[olor1n]

Lazy question, but are the single vertical screws in the L and R blocks designed to lock the height adjustment in place? I find it irritating the left pole keeps dropping and loosening the fit.

 

[Duckman]

I'm with Jax regarding burn-in. The stridency I heard initially with the Rev2 has abated quite a bit.
 
To demonstrate stridency within a certain frequency band, I use and recommend the "Chad Kroeger test". The only Chad song I have is Hero from the Spiderman disk. It is relatively well recorded for a rock tune, but with headphones that offer stridency in the upper-mids and lower treble (I'm guessing at the range), his voice becomes positively painful when he sings certain notes. It's as though the brain is being pierced from within by a rusty dagger. In other words, quite unpleasant.
 
When I mentioned earlier that the Rev2 had Grado 325 treble harshness, that was the overwheming conviction that flooded my mind after applying the Chad Kroeger test. But it was there more or less with most of the music I was playing.
 
Now however, after I'm not sure how many hours of burn-in (maybe 24), Chad has shown me that the Rev2 has changed. I can listen to him pretty much pain-free.
 
By the way, WNBC, thanks for the review. I pretty much agree with everything you said.

 

[HK_sends]

Quote:

Lazy question, but are the single vertical screws in the L and R blocks designed to lock the height adjustment in place? I find it irritating the left pole keeps dropping and loosening the fit.

Yes, but they are threadlocked with Loctite.  I removed mine and some of the plastic thread came with it.  One of my posts is loose as well.  I really think it's a design flaw with the blocks.  The aluminum blocks on some of the R.1s had the screw/ball adjuster on one side and something held in with a hex screw on the other side to keep the posts from being loose.
 
I wish I had a good fix for you...
 
-HK sends
 
 

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

I think the entire forum would benefit from posters such as yourself allowing themselves to be more critical when describing their experiences.  I really did try to empathize with your descriptions here, but at the end of the day, what you're REALLY saying is, the R1 didn't have enough detail and the R2 has more. It would be vastly more beneficial to people reading your posts to just come right out and say that, rather than coat it with words like "beautiful" and "impressive", yet actually imply that it's lacking.  Now I know you're going to come back in here and call me out for putting words into your mouth, that you really don't think the R1 lacks detail yada yada, but come on.  Details are details on tracks. if you feel that there are drivers that can bring out more, then the ones you've been listening to just haven't been doing the job adequately.  People shouldn't be ashamed of making critical statements about their equipment, even if they've spent $1000 on them.  I'm not sure why you so adamantly wish to defend the R1's detail when you clearly find it short.  It makes it so much more informative for people who are looking to buy the headphones you so love.  There's a reason why words like bad, poor, adequate, good, great, exceptional, perfect were created.  If our headphones were allowed only the descriptors 'perfect', and 'perfecter', confusion is all that awaits us.
 
p.s. I do love my lcd-2 r2 but I would never call them close to perfect. At all.  simply because in 10 years time that's just gonna sound silly. we would all benefit from being more realistic.


 

What do you want me to say?  The r.1 is beautiful and impressive. It is seductive and creamy. It just wasn't for me, not for my tastes.  It didn't have enough detail for me but I'm a detail whore I guess. It could be that the HD 800 is really for me, and if it is that doesn't make the r.1 or the r.2 bad. Just not for me as far as detail goes.  I have a terrible feeling the STAX may be for me.  
 
There are so many kinds of headphones and amps and DACs that really it's all a combo of what one can put together to find what fits ones preferences. The key really is to know what ones preferences are and then when you achieve that goal to STOP. Don't go any further.  Most people learn this the hard expensive way. I did for sure with speaker rigs. I found a sound I really enjoyed but I got swayed and spent thousands upon thousand of dollars trying to find the right sound again.  It never even occurred to me to just go back to the sound I liked because I thought i'd eventually find it in the same way with more and more gear. but it was not to be.  Luckily headphone gear costs a fraction of what high end speaker gear can cost.
 
I agree with you detail on a track is detail but once it leaves the recording studio and goes out into the world it starts on a journey of interpretation by all manners of equipment and ears and it will never ever be interpreted again or played back again the way it was recorded and mixed unless it is played back again on the same equipment it was recorded on, in the recording house it was created in.  That never happens.
 
So the recording goes out into the world on a journey for everyone to interpret.  in the case of a headphone audiophile  it may be a Woo WA22 and an HD800 with who knows what DAC, or in my case an LCD-2 with a DAC-2, and a V200.  No matter what the detail thats on the track it will always be left up to interpretation by the equipment used and judged and savored by the personal preferences of the user.
 
Even the engineers who record or compose a track don't really know how much detail there is their tracks.  I know this because I've listened to one of my own compositions which I made and mixed on a set of speakers and was taken aback by how much detail was revealed by the r.1, and then when I got the r.2 there was even more detail revealed.  I never knew there was so much detail in one of my own tracks.  There was more detail from the r.1 than the speakers and more detail from the r.2 than the r.1   What to choose?   I'm a detail whore but I choose the speakers for interpretation even with all the detail from the r.2 my preference is to hear the speakers with my own tracks  BTW I can link you one of my tracks if you want. Most people don't dig them so you are forewarned.
 
Thanks for spending some energy to empathize with me though and for spending the energy to reply. 
 
How do you feel about the differences between the r.1 and the r.2?   I may leave it up to preference when it comes to which has better detail but as far as the soundstage goes in my opinion the r.2 is clearly superior and the r.1 is inferior.  

 

[WobblyGoblin]

Quote:

 
Now however, after I'm not sure how many hours of burn-in (maybe 24), Chad [Kroeger]has shown me that the Rev2 has changed. I can listen to him pretty much pain-free.
 

