[jamato8]

I just made a new balanced IC to go from the iBasso PB1 to the DB1 dac. One thing about these, phones that play very well with the iBasso balanced amp and dac, is that they let me know right away what something sounds like. I use a very high purity silver and I am pleased with the large and open soundstage that is being portrayed. 

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

 
Quote:

 

 

LCD-2's are in a so much higher class that they don't sound anything like HD650's (thankfully).
The only reason they are compared at all is because they both are said to have a 'dark' character. However the LCD's extend far higher than the HD650's and the highs are not as recessed although more recessed than 'bright' phones.

Sorry to rewind the thread a bit, but I was catching up looking through posts and noticed a discussion comparing HD650's to LCD-2's, with at least one mention of the frequency response being similar.  Are we talking about the same headphones?    Pardon the crude photoshop work, but this is scaled pretty much to overlap to scale but may have minor distortions in scaling.   I've heard the 650's on a number of occasions and I would probably agree that if you like them that you'd like the LCD-2 even more (assuming you don't mind the roll off in the highs, which is a big assumption), but I'd be hard pressed to say their frequency response is similar.  I owned a pair of HD600's for about three months and found them to be totally dull and uninspiring personally, but I'd qualify that opinion in that it is based on experience with only one amp: WA6SEm.  I had both stock cable and Cardas cable for them.  OTOH - having lived with the LCD-2 now for a while, my main complaint is the steep roll-off in the highs.  From 1K up they roll off steeply and average about 10db down from the meat of the material I listen to (about 70% vocals).  10db is not insignificant. 
 

 
 

Nice work on the graph. I'd say if you aligned the top of the LCD-2's bass line to the top of the bass curves of the other headphones, or a bit below (maybe where the average of the bass would be on the other headphones), it will give a slightly better idea to people what I reckon they'll hear from them. I always thought that aligning the headphones at 1 kHz doesn't work, but should be aligned on an average of some kind.  The lack of a regular curve through the bass region I think is where people get deceived when comparing graphs, as it makes the treble look lower than it is when you're actually listening.  It's around the mids where everything is rather unusual IMO. Am I making any sense?

 

[elwappo99]

So after some time, I decided to build a cable for my LCD. It's up-occ solid core silver (yikes, no bending). I was very disappointed. After building it, going through the hoops and hooking it up, I was surprised.  "Hey! Where's the bass?!?!?!"  The silver cable turned these into a pair of K701, but with better mids

. After reading my email, and really getting into the music, I realized I had been listening for about 15 minutes, and was really enjoying it. Anyone else have a similar  or different experience with silver cables? I think tomorrow I'm going to try making a cable with my favorite wire

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

So after some time, I decided to build a cable for my LCD. It's up-occ solid core silver (yikes, no bending). I was very disappointed. After building it, going through the hoops and hooking it up, I was surprised.  "Hey! Where's the bass?!?!?!"  The silver cable turned these into a pair of K701, but with better mids

. After reading my email, and really getting into the music, I realized I had been listening for about 15 minutes, and was really enjoying it. Anyone else have a similar  or different experience with silver cables? I think tomorrow I'm going to try making a cable with my favorite wire

I started working with silver in the early 90's. There are configurations and gauges that can give you everything you need, including normal substantial bass. Dead soft is what any high purity silver is but it is used today in audio silver wire as if it is annealed special when high purity silver is dead soft but a good annealing process is still desirable. In audio I coined the phrase years ago and I get a kick out of it when I see it used. 
 

 

[nigeljames]

 
Quote:

 
Quote:

 
LCD-2's are in a so much higher class that they don't sound anything like HD650's (thankfully).
The only reason they are compared at all is because they both are said to have a 'dark' character. However the LCD's extend far higher than the HD650's and the highs are not as recessed although more recessed than 'bright' phones.

Sorry to rewind the thread a bit, but I was catching up looking through posts and noticed a discussion comparing HD650's to LCD-2's, with at least one mention of the frequency response being similar.  Are we talking about the same headphones?    Pardon the crude photoshop work, but this is scaled pretty much to overlap to scale but may have minor distortions in scaling.   I've heard the 650's on a number of occasions and I would probably agree that if you like them that you'd like the LCD-2 even more (assuming you don't mind the roll off in the highs, which is a big assumption), but I'd be hard pressed to say their frequency response is similar.  I owned a pair of HD600's for about three months and found them to be totally dull and uninspiring personally, but I'd qualify that opinion in that it is based on experience with only one amp: WA6SEm.  I had both stock cable and Cardas cable for them.  OTOH - having lived with the LCD-2 now for a while, my main complaint is the steep roll-off in the highs.  From 1K up they roll off steeply and average about 10db down from the meat of the material I listen to (about 70% vocals).  10db is not insignificant. 
 

 
 

 
In my system I don't find the LCD's to be significantly rolled off in the hf's, slightly recessed yes rolled off no. I compared my balanced K701's to the LCD-2's (singel ended) into my Roc and both into the Woo and noticed that the AKG's were only slighly brigher on most material and as they are considered bright phones I consider the LCD's as rather neutral in hf extension its only the slighty recessed hf's, much less than HD650's, that can be the cause of any 'dark' sound.
 
