Audeze LCD-2 Orthos

[Sophonax]

Someone asked a little earlier for some negative things about the LCD-2s:
 
My biggest problem is with the stock cable -- it is absurdly microphonic!  Something about the design of the headphones makes them pick up vibrations on the cable particularly strongly (heard as a lot of bass bumps and scratches), and that Techflex sleeving on the top portion of the cable scrapes on everything.  I often wear a polar fleece zippered jacket around home, and that Techflex sleeving scraping on the zipper is enough to drive me insane...
 
But if I hold perfectly still while listening, problem solved

 
The other thing I haven't found myself enjoying about the LCD-2s is the soundstage.  Next to the HD800s, T1s, K701s, or even my closed LA7000s, I find the soundstage of the LCD-2s to be smaller by comparison.  This compressed soundstage, combined with the slightly recessed treble and stronger bass, gives them what is in my opinion something of a stuffier sound.  I find myself wanting just a little more air in the presentation to help open it up. 
 
I haven't put too many hours on them yet, and I'm not yet sure that I like the overall sound signature given by the LCD-2s.  However, there is one thing I can say for certain: these 'phones have TONS of detail.  Detail done the proper way, too -- that is, the detail comes from the extremely fast driver rather than from unnatural emphasis of treble (a la HD800).  When it comes to detail, these cans are in a league of their own; the attempts at detail made by the HD800s and T1s seem almost amateur-ish when compared with the LCD-2s.
 
I'll probably post some more thoughts later.

 

[AmanGeorge]

Quote:

 
The other thing I haven't found myself enjoying about the LCD-2s is the soundstage.  Next to the HD800s, T1s, K701s, or even my closed LA7000s, I find the soundstage of the LCD-2s to be smaller by comparison.  This compressed soundstage, combined with the slightly recessed treble and stronger bass, gives them what is in my opinion something of a stuffier sound.  I find myself wanting just a little more air in the presentation to help open it up.

I haven't decided yet to what degree I find this to be true myself (even coming from a preference for 'phones like the HD800 and K701). When I've really sank into the music, I have found the Audez'e imaging to be the best I have heard from a headphone - it just doesn't have the huge, encompassing, airy presentation. I do miss that from other headphones, but I guess I worry that the trade-off would be other aspects of the sonic performance.

 

[SillyHoney]

So far I'm impressed by 4 things:

- Bass is phenomenon but yet not overwhelm the whole spectrum, unlike my D7000.

- Very retrieving

- I don't really get the concept of "fast" but when I listen to LCD-2 I feel it's very fast. The pace of music is somehow different even compared to my STAX. It's my own feeling. Not by reading other posts.

- Soundstage is indeed not the hugest compared to some phones I had but imaging best them all.

 

[K3cT]

Quote:

The other thing I haven't found myself enjoying about the LCD-2s is the soundstage.  Next to the HD800s, T1s, K701s, or even my closed LA7000s, I find the soundstage of the LCD-2s to be smaller by comparison.  This compressed soundstage, combined with the slightly recessed treble and stronger bass, gives them what is in my opinion something of a stuffier sound.  I find myself wanting just a little more air in the presentation to help open it up.   
I haven't put too many hours on them yet, and I'm not yet sure that I like the overall sound signature given by the LCD-2s.  However, there is one thing I can say for certain: these 'phones have TONS of detail.  Detail done the proper way, too -- that is, the detail comes from the extremely fast driver rather than from unnatural emphasis of treble (a la HD800).  When it comes to detail, these cans are in a league of their own; the attempts at detail made by the HD800s and T1s seem almost amateur-ish when compared with the LCD-2s.
 
I'll probably post some more thoughts later.

 
Sounds like you're describing an O2. It has a smallish soundstage compared to the HD800 or K701 but man, the precision of the imaging is unbeatable. The O2 also has a slightly recessed treble and some serious bass thump but I suppose the lack of boosted treble which is obviously present in HD800 makes things sound very natural and life-like. I also have to say that the O2 is not something that will "WOW" people at meets because of the above-mentioned characteristics, you need to spend some time with it first to acclimate to its characters. And suddenly, you will find that other dynamic phones sound unnatural and constricted.
 
