[saxelrod92]

  I am not sure where else to post this so I figured here would be good. I have some LCD-2's coming with leather pads. However, I have always loved the feeling of velour and am looking at the velour/whatever-material-it-is on the audeze website. I'm just wondering if those pads would still fit the Revision 1's. I would assume yes, but before I drop $80 on some damn pads I want to be sure.

Audeze never changed the size of their headphones, any pads, from any audeze, from any time period, should fit any of their headphones. Unless they had a different mounting system for the rev 1, but I dont think they did.

 

[diamondears]

I am not sure where else to post this so I figured here would be good. I have some LCD-2's coming with leather pads. However, I have always loved the feeling of velour and am looking at the velour/whatever-material-it-is on the audeze website. I'm just wondering if those pads would still fit the Revision 1's. I would assume yes, but before I drop $80 on some damn pads I want to be sure.

To be sure, you can contact Audeze via their website's customer support. They reply pretty quickly.

 

[Lohb]

  I am not sure where else to post this so I figured here would be good. I have some LCD-2's coming with leather pads. However, I have always loved the feeling of velour and am looking at the velour/whatever-material-it-is on the audeze website. I'm just wondering if those pads would still fit the Revision 1's. I would assume yes, but before I drop $80 on some damn pads I want to be sure.

They fit. I have black velour 2014 for my Revison 1's. They are held on to the cans with a double-sided glue ring...you get 4x glue rings in case you mess it up first time. A very simple and clever way to get those ear-pads right down to the frame with no gaps to cause bass bleed....
 
Did anyone see the new smaller (?) closed Audeze can or was that a hoax posting ? I saw an official looking flyer then could not dig up the post again...(not the 1200ohm new carbon headband can)

 

[midnightwalker]

Agree re airy, but disagree bass is exactly the same. Really wondering how come the best characteristic of the older LCD-2 was sacrificed when that characteristic is the one that made them famous in the first place. Maybe another model, but replace it totally? I'd like the Rev. 2 to be totally revived, the lower sensitivity, the bass, and all.

 
The bass is still there. The reason you feel that they sacrificed the bass is because the high range they boosted.

 

[diamondears]

The bass is still there. The reason you feel that they sacrificed the bass is because the high range they boosted.

I considered that. And IMHO, it's not a mere treble "boost", but a bit trade-off on bass body. The bass on my Rev. 2 (2012) is significantly "more", not necessarily in dB terms but, in terms of body/mass/fullness/tightness. But yes, it has less treble and imaging.

My 2 cents is--why remove a "product" from the market when there's a proven demand for it? Heck it's the model and sound that propelled Audeze to greatness, to where they are now. Nobody can beat the original, as they say. Why not just introduce another model?

 

[Wilashort]

saxelrod92, how the LCD-2 be compared vs the Alpha Prime in terms of detail retrieval, resolution, soundstage, bass, mids (is more forward, recessed), etc.
Which is better in these areas?. Which have better bass quality, mids and treble?
Thanks in advance for the comparison

 

[saxelrod92]

  saxelrod92, how the LCD-2 compared vs the Alpha Prime in terms of detail retrieval, resolution, soundstage, bass, mids (is more forward, recessed), etc.
Which is better in these areas?. Which have better bass quality, mids and treble?
Thanks in advance for the comparison

I can only say in regards to the lcd-2 I have, which is from 2013 without the fazor, so please take that into consideration first. Otherwise let me get to it
 
So in general the alpha prime is definitely the more detailed, higher resolution, larger soundstage (and better imaging), tighter stronger bass thats just as deep and textured, mids go to the lcd-2 because they are slightly more forward and the primes are a bit further back but still very well balanced, highs depend on how sensitive you are to a hard edge in the sound and the gear you use. The primes are really transparent so they will sound like the gear you use to en extent, and without adding the tuning dots, they can with some sounds get a bit edgy but still very smooth overall (for the music I listen to I actually like the edge because its just enough to give music a solid feel, and it's not in any way too edgy or sibilant). but again the lcd-2 is going to be smoother overall, and be way less sensitive to the highs, I sometimes consider them the anti-sibilance headphones because its just nearly impossible to hear sibilance with them lol. The primes are dead neutral, but retain a fuller dynamic sound like the lcd-2. They're actually not that different from each other, just that the primes are much more neutral and have more detail, and a better soundstage and imaging.
 
Comfort is going to be a deciding factor here too though. the lcd-2 might be heavier, and have a more uncomfortable headband, but they have the large ear pads, and as such have a more comfortable feel around the ear, if you dont mind the weight and top of the head pressure. The primes are lighter, and have a great suspension strap system to relive all head pressure, but they have a higher clamp force because they are very sensitive to getting a good seal. Also the ear cups cant tilt up and down much, so if you are like me and most headphones tend to be more in a V shape when on your head, then the primes will put more pressure at the top of your ear area. You can reduce this by reducing the clamp and rotating the pads back, so there's options.
 
