[pippen99]

I have had my LCD-2f for 4 months.  This was my first hi-fi headphones moving up from Ultrasone HFI-2400.  I use a Gustard stack(X12 + H10).  They all burned in together.  Yesterday I received my new LCD-X bought as an upgrade for the impending arrival of a Cavalli Liquid Carbon.   I got a Norne Draug v2 balanced cable but have not used it pending the arrival of a Draug SE adapter so comparisons were using the stock SE cables.  Straight out of the box with no burn-in the X was superior in every way to the 2f.  the most noticeable difference was in the low end.  I have always found the 2f to be somewhat lacking in the low end.  The X low end was more controlled with better extension and more punch.  The mids had more clarity and presence with the X.  The high end was clearer and cleaner on the X.  I got the vegan pads and once I get the headband shaped to my liking I expect greater comfort with the X.  If Audeze has a burn-in then I can only expect the X to far outdistance the 2f in over all SQ.  I have auditioned the 3f and I too found the X superior.  I cannot speak to the pre-fazor 2f sound but have heard many prefer it to the fazor version, but for me the X is the one!

 

[Jeb Listens]

Yes 

 
Woah, thanks, they should have written this in the box. This link, right? https://www.audeze.com/contact-us "Tech Support"?

Yes I'm sure that will get you through to the right people.  There's also support@audeze.com for general enquiries.  I would think either would be fine. 
 

 

[Alexalder]

Thanks again.
Any opinions on my other question?
 
Quote:

  I am currently using a solid state Schiit Asgard, what would be a good start if i would want to venture into tube-land? I read good opinions on the Lyr but i really don't know much

 

[Jeb Listens]

  I am currently using a solid state Schiit Asgard, what would be a good start if i would want to venture into tube-land? I read good opinions on the Lyr but i really don't know much
 

 
well maybe start with - what do you like/dislike about the pairing with the Asgard II?  Are you looking to change the sound signature in certain areas ? Do you find some areas lacking or are you just intrigued by the world of tubes?  
 
The more we know, the better the recommendations can be!  
 
Also, since you asked for graph, i'm assuming yours is a brand new headphone, thus a LCD-2 with fazor?
 
Jeb.

 

[Alexalder]

   
well maybe start with - what do you like/dislike about the pairing with the Asgard II?  Are you looking to change the sound signature in certain areas ? Do you find some areas lacking or are you just intrigued by the world of tubes?  
 
The more we know, the better the recommendations can be!  
 
Also, since you asked for graph, i'm assuming yours is a brand new headphone, thus a LCD-2 with fazor?
 
Jeb.

Yes, LCD-2 with fazors. I have no way to try things out where i live, i spent 100€ only to go try the LCD2 before buying them (and i'm happy of that, i thought i would have bought the hd800), so i can only read forums online. I pretty much understood there's not a lot of difference between solid state amps, and that the asgard is transparent and powerful enough to be decent with LCD2, so i wanted to try the other "side" of amping.
As for the sound signature, i find them more fatiguing than my old hd600, so if i could have a bit of smoothness in highs it would be nice. I'm waiting to see the frequency response too
Pretty sure i wrote a lot of stupid things, thank you for replying

 

[marcan]

Unfortunately I didn't try the LCD-2f, but the LCD-2.2 was superior than LCD-3f and LCD-Xf and it was particularly obvious in the bass department: the LCD-2.2 goes lower.
So is the fazor the culprit or the burn in?

 

[Jeb Listens]

 
Yes, LCD-2 with fazors. I have no way to try things out where i live, i spent 100€ only to go try the LCD2 before buying them (and i'm happy of that, i thought i would have bought the hd800), so i can only read forums online. I pretty much understood there's not a lot of difference between solid state amps, and that the asgard is transparent and powerful enough to be decent with LCD2, so i wanted to try the other "side" of amping.
Pretty sure i wrote a lot of stupid things, thank you for replying

 
Sure - I can only speak about the equipment I've tried. 

