[KevinWolff]

They rarely stay that way. After a couple years of burn-in, they become exponentially less supportive of such hobbies in my experience. I A/B'd two completely different wives, the result was the same. 

 
Quote:

Hmmmmmmm.  she could be audiophile wife material...

 

 

 

[pp312]

 
Quote:

Based on your requirements (at least what I think you want), you need to upgrade your amp and source. Simple as that. It's up to you whether you want to take my advice.
 
 

Chesebert, I'd like to ask if you think any of the possible causes of varying perception that floydfan has listed are valid, or is the cause of all dissatisfaction always inferior equipment? For myself, in 30 years I have never been able to discern any difference whatsoever in CD players--none. I've had some very good players and they sound no different to me than my budget Sony. Amps--yes, to a degree, though usually not the degree people claim. But CD players...I've never had a system dissatisfaction that a change of CD players has fixed.   
 

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

 

I didn't really understand the reasoning either, the closure seemed a bit heavy-handed.
 

 

[K3cT]

Quote:

Yes, I just read the last page of that thread, plus the reason for closing it: "Most of you are expressing mistaken opinions." Eh, what's a mistaken opinion?
 

 
 

Yeah, no offense to the moderator but the reasoning is strange. Threads go off tangent all the time anyway, not sure why that particular thread has to be singled out and locked. I would rather read comparisons to HE500, HD800 and vintage orthos rather than whether burn-in changes the LCD2 from mediocre to awesomeness. 

 

[DeadEars]

Quote:

They rarely stay that way. After a couple years of burn-in, they become exponentially less supportive of such hobbies in my experience. I A/B'd two completely different wives, the result was the same. 

 


 

LOL!
 
Mine has decided that audiophilia is a lot cheaper than mistresses or gambling...   I still get encouragement after many, many years.
 
 
 

 

[wink]

 
Quote:

I've had some very good players and they sound no different to me than my budget Sony. Amps--yes, to a degree, though usually not the degree people claim. But CD players...I've never had a system dissatisfaction that a change of CD players has fixed.     

Just face it, some people have better hearing than us, others worse, and some totally different......................

 

[jax]

 
Quote:

Judgment comes with experience. My comment on how you can solve your rev1 problem is for your benefit, and not for the benefit of other new members. Schitt makes some nice amp with high value proposition. But that doesn't mean it can create the kind of soundstage you are looking for with rev1 (I presume you want rev1 to sound more 3-D, with sound that sits outside your head and and proper depth reproduction and positioning).
 
Lastly, the comment about DAC1 is simply to point out that it's significantly easier to get great preceived soundstage with HD800 than LCD2 (you need to read more closely next time). 
 
Based on your requirements (at least what I think you want), you need to upgrade your amp and source. Simple as that. It's up to you whether you want to take my advice.
 


 

 
I've had some experience over six months of ownership of the r.1's (using a few different amps and front-ends), and having also heard several samples at a local meet on many different amps and front-ends.  My own rig is pretty good and some of the rigs I've listened on don't get much better.  My own impressions based on this experience is that if you are a big fan soundstaging prowess in a headphone, an improvement in the upstream components will not satisfy your desire for better soundstaging.  Not even remotely. It is just not one of the r.1's strengths. The r.1's soundstaging performance don't magically transform with different upstream gear - the best you could hope for is minor improvements there.  Other aspects of its performance certainly do change (your judgment would be better to know whether those changes are improvements to your own tastes), but there are no major changes in sounstaging in my own experience.  If you do want soundtage prowess, and like the signature of the LCD-2 r.1, you can certainly get a marked improvement by going to the r.2.  This will come with a few other changes as well, so be forewarned that you might want to listen and consider all the differences.  Neither one will approach the soundstage performance of an HD800 or 007's in my own experience.  Those cans have an entirely different character altogether, and there is really no point going down the LCD-2 road if that is what you are after, but the r.2 will bring you closer....IMO. On the other hand the LCD-2 makes a very nice complement to HD800's or Stax simply because the two are so different. 
 
Cheesebert - you've made a general comment here on Schitt amps and soundstaging.  Have you actually listened to any specific Schitt amps to come to that conclusion?  I assume you are referring to the Lyr, though you don't specify.  What are you basing that on? You also have commented previously on the Leben with apparently no direct experience.  And your experience led you to make this comments in the recent past:
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
In my experience most well made dynamic headphones sound more alike (as in all sound good) than different when driven from a top-end amp with a high-end source. Sure, there are slight differences in how each...

 
So what you are suggesting is that from a top-end amp, a Grado HF2 sounds pretty much like HD800's, according to your post here, is that correct?  And that is based on your experience?
 
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chesebert /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Judgment comes with experience. My comment on how you can solve your rev1 problem is for your benefit, and not for the benefit of other new members.

 
 
Why would any of your comments that you post publicly be expected to be for the "benefit" of only one person and not for anyone else?  If you wanted to bestow your wisdom to only one person I'd suggest just PM'ing that one person rather than posting here. 
 
I just want to get a clear sense of where you are coming from. 