Also another big one is isolation. the lcd-2 is an open headphone and as such you will obviously hear all the sounds in your room, and people around you will hear what you are listening to. The primes are closed back and actually isolate very well. So they have a blacker background from this, and they can be a bit more dynamic sounding as a result.
 
The primes definitely win hands down with the bass. its simply more powerful, harder hitting, and just textured and detailed and goes just as low, its perfect bass in my opinion, and it securely stays within its frequency spectrum. The mids will go to the lcd-2 because its hard to beat up close, sweet sounding mids (the primes have mids that sound right, but dont stand out like they do on the lcd-2), and the treble for me goes to the primes, because my pair of lcd-2s pre-fazor just are too dulled in that area and it becomes very obvious they are simply not even playing certain details and sounds up there that are supposed to be there. But if you are super sensitive to sibilance, hardness, edge, and just want something laid back and sweet for the treble, then the lcd-2 wins.
 
I wish I have heard the fazor version so I can compare bass better, because on my lcd-2 the bass is just straight up weak, its full and textured, but its annoyingly weak. It cant hold down the low frequency spectrum properly, the other frequencies over-power the bass on my lcd-2. and the soft, laid-back nature of them makes the bass lose most of its attack, which is what help you hear bass within a song. But supposedly the fazor fixes this issue quite a bit, so that version could be closer to the primes. But I think regardless of that primes will have more detail, resolution, isolation, and neutrality, while still sounding full and dynamic.
 
I think its just a matter of what feels more comfortable to wear for you at the end of the day, because either headphone (assuming the lcd-2 is fazor) should sound exactly like a 1000 dollar headphone should. different heads different comfort. I'm still undecided on whether to keep the primes or not because of comfort. Still just messing around with adjustments. The lcd-2 you get used to eventually, but the weight is always noticeable.
 
Let me know if theres a specific comparison between these two you want more detail on, and I hope this helps!

 

[diamondears]

Lots of **** going on here...

 

[midnightwalker]

My 2 cents is--why remove a "product" from the market when there's a proven demand for it? Heck it's the model and sound that propelled Audeze to greatness, to where they are now. Nobody can beat the original, as they say. Why not just introduce another model?

 
Regarding product demand, you will never know unless you are working for Audeze. I believe that they will chose the best decision for their product lines. 

 

[abcd]

I can't really find this anywhere, but can someone tell me the visual differences between the original LCD-2's, the Revision 1's, the Revision 2's, and the Fazor Revision 2's?

 

[dnuggett]

These and the LCDX have really hit my radar as the next choice to replace my NAD HP50s when I'm ready. 

 

[diamondears]

Regarding product demand, you will never know unless you are working for Audeze. I believe that they will chose the best decision for their product lines. 

I think Audeze made the right decision in improving the LCD-2 with the Fazors. But, I think they should have kept the non-Fazor edition, or at least as a custom option, and sell the Fazor editions at same time to satisfy demands.

Like I said, I prefer the Fazor edition as there's plenty of bass boost options to remedy the bit reduction in bass quantity, while, OTOH, the lack of imaging/air/treble in the non-Fazor cannot be remedied on the fly.

In short, I'd like to be able to buy a spanking brand new LCD-2 Rev. 2..

 

[Lohb]

  I can't really find this anywhere, but can someone tell me the visual differences between the original LCD-2's, the Revision 1's, the Revision 2's, and the Fazor Revision 2's?

There is kind of a cross-over at times going from version 1 to 2 I think with the cups wood mini-XLR ports style on some revisons 2's (?).
Otherwise :-
1's have straight-down wood holes that had the mini-XLR plugs in them.
2's and Fazor have angled metal mini-XLR plugs and bigger earpads.
Fazor can be felt ear-side by rubbing your hands along the extended grill inside the earpad.
 
There are also various branding differences on the grill -  Audez'e (Revison 1) / Audeze Research Labs etc...if you hit google, there is an Audeze versions wiki out there.

 

[saxelrod92]

Also I want to clarify from my previous posts about the 2013 version I have being weak in bass. It's not that it lacks any bass or anything, it definitely has that full, deep, textured bass. But for my ears I think I correlate attack/bite with more punch, and in turn better/harder hitting bass. So even though the fazor might have a slight reduction in this fullness of the bass, the extra air and imaging, have added extra bite to the bass (I see this in Tyll's graphs). So some people really liked that fuller, but less attack type bass, and with the fazor would conclude there is less bass. and others like more attack with their bass, and conclude the fazor has faster, harder bass.
 
So it's all about our ears, and what we correlate sounds with. I just wanted to mention this, so those trying to figure out what to buy, can get an idea of what we're all saying when we talk about the different versions. Because like for me, I would read what some of you guys who like the fuller, less attack bass are saying, and think I'm getting the type of bass I'm thinking of, which is in reality a less full, and harder bass. So just making sure everyone gets proper context with all this. I dont want us to start getting into a you're wrong, I'm right debate lol because it seems in this case, everyone is right and wrong at the same time.

 

[abcd]

EDIT: I have the Revision 1's from 2011 I think. Angled wooden connectors, "Audeze LCD-2" on the grill. Non leather/swede headband.