I have an Asgard II - it was my first  headphone amp, and it was what I first paired my LCD-2s with too.  I thought it was excellent - mostly neutral, perhaps a little on the warm side with plenty of power to do a fine job with the LCD-2s.
 
I was curious about tubes too so went for a Woo WA7 & WA7tp, which is much more expensive ($1400 + tubes) but I like it considerably more and thoroughly enjoy tube rolling.  I recently compared the Woo & Asgard side by side and the latter seemed quite sluggish and compressed in comparison, though I never really thought that about it when it was my only amp.  I still think it's a super amp in its own right.  I'm not using it anymore but not planning on parting with it either.  
 
Lots of choices for you, i'm sure others will have great suggestions for you, depending on your budget.  The Lyr seems very popular, and very powerful, and I'm guessing it would take things up a level in quality for you but I'm not sure how much it will give you the traditional "tube" experience.  Lyr owners can help with this. 
 
Best of luck on your journey! 

 

[Alexalder]

   
Sure - I can only speak about the equipment I've tried. 

I have an Asgard II - it was my first  headphone amp, and it was what I first paired my LCD-2s with too.  I thought it was excellent - mostly neutral, perhaps a little on the warm side with plenty of power to do a fine job with the LCD-2s.
 
I was curious about tubes too so went for a Woo WA7 & WA7tp, which is much more expensive ($1400 + tubes) but I like it considerably more and thoroughly enjoy tube rolling.  I recently compared the Woo & Asgard side by side and the latter seemed quite sluggish and compressed in comparison, though I never really thought that about it when it was my only amp.  I still think it's a super amp in its own right.  I'm not using it anymore but not planning on parting with it either.  
 
Lots of choices for you, i'm sure others will have great suggestions for you, depending on your budget.  The Lyr seems very popular, and very powerful, and I'm guessing it would take things up a level in quality for you but I'm not sure how much it will give you the traditional "tube" experience.  Lyr owners can help with this. 
 
Best of luck on your journey! 

Aha thank you, I'll wait for Lyr owners then. Also, my f.r. graph is already here O:

 

[joebobbilly]

Had the 2.2, went to the LCDX... never looked back.
 

(not a single letter...

)
 
Bass might be deeper (slightly) on the 2.2 but the resolution and accuracy is definitely not the same. The LCDX is certainly more resolving and for anyone wanting something more transparent like the HD800 but with the Audeze house sound they are bang on IMO. The soundstage improvement from the LCD2.2 to the LCDX is not subtle and depending on one's preferences (the LCD2.2 is indeed a bit more intimate sounding if that's what you prefer). Is it worth the extra money? well so long as you recognize the law of diminishing returns... yes.

 

[Amish]

Well My LCD-2 R2F right speaker died tonight. Very random. Worked fine the other day, took them out if its case tonight and no right speaker. Tried multiple cables, amps etc.
 
After a quick search I discovered this has been an issue for others. Some people having one of their speakers go out multiple times after repair.
 
I sent in a request to Audeze for an RMA. I hope this is painless. My cans were purchased from Audeze in May of 2014.
 
Bummer...
 
What sucks worse is I just sent my Grado 325 cans into Grado for a service. lol Now I'm stuck using my back up to my back up cans.

 

[marcan]

  Had the 2.2, went to the LCDX... never looked back.
 

(not a single letter...

)
 
Bass might be deeper (slightly) on the 2.2 but the resolution and accuracy is definitely not the same. The LCDX is certainly more resolving and for anyone wanting something more transparent like the HD800 but with the Audeze house sound they are bang on IMO. The soundstage improvement from the LCD2.2 to the LCDX is not subtle and depending on one's preferences (the LCD2.2 is indeed a bit more intimate sounding if that's what you prefer). Is it worth the extra money? well so long as you recognize the law of diminishing returns... yes.

