I forgot, mini-XLR on LCD-2.....3-pin or 4-pin ?
Don't have access to mine now, but got confused as sellers online saying 3-pin and 4-pin work with the angled cup connectors, and obviously one or the other.
I forgot, mini-XLR on LCD-2.....3-pin or 4-pin ?
Don't have access to mine now, but got confused as sellers online saying 3-pin and 4-pin work with the angled cup connectors, and obviously one or the other.
QUOTE: For accurate bass and low impedance Audeze uses 20-gauge wire constructed of 140 flexible strands for extra durability. And to ensure great sound and reliability, your 4-pin cable is terminated with gold-plated, pro-grade connectors; one 4-pin male XLR and two 4-pin female mini-XLRs.
4-pins Are Better Than Two
Four contact points instead of two doubles the contact area and cuts resistance in half for a higher current capacity and more dynamic sound. The locking 4-pin construction also ensures your headphones will continue to work even if one pin were to fail.
UNQUOTE
I think that answers it....their own balanced cable is 4-pin into each cup.
I forgot, mini-XLR on LCD-2.....3-pin or 4-pin ?
Don't have access to mine now, but got confused as sellers online saying 3-pin and 4-pin work with the angled cup connectors, and obviously one or the other.
Hi, just checking back in quickly and saying thanks to MRC001 (as well as DavidA and Sonic Defender) for your insights.
I feel 'educated' now in terms of how I am expecting the LCD-2 to 'Wow' me when I audition it. I'm not pinning all my hopes on being transported to a whole different league of bass enjoyment, but instead being more open-minded about what magic it can do with a few different genres.
I expect I would probably love the Fostex TH-600, if there was a shop here where I could have a listen to them. I noticed it received a very positive write-up in the Head-Fi buying guide. Also for me the jury's still out on whether I prefer open or closed headphones. I do get the general advantages of open, but I personally find that I have an urge to turn the volume up too loud on open headphones, an issue I don't seem to experience with closed units. I have learned to resist this temptation after (I'm 95% certain) giving myself permanent tinnitus by turning the DT990's I briefly owned up too loud. As I'm going to be buying a single, do-it-all, versatile home-use headphone... I don't think I can go wrong with the LCD-2(F). If I could afford to buy different high-end headphones for different genres, I'd probably order the TH-600 (I've found it advertised for $999 on-line, compared to $1590 for the Audeze). I wouldn't buy expensive headphones second-hand - just personal preference that's all.
Anyway, I guess I'll probably post a short message about how happy(?) I am with my new headphones once I feel like I'm familiar with their sound.
Hi, just checking back in quickly and saying thanks to MRC001 (as well as DavidA and Sonic Defender) for your insights.
I feel 'educated' now in terms of how I am expecting the LCD-2 to 'Wow' me when I audition it. I'm not pinning all my hopes on being transported to a whole different league of bass enjoyment, but instead being more open-minded about what magic it can do with a few different genres.
I expect I would probably love the Fostex TH-600, if there was a shop here where I could have a listen to them. I noticed it received a very positive write-up in the Head-Fi buying guide. Also for me the jury's still out on whether I prefer open or closed headphones. I do get the general advantages of open, but I personally find that I have an urge to turn the volume up too loud on open headphones, an issue I don't seem to experience with closed units. I have learned to resist this temptation after (I'm 95% certain) giving myself permanent tinnitus by turning the DT990's I briefly owned up too loud. As I'm going to be buying a single, do-it-all, versatile home-use headphone... I don't think I can go wrong with the LCD-2(F). If I could afford to buy different high-end headphones for different genres, I'd probably order the TH-600 (I've found it advertised for $999 on-line, compared to $1590 for the Audeze). I wouldn't buy expensive headphones second-hand - just personal preference that's all.
Anyway, I guess I'll probably post a short message about how happy(?) I am with my new headphones once I feel like I'm familiar with their sound.