I was really impressed with the O2 and so I will be content if the LCD-2 can even be 70% or 80% similar to it.
 
What are you using to drive the LCD-2 anyway?
 

 

[Sophonax]

 
Quote:

What are you using to drive the LCD-2 anyway?
 

My source was my FLAC library on my computer feeding via optical into a Bel Canto DAC3.  For amplification, it was the Schiit Asgard -- maybe not the most optimal amp, but it's the only amp that I have which (by other people's findings) has enough juice to properly power the LCD-2s.
 
That being said, I also tried the LCD-2s out of lower-end sources and amps, such as out of my Yamaha RX-497 and straight out of an iPod.  My impressions were that the LCD-2s are not as difficult to power as has been reported.  The DAC3 / Asgard combo helped to bring extreme levels of detail out of the LCD-2s, but the overall tonality and even the bass performance did not seem to degrade much when switching to lower-quality and lower-powered sources.  Compare that to my LA7000s and other Denons I've heard, which to my ears always had very sloppy bass when powered directly from an iPod.

 

[tonereef]

I don't really know how these things work but by filtering out the crud in the line it seems to improve the s/n and allow detail that was masked before to be heard. Yes, it was installed on the same outlet/circuit that I'd been using before, and no, the result wasn't a psychoacoustic effect. I didn't even have to A/B because I played CDs/SACDs I had recently listened to with the same set-up, which hasn't changed for a couple of months. This wasn't a subtle improvement that I had to check to make sure I wasn't making it up. Once you know how a reference sounds, obvious changes are just that, obvious. And they were consistent.
 
The amp is DIY, discrete, ss, about 1/2w.
 
Quote:

I bought a power-conditioner for my gear a while back, but for surge protection more so than sound quality. I can't say whether it makes any sonic differences as these things just filter out the sound spectrum that is double what we at  >18 yrs have trouble hearing -40khz.
 
Was the power conditioner installed on the same outlet you were using before? Or was the whole system moved? just curious.
 
Also, which amp are you currently using?
 
Perhaps it was more so you finally got used to the sound signature and it's psychoacoustics. The "audeze wall" definitely seems to take getting used to, before it is transformed into believable depth and detail. Doesn't mean they have the best headstage, but it is not bad or gradoesque. It's like a new pair of shoes, your feet stay more or less the same, but each new pair takes a little while before they feel like your shoes, instead of something you bought at the store.
 
Plug the LCD-2 into and iPod, and then your reference system. I will sound good regardless of what is playing it, just not necessarily at its best.

 

[SP Wild]

Compared directly to the K701s, I find the LCD2s are at least just as wide...at the upper mid and treble, this is where the K701s main soundstage exists and is emphasised to let you know its wide.  The LCD2s upper mid soundstage  at least matches it and I think is wider...only it's not as obvious, because unlike the K701s - the LCD2s also have a wide lower mid soundstage - something the K701 doesn't have.  The imaging of the K701 does not compete either.  I find the LCD2s soundstage is twice as large in overall volume than the K701 - ie the soundstage extends through all frequencies...not just upper mid as in the K701.   The K701 may give an impression of a larger soundstage because of it's tipped up tonal  balance.  The point being, constricted soundstage and LCD2s do not compute to me.  This is the same with all my amps and sources.
 
The LCD2 soundstage in my setup is positively massive and intimate.  Basically I am wondering if my hearing is defective - as I own the K701s and these are known to have a huge SS and I hear it as so...but I must be hearing something that is not there with the LCD2s...time to get my hearing checked I suppose...LOL! 
 
Am listening to 24/96 master of Ana Caram "blue bossa" and must remind myself that the saxophone that extends waaay to my left is just an illusion.

 

[BK_856er]

Out of curiosity, what specific conditioner did you use?
 
BK

 
Quote:

I don't really know how these things work but by filtering out the crud in the line it seems to improve the s/n and allow detail that was masked before to be heard. Yes, it was installed on the same outlet/circuit that I'd been using before, and no, the result wasn't a psychoacoustic effect. I didn't even have to A/B because I played CDs/SACDs I had recently listened to with the same set-up, which hasn't changed for a couple of months. This wasn't a subtle improvement that I had to check to make sure I wasn't making it up. Once you know how a reference sounds, obvious changes are just that, obvious. And they were consistent.
 
