[dallan]

Quote:

 
That's how the Audez'e differs from the 800...everything is highlighted evenly (with balance true to itself), rather than the 800 spot-lighting. Now the 800's are gone my ears have stopped ringing! Damn phone was making me deaf, you need to maintain a higher level for any semblance of balance from the 800....

Huh?  Oh that woke me up in my constant reading of this thread.  Can't wait to hear the LCD-2s at a meet and spend more money.  But that is not what woke me.  It was the part about having to listen at higher levels to get balance from the 800s. That is not my experience.  I listen at pretty low levels normally and I find the 800s to have great balance.  Hmmm.  Ringing?   Guess we all hear things differently, hopefully the LCD-2s will be different enough that i won't like them then i won't be forced to buy them.
 
Turn those things down trying to get balance out of em will ya, your waking the baby!

 

[TheJudge]

Quote:

The point I think I have to reiterate is that "natural" is among most descriptions that people glean from exposure to the Audez'e. Naturalness is emotive in that demonstrates soul or essence of the Musical message. That's the Audez'e (properly powered of course), and with worthy source and material, strives to maintain that stance regardless of genre. Bond with the material when possible, not a special coloration.
 

Huh?

 

[SemiAudiophile]

I think what I liked best about Stax is the "out of head" experience, they do sound more like speakers. Then again, I never heard the LCD-2 driven out of a worthy amp. 
 
I've only listened to the Lambda's and never really cared for its tone and that midrange "etch". The fact that you need a dedicated amp was another turn off for me.  

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

Huh?

 
What don't you understand? His post was clear.

 

[TheJudge]

To you perhaps. I found it oddly expressed but think I understand what he is attempting to convey. The second sentence is particularly problematic.  

 

[El_Doug]

I didnt get it either - care to explain? 
 
Quote:

 
What don't you understand? His post was clear.

 

[smeggy]

Quote:

I didnt get it either - care to explain? 
 

 

They sound awesomezz!!!!

 

[oqvist]

Quote:

 
What don't you understand? His post was clear.

Sure wasn´t... Alan tried to include as many fancy words as possible in that post

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

They sound awesomezz!!!!

There ya go!

 

[Shahrose]

Quote:

I didnt get it either - care to explain?

 

 
Quote:

 
They sound awesomezz!!!!

 
Pretty much.
 
I think what he was trying to convey is that one of the LCD-2's key strengths is their natural presentation and transparency. These qualities allow one to focus more on the inherent emotion and expressiveness of the music recording rather than the coloration/sound signature of the headphone...(and because of this, the Audez'e isn't restricted to/suited for only a small subset of genres like many other headphones are.)
 
Correct me if I'm wrong Alan.

 

[achristilaw]

 
Quote:

 
 
Pretty much.
 
I think what he was trying to convey is that one of the LCD-2's key strengths is their natural presentation and transparency. These qualities allow one to focus more on the inherent emotion and expressiveness of the music recording rather than the coloration/sound signature of the headphone...(and because of this, the Audez'e isn't restricted to/suited for only a small subset of genres like many other headphones are.)
 
Correct me if I'm wrong Alan.

Give that man a Cigar! The Audez'e does a better job of it's own description than I ever could...so does Shahrose. I just read back through it and it makes sense to me...of course I wrote it. Don't kill the messenger! I shouldn't drink in the afternoon, I'd be awake right now.

 

[TigzStudio]

made sense to me.

 

[thinker]

PS awfull
 
 If your pointing to ONE example...what I'm thinking is that you enjoyed the coloration provided, by the over-resonant/prominent nature of the PS-1000 on a particular piece of material. It tickled your ear fancy....and you have to determine whats natural for you. That's my opinion! And it will differ form yours...that's what makes it interesting!

I have done many examples with the LCD and i know the purity what the PS shows against LCD. Its quite simple,take 256 files against
Flac or Wav.The PS shows the difference very clearly but LCD dont,on LCD even 256 are nice but with PS unlistenable.Or a recording where many mics are used on singers for instance Meredith Monk works ,there are many singers but sombody only whispers on the backstage,its clear with the PS but on LCD you hardly get it.Or on a recording where a singer between the words is licking hes lips its clear with PS but i dont get the last info of that licking with LCD etc.Anyway its possible that when changing the stock cable i get the last info.I wish i would have Stax Omega to compare.This is very subtle information and in practise it has no meaning because the LCD overall performance is way above what i have ever heard from any phone .

 

[smeggy]

Lots of phones have very evident peaks in those sonic regions which puts those noises  to the fore, when in reality they may be down in the mix. Many phones sound bright and are sibilant where the LCD is not. Lots of times I think it's frequency emphasis, rather than true detail retrieval that's going on. Given the average Grado spike, I'd be quite surprised if you didn't hear all those little things getting thrust in your face .

 

[grokit]

^ interesting...