Are those prices US dollars? The TH-600 has been discontinued so it might be hard to find a new one and they were selling for $500 US when I got mine about a year and a half ago. My LCD-2f was $795 IIRC for a new one at the end of 2014, might have been the Nov sales thing. I hope you read that the 2f is not a dark/warm headphone with the fazor but it still is not as sparkly as the TH-600 which has highs that can get sibilant for some.
Nah, these are Australian dollar prices. I actually thought that price for the TH-600 wasn't too bad - another local shop is advertising it for $1499! Prices for stuff can sometimes tend to be a bit high over here .. but I don't want to go down any too complicated route as I want peace of mind with regard to straight-forward resolution of any warranty issues. Anyway, yeah I will post back later with the conclusion. I could still decide to take a chance and order the Fostex if the LCD-2 doesn't strike me as being quite what I'm looking for.
> cheers.
Nah, these are Australian dollar prices. I actually thought that price for the TH-600 wasn't too bad - another local shop is advertising it for $1499! Prices for stuff can sometimes tend to be a bit high over here .. but I don't want to go down any too complicated route as I want peace of mind with regard to straight-forward resolution of any warranty issues. Anyway, yeah I will post back later with the conclusion. I could still decide to take a chance and order the Fostex if the LCD-2 doesn't strike me as being quite what I'm looking for.
> cheers.
I found an Amazon seller moving new TH 600 for I think $500 Canadian. If you ask me, that price is an absolute steel. The TH 600 is a very, very good headphone and relative to what other headphones with similar quality of construction and sound go for, it is undervalued. I owned the TH 900 as well and I have to say that the TH 600 was most of the TH 900, just a little less refined.
I think what happened is that the TH 600 was poorly marketed. Sold originally too close to the price point of the TH 900 so those with that kind of money just went for the 900. I think the TH 600 wasn't well positioned by Fostex and had it been marketed from the get go as say a $799 headphone MSRP, it might have had a more natural fit into the lineup in terms of consumer pricing expectations.
I was able to get my TH 600 used here, extremely low hours, as new for $475 US shipped to me from Texas. Great deal, perhaps the best deal I have had. Anyway, I paid for my LCD 2F new, got a better than MSRP price of course, and I really like it's signature and I plan to keep both as it is nice to have a more closed design and an open back.
EQs are an option, but really not the best choice. That said, the LCD 2 should EQ well, but you want to make sure the EQ itself is well designed as not all are. Some digital EQs have very little dynamic range and can introduce distortion quickly when boosting. The stock EQ built into the Onkyo DP-X1 for instance is widely considered to be such an EQ whereas the EQ implemented in Neutron is well respected. So again, EQ should be the last resort after the headphone signature itself.
Don't know about eqing to pre-Fazor sound, but I eq my lcd 2016 using Soundblaster X7 for movies. Adding 4 dB to the subbass is very nice, the lcd2 handles it in stride.
The pre-Fazor sounds different for 2 reasons: slightly different frequency response and slower transient/impulse response. You can address the first with EQ, but not the second. The post-Fazor LCD-2 is faster with closer to neutral frequency response, though it still has a small (3 dB) dip from around 2 to 9 kHz. It's smooth & linear enough to not impair the voicing. The LCD-3 has a similar response curve to the LCD-2.
You can study pre vs. post Fazor frequency response measurements (for example in charts at InnerFidelity) to set up the EQ.
I find the LCD-2 EQs well. I EQ my LCD-2 Fazor using a Behringer DEQ2496, a single parametric filter, +3 dB centered at 4500 Hz with slope 3 dB / octave or Q=0.67. It works very nicely and gives the LCD-2 almost perfectly flat frequency response much like the LCD-X.
The pre-fazor'd LCD2s use a different material for their diaphragm than the post-fazor'd ones. It was subjectively a better diaphragm material, but Audeze decided to change to have more consistent production and less driver failers.
The fazors also add a sound of their own that's probably impossible to create with EQ, because it deals with how the sound is passed through the magnets, and EQ only balances different frequencies.
