[marcan]

  Maybe because most of the time in balanced amps SE output is inferior. They are meant to be used as balanced so SE output is there just in case someone needs it.

If I understand it correctly it just uses half of the circuit.

 

[madwolfa]

  If I understand it correctly it just uses half of the circuit.

 
That's not correct. Balanced signal is usually "summarized" by a special converter circuit to produce a single-ended output.

 

[WilCox]

That's not correct. Balanced signal is usually "summarized" by a special converter circuit to produce a single-ended output.

Half the balanced output is simply unused or shorted out like this:



(Line level signal example)

So you are using only half of the amplifiers capability. This is the case with the Bryston BHA-1.

 

[marcan]

Half the balanced output is simply unused or shorted out like this:



(Line level signal example)

So you are using only half of the amplifiers capability. This is the case with the Bryston BHA-1.

Thx m8

 

[CanadianMaestro]

One company's take on balanced circuitry for HPs:
 
http://www.headphone.com/pages/balanced-headphones-guide

 

[madwolfa]

Half the balanced output is simply unused or shorted out like this:



(Line level signal example)

So you are using only half of the amplifiers capability. This is the case with the Bryston BHA-1.

 
Hmm, then I guess it's just another approach, which ultimately depends on the amp's base topology.

 

[marcan]

   
Hmm, then I guess it's just another approach, which ultimately depends on the amp's base topology.

One run around the block naked then

 

[MrD]

Apologies for the length of this post - unfortunately I've always been incapable of being concise - and thanks for any advice...

I'm hoping to establish how the upper frequencies of LCD-2.2 and Fazor compare to my two current reference points, Sennheiser HD580s and Beyer T1s. As background, I'm looking for a single pair of headphones to complement my (currently hypothetical) speaker setup, which won't be able to fill a critical niche in my listening - mostly 80s/90s/00s indie rock/post-punk, with some electronic thrown in - as I find these demand to be played at volumes that aren't entirely appropriate for my listening environment.

Although I probably prefer the T1s (despite their flaws) as an all-rounder, the HD580s are more often than not decisively better-suited to that kind of material, where elevated bass is usually desirable given the general characteristics of those genres and the ubiquity of bass-thin/treble-hot recordings. And from owning LCD-2.1s in the past, I know their low-frequency extension and performance easily surpasses that of the 580s, which is why I'm looking to go back to them.

However, as a not-entirely-recovered former detail addict, I tend to find with all but the most searingly bright recordings on the 580s that I crave a little more bite with the guitars, crack with the snares etc. I'm abnormally tolerant of treble harshness, so in an ideal world I'd take quite a bit extra on top, but I appreciate it's a zero-sum game where I can't gain anything without something else (bass/mids) being taken away, so I think I'm only looking to move fractionally closer to neutral.

I know the 2.1s take things slightly in the other direction from HD580/600, but would I be right in thinking that the 2Fs have enough added treble presence to edge past the Senns while still remaining some way off the Beyers? And if not, is there anywhere else I should be looking? I'd like to consider LCD-3 but my budget and European location make that unrealistic, so if neither 2.2 nor 2F is suited I'll probably have to consider other brands.

 

[Alexalder]

  Apologies for the length of this post - unfortunately I've always been incapable of being concise - and thanks for any advice...

I'm hoping to establish how the upper frequencies of LCD-2.2 and Fazor compare to my two current reference points, Sennheiser HD580s and Beyer T1s. As background, I'm looking for a single pair of headphones to complement my (currently hypothetical) speaker setup, which won't be able to fill a critical niche in my listening - mostly 80s/90s/00s indie rock/post-punk, with some electronic thrown in - as I find these demand to be played at volumes that aren't entirely appropriate for my listening environment.

Although I probably prefer the T1s (despite their flaws) as an all-rounder, the HD580s are more often than not decisively better-suited to that kind of material, where elevated bass is usually desirable given the general characteristics of those genres and the ubiquity of bass-thin/treble-hot recordings. And from owning LCD-2.1s in the past, I know their low-frequency extension and performance easily surpasses that of the 580s, which is why I'm looking to go back to them.

However, as a not-entirely-recovered former detail addict, I tend to find with all but the most searingly bright recordings on the 580s that I crave a little more bite with the guitars, crack with the snares etc. I'm abnormally tolerant of treble harshness, so in an ideal world I'd take quite a bit extra on top, but I appreciate it's a zero-sum game where I can't gain anything without something else (bass/mids) being taken away, so I think I'm only looking to move fractionally closer to neutral.

I know the 2.1s take things slightly in the other direction from HD580/600, but would I be right in thinking that the 2Fs have enough added treble presence to edge past the Senns while still remaining some way off the Beyers? And if not, is there anywhere else I should be looking? I'd like to consider LCD-3 but my budget and European location make that unrealistic, so if neither 2.2 nor 2F is suited I'll probably have to consider other brands.

LCD 2F have a lot of treble, too much for me as i had to use software eq. Check the frequency response graph and compare

 

[CanadianMaestro]

In a nutshell, what's the main difference in SQ between LCD-2.2 pre-fazor and the LCD fazors, closed-back only.

 

[x RELIC x]

In a nutshell, what's the main difference in SQ between LCD-2.2 pre-fazor and the LCD fazors, closed-back only.

For one LCD-2 doesn't come in closed back. :wink_face:

The Fazor adds more coherence to the sound pressure waves leaving the driver through the magnetic structure so you'll hear more detail. I believe at the same time that Audeze introduced the Fazor wave guide they also tweaked the membrane and traces on the membrane for a faster response. Again, the result is more perceived treble and detail.

For closed back the only offering in the LCD line is the XC (which only comes with Fazor), and that has thinner and faster drivers than the LCD-2, but there is some elevated upper mids and lower treble that some may not enjoy. I love it as a compliment to my LCD-2.2 (non-Fazor).

 

[CanadianMaestro]

For one LCD-2 doesn't come in closed back.

The Fazor adds more coherence to the sound pressure waves leaving the driver through the magnetic structure so you'll hear more detail. I believe at the same time that Audeze introduced the Fazor wave guide they also tweaked the membrane and traces on the membrane for a faster response. Again, the result is more perceived treble and detail.

For closed back the only offering in the LCD line is the XC (which only comes with Fazor), and that has thinner and faster drivers than the LCD-2, but there is some elevated upper mids and lower treble that some may not enjoy. I love it as a compliment to my LCD-2.2 (non-Fazor).

Thanks for the insights. Yes, I'm aware that LCD-2 is only open-backed 

 
The highs can grate on me after a while. Shall stick with my 650 and 560.
 
cheers

 

[White Lotus]

Anyone ever tried to put the LCD XC cups onto the LCD 2?
 
Might be an interesting experiment.
 
The prototype LCD XC looks like an LCD 2 with cups on.
 

 

[x RELIC x]

Anyone ever tried to put the LCD XC cups onto the LCD 2?

Might be an interesting experiment.

The prototype LCD XC looks like an LCD 2 with cups on.

There was some talk of it quite a while ago, can't remember which thread. The takeaway was it sounds terrible.

 

[Lohb]

A Russian guy did it in the thread before. It measured flatter than XC objectively, but that is only half the story.