 

[WarriorAnt]

 

Quote:

Have I missed jude's comparison yet?

Quote:

Just a quick opinion after some time with the Rev 2 LCD-2's:  I don't care what the graphs say--to my ears, the Rev 1 and Rev 2 sound less alike than the graphs might suggest.  I don't know if it's due more to the earpads (both of my Rev 1's are equipped with the older style pads, and I haven't done any swapping yet) or the different drivers, but the LCD-2 is noticeably more resolving to me, and the improvements in tonal balance and treble presence are noticeable and appreciated (for my tastes).  I'm over the moon about the changes.
 
I still love the Rev 1, and the ones I've got aren't going anywhere.  But if Audeze had asked me what I'd change about the sonics of the Rev 1, the Rev 2, as it is, is what I'd have asked for.
 
On the one hand, I see why Audeze has stuck with the LCD-2 designation for this revision.  On the other hand, part of me is surprised this didn't end up being called the LCD-3.
 
(And, yes, I have both sets, so I'm not comparing from memory.  I actually have two sets of each; and, again, I'm keeping the Rev 1's, as its signature is still an awesome flavor to keep around.)
 
 

 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Yes, I just read the last page of that thread, plus the reason for closing it: "Most of you are expressing mistaken opinions." Eh, what's a mistaken opinion?
 

Public urination is neither encouraged nor allowed 'round these parts.
 
 

 

[floydfan33]

Quote:

Floydfan are you going straight from your computer to your Lyr with your FLAC music? If so that is definitely an issue, get that Bifrost with the USB option on order! If your SACD has coaxial out then it's a double win.

Currently using a Matrix Mini-i, which replaced an HDP. I am waiting for the mid level Schiit DAC, and will be upgrading.
 
I have to say that the Mini-i was slightly better than the HDP as a DAC, but felt that the analog out on my CD-S1000 provided a little better imaging and mid-range than the BNC to the Mini-i.
 
Thanks for the advice, as this is very much my next jump.
 
 

 

[KevinWolff]

You definitely have a rare wife. I've heard about them but never encountered one. Legend has it they are as rare as some of the finest matched pairs of 1950's NOS tubes. 

 
 
Quote:

LOL!
 
Mine has decided that audiophilia is a lot cheaper than mistresses or gambling...   I still get encouragement after many, many years.
 
 
 

 

 

[chesebert]

Those factors could certainly contribute to variations in sound perception. However, those factors would be present in any impression/review/comment of audio equipment or any other hobby that depends on one of the senses. The issue is whether any one of those factors listed is a primarily contributing factor for the 2D "flat" soundstage and "in your head" sound. The answer is possible, but not likely. One of the benefits, among many, hi-end sources bring to the table that's lacking in more modest gear is the realistic rendition of soundstage. The illusion of soundstage is created by your brain based on the many sound cues recorded during a performance. As sound bonce off many different surfaces, these reflection are recorded. Depending on the quality of your playback gear, you might be able to extract a percentage of those, the better the source, the more accurate the rendition. Timing errors (or jitter) would certainly destroy/distort those fine sounds, as will less sophisticated digital conversion/filter and output stage. These many sound cues are crucial to your ability to "recreate" the sound stage. Of course, if your amp can't properly control the driver to reproduce those fine sound cues, you won't hear the benefit of any improvement - this is a reason why some people can't tell any difference when they upgrade their sources. 
 
To help you improve your ability to discern sounds and quality of gear, particularly sources, I would recommend Chesky's Ultimate Demonstration CD. It's a great tool to learn critical listening with.
 
Quote:

 


Chesebert, I'd like to ask if you think any of the possible causes of varying perception that floydfan has listed are valid, or is the cause of all dissatisfaction always inferior equipment? For myself, in 30 years I have never been able to discern any difference whatsoever in CD players--none. I've had some very good players and they sound no different to me than my budget Sony. Amps--yes, to a degree, though usually not the degree people claim. But CD players...I've never had a system dissatisfaction that a change of CD players has fixed.   
 

 

 

[olor1n]

chesebert, have you heard the rev.2 through the Lyr?

 

[Questhate]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeadEars /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
LOL!
 
Mine has decided that audiophilia is a lot cheaper than mistresses or gambling...   I still get encouragement after many, many years.

Yes! My significant other calls headphones my "anti-drug". The more money I pour into it, the more money I displace from more damaging vices. 
 
She'll change her tune whenever I propose with a plastic gumball ring as I blow my money on an SR-009 set up. 
 

 

[googleli]

To be frank, the effect of high end source on headphone is not as drastic on speaker systems. And the effect is even less on the LCD2 - which is quite resolving, but not nearly as resolving as the Stax 009, on which improvement is clearly heard as source improves. Not that I suggest everyone should get my Esoteric K-01 which costs US$20,000 in the States, but source certainly makes a difference.
 
Like cables - it is one thing to say that more expensive CD players do not necessarily produce better sound - and even if they do, the improvement is never linearly proportional to the amount of money spent - this much I agree. But it is another thing to say they don't make any difference, which I completely disagree, and I suspect anyone who is not deaf would.