I have done a comparison between the HE-6's and LCD's just listening for hf notes/instruments and have yet to find a situation where the LCD's are rolled off compared to the HE-6's although the hf's are further back in the mix with the LCD's.
To the best of my knowledge all phones have hf levels lower than flat in their frequency response with the 'bright' phones generally being bright because of treble peaks not an overall increase in hf levels.
 
Maybe I have a brighter than normal LCD-2, unfortunately its frequency graph is in its box somewhere in the loft and I am not about to search for it!
 
IMO the biggest area where the HD650's and LCD's are similar is in their full bodied and rich sound. Everything else is totally different and much better on the LCD's.
 
This is ALL in my system with my ears

 

 

[eugeneyou]

can LCD-2 be be driven by portable amp?

 

[Skylab]

 
Quote:

In my system I don't find the LCD's to be significantly rolled off in the hf's, slightly recessed yes rolled off no. I compared my balanced K701's to the LCD-2's (singel ended) into my Roc and both into the Woo and noticed that the AKG's were only slighly brigher on most material and as they are considered bright phones I consider the LCD's as rather neutral in hf extension its only the slighty recessed hf's, much less than HD650's, that can be the cause of any 'dark' sound.

 
That's because they are NOT rolled off, and the graph clearly shows this.  This isn't even open for debate - it's fact.  I think people get terms confused, but you have it right.  "Rolled off" means that the treble decreases as the frequency increases, such that it continues to decline in amplitude as the frequency increases.  If you look at the graph, that is very clearly NOT happening, and in fact much less than it does with many other headphones.
 
The treble on the LCD-2 is, stated accurately, "shelved down".  It's shelved down an average of 10 dB or so from the bass level.  But it is NOT "rolled off".
 
Just sayin'

 

[MrGreen]

asdsadadsa

 

[Skylab]

 
Quote:

That's a bit of a nitpick, to be fair. You both mean the same thing.

To be clear, I was agreeing with NigelJames, but making it clear that he is right, and that it is inaccurate to state that the LCD-2 are "rolled off", as others have claimed.

 

[nigeljames]

I agree with nigeljames as well

 

[InnerSpace]

Quote:

Quote:

That's because they are NOT rolled off, and the graph clearly shows this.  This isn't even open for debate - it's fact.  I think people get terms confused, but you have it right.  "Rolled off" means that the treble decreases as the frequency increases, such that it continues to decline in amplitude as the frequency increases.  If you look at the graph, that is very clearly NOT happening, and in fact much less than it does with many other headphones.
 
The treble on the LCD-2 is, stated accurately, "shelved down".  It's shelved down an average of 10 dB or so from the bass level.  But it is NOT "rolled off".
 

That's a bit of a nitpick, to be fair. You both mean the same thing.

Don't agree.  A shelf is very different than a roll-off.  A roll-off continues to decline as frequency rises (or falls, in the bass), but a shelf can be flat all the way, albeit globally lower (or higher) in level than a midrange point of reference.  E.g. HD800 bass, which is very flat and very, very extended, albeit lower in level than the midrange.  No roll-off there, just a shelf.  If it was rolled off, it wouldn't be extended.  Same with LCD-2 treble, not that I love the LCD-2 or am here to defend it.

 

[MrGreen]

Quote:

 
Quote:

That's a bit of a nitpick, to be fair. You both mean the same thing.

To be clear, I was agreeing with NigelJames, but making it clear that he is right, and that it is inaccurate to state that the LCD-2 are "rolled off", as others have claimed.

Oh sorry, read the wrong post. Bit smashed to be honest.

 

[jax]

I see your point, Rob.  So taking a 14db swan dive from 1k to 2.5k is not "rolled off" because then it then maintains an average of -10db extended out to 20k.  My bad then, but the highs do occur to my ears to be a bit too recessed. Then again, the highs on HE-5's consistently cave me a headache and I gave up on them in less than a month.  So I might be have a similar complaint had Audeze opted to knock that shelf up a bit higher. Thanks for the correction.  Also thanks to Currawong - good suggestion in aligning the curves.  If I have a moment today I'll do that.  It makes sense because ultimately I tend to adjust my volume to the midtones. 
 
 


Quote:

 
 
That's because they are NOT rolled off, and the graph clearly shows this.  This isn't even open for debate - it's fact.  I think people get terms confused, but you have it right.  "Rolled off" means that the treble decreases as the frequency increases, such that it continues to decline in amplitude as the frequency increases.  If you look at the graph, that is very clearly NOT happening, and in fact much less than it does with many other headphones.
 
The treble on the LCD-2 is, stated accurately, "shelved down".  It's shelved down an average of 10 dB or so from the bass level.  But it is NOT "rolled off".
 
Just sayin'

 

[grokit]

Glad we got that sorted out, now we all know the difference between recessed and rolled-off high frequencies.
 
And it only took 8,158 posts

 

[K3cT]

I have to say it's nice to have a "dark" can for once since emphasizing highs have been the cool thing to do lately in flagship models. *looks at the T1 and HD800*