The amp is DIY, discrete, ss, about 1/2w.
 

 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

So far I'm impressed by 3 things:

- Bass is phenomenon but yet not overwhelm the whole spectrum, unlike my D7000.

- Very retreiving.

- I don't really get the concept of "fast" but when I listen to LCD-2 I feel it's very fast. The pace of music is somehow different even compared to my STAX. It's my own feeling. Not by reading other posts.

- Soundstage is indeed not the hugest compared to some phones I had but imaging is best them all.

I agree on all of your points as well with 2 days under my belt with the LCD-2s. (except for the Stax comments as I don't have enough experience with them to comment)
 
CD Player --> PS Audio DLIII --> Concerto setup.

 

[Frank I]

I am happy we are seeing more varying impressions, For the past five months it was like there wer the best. I asked that question on weaknoess and now getting some cleare impression on what to expect when I get my pair. The microphonic cable is not too cool.

 

[Equus]

Quote:

Compared directly to the K701s, I find the LCD2s are at least just as wide...at the upper mid and treble, this is where the K701s main soundstage exists and is emphasised to let you know its wide.  The LCD2s upper mid soundstage  at least matches it and I think is wider...only it's not as obvious, because unlike the K701s - the LCD2s also have a wide lower mid soundstage - something the K701 doesn't have.  The imaging of the K701 does not compete either.  I find the LCD2s soundstage is twice as large in overall volume than the K701 - ie the soundstage extends through all frequencies...not just upper mid as in the K701.   The K701 may give an impression of a larger soundstage because of it's tipped up tonal  balance.  The point being, constricted soundstage and LCD2s do not compute to me.  This is the same with all my amps and sources.
 
The LCD2 soundstage in my setup is positively massive and intimate.  Basically I am wondering if my hearing is defective - as I own the K701s and these are known to have a huge SS and I hear it as so...but I must be hearing something that is not there with the LCD2s...time to get my hearing checked I suppose...LOL! 
 
Am listening to 24/96 master of Ana Caram "blue bossa" and must remind myself that the saxophone that extends waaay to my left is just an illusion.

Interesting observations on the width of the soundstage.  Thanks!

 

[MuppetFace]

Guess whose LCD-2 just arrived at 12:15 PM? This girl's right here!
 
 
 
 
 
 
......see you all tomorrow! 

 

[AmanGeorge]

Congrats!

 

[SP Wild]

 
Quote:

Interesting observations on the width of the soundstage.  Thanks!

You just need a decent software EQ...the standard Foobar and JRMC EQ will suffice.  Adjust the EQ's to emulate different cans in tonality...it is in this method one can pinpoint true strengths and weaknesses without the effects of acoustic masking by competing frequencies.  This applies specifically to speed and soundstage which seem to be interpreted by many via higher frequencies only - ignoring the rest of the spectrum.
 
When I auditioned the O2s, that had a soundstage size not disimilar to the HD650 - I'd say smaller even - the advantages with this approach is clearly better imaging.  The LCD2s just don't compare to either in SS - yet remarkable imaging does not suffer from its big SS, not like the diffused K701 imaging.  Ultimately, I find the HD650 images a touch more sharply than the LCD2s - as in able to pinpoint a precise instrument location...but the LCD2s are no slouch when it comes to imaging, it's very good.
 
Then again, the PX100s image better than the HD650 - no soundstage means the guitar is right beside my ear, with incredible pinpoint accuracy.

 

[tonereef]

It's a clone of the Audience Adept Response:
 
www.audience-av.com/conditioners/ar12_desc.php
 
Here's a review:
 
www.6moons.com/audioreviews/audience5/adeptresponse.html
 
I haven't tried others so maybe there's something out there for less money that would do as good a job with headphones. This unit has no inductors, only capacitors, and I'm told is really designed for use with power amps where reduction of dynamics with power conditioners is a problem - that shouldn't be an issue with low-level inputs (preamps, hp amps etc.).
 
Quote:

Out of curiosity, what specific conditioner did you use?
 
BK