I agree micro dynamics was better on the LCD-X... but I prefer deeper bass (which is a tag point of audeze) otherwise I would go for the HD800
Regarding the soundstage, it was better on the LCD-2.2 (we was 3 tester with extensive experience in the audio field) but it might the burn in.

 

[Liu Junyuan]

  I have had my LCD-2f for 4 months.  This was my first hi-fi headphones moving up from Ultrasone HFI-2400.  I use a Gustard stack(X12 + H10).  They all burned in together.  Yesterday I received my new LCD-X bought as an upgrade for the impending arrival of a Cavalli Liquid Carbon.   I got a Norne Draug v2 balanced cable but have not used it pending the arrival of a Draug SE adapter so comparisons were using the stock SE cables.  Straight out of the box with no burn-in the X was superior in every way to the 2f.  the most noticeable difference was in the low end.  I have always found the 2f to be somewhat lacking in the low end.  The X low end was more controlled with better extension and more punch.  The mids had more clarity and presence with the X.  The high end was clearer and cleaner on the X.  I got the vegan pads and once I get the headband shaped to my liking I expect greater comfort with the X.  If Audeze has a burn-in then I can only expect the X to far outdistance the 2f in over all SQ.  I have auditioned the 3f and I too found the X superior.  I cannot speak to the pre-fazor 2f sound but have heard many prefer it to the fazor version, but for me the X is the one!

 Congrats. I think the LCD-X would be particularly suitable for the Gustard H10's slightly warm "tilt."
 
I am interested in what you say about the mids, for which (along with bass) the LCD-2's are famous. While I understand what you mean by "more clarity," what do you mean by "more presence" in the X?  

 

[pippen99]

   Congrats. I think the LCD-X would be particularly suitable for the Gustard H10's slightly warm "tilt."
 
I am interested in what you say about the mids, for which (along with bass) the LCD-2's are famous. While I understand what you mean by "more clarity," what do you mean by "more presence" in the X?  

I think I may be repeating myself when I say presence.  The best I can describe what I am hearing is if I was at a concert.  the difference is between siting in the back near the entrance or the kitchen and with the X sitting at stage front.  I hope that makes some sense.

 

[Liu Junyuan]

 
I think I may be repeating myself when I say presence.  The best I can describe what I am hearing is if I was at a concert.  the difference is between siting in the back near the entrance or the kitchen and with the X sitting at stage front.  I hope that makes some sense.

Yes, but I think there is a tension between immediacy and expansiveness in some impressions I have read comparing the two. It seems like you mean the stage is more immediate and intimate, sort of like on a Grado headphone, with the LCD-X. You are "right there." At the same time, the LCD-X conveys a larger stage than the LCD2-F, or am I mistaken? I think I know what you mean by my experience with the HE-560, which has a pretty open stage for a planar but at the same time can render certain instruments (violin) to appear creepily (in a good way) right over your shoulder. 

 

[adobotj]

My lcd-2 rev1 circa 2010


My lcd-2 fazor (2014)


My rev1 still works excellent until now. It will be almost 5 years old in 4 months. Sound quality remained the same if not, aged beautifully.

Comparing it to my fazor version it still holds its ground on having an excellent sound quality. Both have very similar sound BUT you can also hear it's differences. Major differences in my ears are:

1. Bigger soundstage of fazor
2. BRIGHTER (fazor)
3. More refined and a tad bit clearer than rev1

But... But.. but...

I prefer the sweet and CREAMY sound of the rev1's. It's definitely darker but a smooth kind of darkness that envelopes you then... delivers you that rich and creamy mids. It's heavier yes but I can listen to it for hours without tiring my eardrums.

So...

I listen to the rev1's when: I want to relax and just listen to music even when I'm doing something else like writing this post.

I listen to the fazor when: I feel analyzing the music, sitting down in a listening room, and not doing anything but just listening critically.