I got to audition two units. One sounded more open/brighter and was priced higher as well (both were used and the brighter unit was older). But the difference between the two was very minimal. I had to A-B a few times side by side. So I do wonder was it really a manufacturing variation or were the pads that caused it as pads on each headphone had changed shape differently (different owners with different head shapes).
The 2F is very very similar and the sound is lush with fabulous bass - quality and quantity. But it needs the right amp. I am using a WA6SE and as soon as I plugged in a Sophia 274B (which adds a slight bass boost) it is exactly how I wanted it to sound. Add to it the sound is more cleaner and better imaging than the 2.2.
THX887 amp goes brilliantly with pre-fazor, really brings much needed detail extraction and dynamics to the table...is only use case out all my planars that went well with that amp - very very clinical and hard-nosed.
Idk about popular but if you’re wanting to spend that amount of money pretty standard is the Jotunheim+bifrost combo. Although they are driven to volume by portable sources even with EQ
Idk about popular but if you’re wanting to spend that amount of money pretty standard is the Jotunheim+bifrost combo. Although they are driven to volume by portable sources even with EQ
Thanks. Currently my main setup is ADI-2/Soloist 3XP/Empyrean.
With the LCD2f I am looking for a potential secondary station somewhere else. I know the Jot2/Bifrost2 is a preferred combo in its price range for pretty much anything, I guess I am more interested in good synergy with the LCD2f and less obvious dac/amp combos. In my experience desktop gear for the same price always sounds better than portable.
Thanks for your recommendation, it is a good start. (Also Schiit UK is basically always out of stock...)
Thanks. Currently my main setup is ADI-2/Soloist 3XP/Empyrean.
With the LCD2f I am looking for a potential secondary station somewhere else. I know the Jot2/Bifrost2 is a preferred combo in its price range for pretty much anything, I guess I am more interested in good synergy with the LCD2f and less obvious dac/amp combos. In my experience desktop gear for the same price always sounds better than portable.
Thanks for your recommendation, it is a good start. (Also Schiit UK is basically always out of stock...)
I went in this search as well (with a budget of 1k USD) and had a lot of trouble finding something conclusive. Please chime in if you figure out some great options!
I went in this search as well (with a budget of 1k USD) and had a lot of trouble finding something conclusive. Please chime in if you figure out some great options!
Do you guys find that the 2F sells relatively quickly in Europe? I wanna get this model, I've tried the X but can't demo the 2F, so I'll be buying it semi-blind, ish. I'm mostly worried about being able to resell it.
Do you guys find that the 2F sells relatively quickly in Europe? I wanna get this model, I've tried the X but can't demo the 2F, so I'll be buying it semi-blind, ish. I'm mostly worried about being able to resell it.
Biggest difference between the LCD-2 and LCD-X is that the LCD-2 is a little more bassy/slammy and the LCD-X is a little more refined/resolving. They are close to the same weight now with the recent revision of the LCD-X. The X is also easier to drive.
In general, Audeze products hold their value quite well because of the lead-time on ordering direct from Audeze. Not sure if the demand is as high in europe though.
Biggest difference between the LCD-2 and LCD-X is that the LCD-2 is a little more bassy/slammy and the LCD-X is a little more refined/resolving. They are close to the same weight now with the recent revision of the LCD-X. The X is also easier to drive.
In general, Audeze products hold their value quite well because of the lead-time on ordering direct from Audeze. Not sure if the demand is as high in europe though.
Gotcha. How big is this diff in resolution though? If you were to try and put a % to it, what'd it be? I really, really liked the resolution the X, I still think the 2F might be better for pure enjoyment but that's gonna come down to how big of a downgrade the 2F actually is in resolution.
Gotcha. How big is this diff in resolution though? If you were to try and put a % to it, what'd it be? I really, really liked the resolution the X, I still think the 2F might be better for pure enjoyment but that's gonna come down to how big of a downgrade the 2F actually is in resolution.
So hard to quantify…. Like maybe a 10% improvement in detail retrieval? It’s noticeable but you have to listen for a little while to notice the difference. But the whole presentation is a little different. If you consider imaging, it is better at imaging than the LCD-2. Personally found them a little more open than the 2s as well… maybe not wide but they just have this sense of openness to them…. wow I know I sound like I’m saying the complete opposite of reviewers right now. You could be happy with either. I listen to enough orchestral/acoustic that having the lower impedance (so I could EQ more) and more refined presentation (less punch but evenly distributed dynamic impact accross the frequency range and more open sound) made the LCD-X better for me if you listen to EDM, Hip-hop, or metal with “chugging 7-string guitars” then the LCD-2 is probably going to be a little smoother and easier to get along with. The LCD-x will just let you look deeper into the recording and will make flaws more obvious.
So hard to quantify…. Like maybe a 10% improvement in detail retrieval? It’s noticeable but you have to listen for a little while to notice the difference. But the whole presentation is a little different. If you consider imaging, it is better at imaging than the LCD-2. Personally found them a little more open than the 2s as well… maybe not wide but they just have this sense of openness to them…. wow I know I sound like I’m saying the complete opposite of reviewers right now. You could be happy with either. I listen to enough orchestral/acoustic that having the lower impedance (so I could EQ more) and more refined presentation (less punch but evenly distributed dynamic impact accross the frequency range and more open sound) made the LCD-X better for me if you listen to EDM, Hip-hop, or metal with “chugging 7-string guitars” then the LCD-2 is probably going to be a little smoother and easier to get along with. The LCD-x will just let you look deeper into the recording and will make flaws more obvious.
Gotcha, maybe a more productive question is this: I will be using the zen dac sig > sa-1 > audeze headphone, right now it's the same chain but with a pair of HD650, let's say the 650 are at the lower end of the resolution spectrum, the LCD-X is at the top, where in between does the 2F land? I think this is the only way I could accurately imagine it realistically.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