The pre-Fazor sounds different for 2 reasons: slightly different frequency response and slower transient/impulse response. You can address the first with EQ, but not the second. The post-Fazor LCD-2 is faster with closer to neutral frequency response, though it still has a small (3 dB) dip from around 2 to 9 kHz. It's smooth & linear enough to not impair the voicing. The LCD-3 has a similar response curve to the LCD-2.
You can study pre vs. post Fazor frequency response measurements (for example in charts at InnerFidelity) to set up the EQ.
I find the LCD-2 EQs well. I EQ my LCD-2 Fazor using a Behringer DEQ2496, a single parametric filter, +3 dB centered at 4500 Hz with slope 3 dB / octave or Q=0.67. It works very nicely and gives the LCD-2 almost perfectly flat frequency response much like the LCD-X.
That's what I was thinking to do.
Pre-fazor: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2sn53211704circa2012.pdf
Fazor: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2sn5423021Fazer.pdf
There isn't that much of a difference. Pre-fazor is mostly flat up to 1 khz, then both take a plunge of ~13db compared to flatness average. The minimum is at ~5khz for pre-fazor and ~3khz for fazor, then flat until 5 khz. Most differences are beyond 5khz. Yet the difference, and especially that Fazor has much less perceived bass and warmth, cannot be explained by these differences. Ok, Fazor also has ~2db dip <40 Hz. Difference I hear is much bigger.
What can cause these perceived diffs beyond frequency response was always a puzzle for me. Will try to fiddle with sonarworks in the week-end. Oh, too bad they don't support Fazor yet.
That's what I was thinking to do.
Pre-fazor: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2sn53211704circa2012.pdf
Fazor: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2sn5423021Fazer.pdf
There isn't that much of a difference. Pre-fazor is mostly flat up to 1 khz, then both take a plunge of ~13db compared to flatness average. The minimum is at ~5khz for pre-fazor and ~3khz for fazor, then flat until 5 khz. Most differences are beyond 5khz. Yet the difference, and especially that Fazor has much less perceived bass and warmth, cannot be explained by these differences. Ok, Fazor also has ~2db dip <40 Hz. Difference I hear is much bigger.
What can cause these perceived diffs beyond frequency response was always a puzzle for me. Will try to fiddle with sonarworks in the week-end. Oh, too bad they don't support Fazor yet.
They both have a smooth linear midrange recess but on the pre-Fazor it's wider, starting at a lower frequency. So the pre-F has lower output from 1-4 kHz. The difference doesn't look like much in a graph, but it's quite noticeable, being right at the ear's most sensitive frequencies. Also the pre-F has a bit less output in the top octave (10kHz on up).
If you wanted a simple parametric EQ to make the LCD-2F sound more like the LCD-2, I'd suggest something like this:
mids: center at 2 kHz, -3db, Q=0.67 or 3dB / octave
highs: center at 14 kHz, -3db, Q=1.4 or 6db / octave
It won't be perfect because the sonic differences are more than just frequency response. But it might get you in the rough ballpark.
The LCD-2F doesn't have noticeably different bass response from the LCD-2. But being less rolled off in the mids and treble, there's more midrange & treble energy which makes bass seem slightly reduced subjectively even if it's at the same level.
That's what I was thinking to do.
Pre-fazor: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2sn53211704circa2012.pdf
Fazor: http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudezeLCD2sn5423021Fazer.pdf
There isn't that much of a difference. Pre-fazor is mostly flat up to 1 khz, then both take a plunge of ~13db compared to flatness average. The minimum is at ~5khz for pre-fazor and ~3khz for fazor, then flat until 5 khz. Most differences are beyond 5khz. Yet the difference, and especially that Fazor has much less perceived bass and warmth, cannot be explained by these differences. Ok, Fazor also has ~2db dip <40 Hz. Difference I hear is much bigger.
What can cause these perceived diffs beyond frequency response was always a puzzle for me. Will try to fiddle with sonarworks in the week-end. Oh, too bad they don't support Fazor yet.
Well you looked at the target curve, which is what it said: a target curve. The real curve is the grey one. Then when you look at it, the LCD2.2 is nearly flat top to bottom, especially if you know that high frequency measurement isn't precise anyway.
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.