 
I don't think that's possible no matter how good a person's setup is

 
 
 
 
 
(we can agree to disagree on music taste, but how could I pass up an opportunity like that?

)
 

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

Actually, the only issues that have been beaten to death 

 are the ridiculous back and forth of posters accusing each other of misrepresenting what they hear, claiming "it's my way or the highway", rationalizing to death the reason that what they hear must be correct based on ridiculous abstractions, arbitrary fact, and arcane career knowledge so everyone else obviously hearing impaired, the LCD-2 must suck because it doesn't sound as good as my $250K system (but I'll keep them anyway to remind myself just how horrible they really are), and finally (although I'm sure there is more out there) because you've turned this into a "v.1 is better...NO, v.2 is better...NO, V.1 is BETTER...NO! V.2 IS BETTER" freakin' Urinary Olympic Competition!
 
About 87 pages ago, it was fun, offbeat, and a little weird.  Now, it's just wailing and gnashing of teeth.  I have both versions here and I have my opinions on which is better for what.  But how dare I venture my opinions and impressions because they are subjective and not written in a 100% sterile, objective environment where there is no margin of error and the "facts" can't be disputed! 

  Seems the hobbyist and enthusiast must take a second seat to this "professional airing of objective opinions" that is taking place in such a calm, constructive manner.

 
Then, of course, I have to be told to "shut up and color" because I want to reintroduce a little fun into a thread long bereft of it.  Have fun with your articulately crafted bicker-fest...I'm outa here!
 
GOD, I miss the Hamsters!  Never laughed so much in my life...now all I do is skip belittling posts...not much to read anymore.
 
It's no one's business which version I prefer until they go up for sale.  Maybe I'll just sell 'em both so I don't have to be tempted to look in on this thread anymore.  It's not a pretty sight.
 
Adios,
-HK sends
 
 

I'm pretty sure your talking about me at least to a large degree. Sorry man, I guess I got out of hand. 
 
Just trying to get the thread to 1000 pages...
 

 

[visualguy]

Quote:

What do you want me to say?  The r.1 is beautiful and impressive. It is seductive and creamy. It just wasn't for me, not for my tastes.  It didn't have enough detail for me but I'm a detail whore I guess. It could be that the HD 800 is really for me, and if it is that doesn't make the r.1 or the r.2 bad. Just not for me as far as detail goes.  I have a terrible feeling the STAX may be for me.  
 
 

The HD800 have good detail, but I can't get used to their strange soundstage - it feels like the sound comes from somewhere over my head (that is, from the ceiling). It's pretty good, but coming from the wrong place!
 
If you really want to continue this quest, I would recommend the HE-6 or the T1. I like the HE-6 a little better overall, but the T1 is close and it has a better soundstage. I can't say how those compare to the LCD-2 r. 2 since I haven't heard these yet, but I think they would fit what you're looking for better than the LCD-2 r. 1.
 
If you want to bask in details without breaking the bank, give the ATH-W5000 a try, although I wouldn't recommend them as your only headphones - they are flawed...
 
High-end Stax (SR-007 or SR-009) is where the journey ends in my experience, but it doesn't sound like you want to go there. My observation is that many folks end up spending more on trying a bunch of lesser combinations of equipment (headphones and amps) with which they aren't totally satisfied. The costs add up... Instead, the money could be spent on a good Stax setup from the beginning, and the time could be spent on listening to music rather than buying/selling/researching...
 
I like listening to a variety of headphones and speakers, so I own many pairs based on different technologies, but if I had to keep only one headphones setup, it would be Stax without a doubt.
 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Lazy question, but are the single vertical screws in the L and R blocks designed to lock the height adjustment in place? I find it irritating the left pole keeps dropping and loosening the fit.

The setscrews adjust the tension on a spring which pushes a ball bearing against the vertical yoke rod.  Just make the spring tension a little tighter to make the detents stronger.
 
 

 

[Alghazanth]

Quote:

 My observation is that many folks end up spending more on trying a bunch of lesser combinations of equipment (headphones and amps) with which they aren't totally satisfied. The costs add up... Instead, the money could be spent on a good Stax setup from the beginning, and the time could be spent on listening to music rather than buying/selling/researching...
 
 
 

 
This would be true if Stax were perfect for all tastes, which they most certainly are not. I have the money for a very good or even TOTL Stax setup and could always go for that over owning all the cans I do, but I know the Stax sound does not suit my music.

 

[HK_sends]

Quote:

I'm pretty sure your talking about me at least to a large degree. Sorry man, I guess I got out of hand. 
 
Just trying to get the thread to 1000 pages...
 

Please folks, it really was directed to no one in particular!  Just the general atmosphere in the thread was getting a bit belligerent.
I truly apologize to anyone I offended.
 
The Hamsters made me do it...
-HK sends
 
 

 

[HK_sends]

Quote:

The setscrews adjust the tension on a spring which pushes a ball bearing against the vertical yoke rod.  Just make the spring tension a little tighter to make the detents stronger.
 
 

The ball bearing and spring are embedded in the set screw itself so you are not tightening against a spring to push the ball bearing, you are pushing the whole set screw/ball bearing assembly against the posts.
 
Hope this helps...
 
-HK sends
 
P.S. - I can try to take a picture if anyone needs it.
 
 

 

[olor1n]

Sorry I meant the horizontal screw in the newer blocks. Are these what you're referring to as threadlocked HK? I'd assumed those screws could be tightened to lock the vertical rod in place, but I don't want to force it if that's not what they're for and are indeed threadlocked.
 

 

[goofyvic]

I couldn't help but to take pictures of the LCD2 trio before I return the Rev 2 to the local distributor.

My LCD2 "Classic" and Rev1 with the Rev2 on the right.
 

My LCD2 "Classic". My first love, the "dark" horse.
 

My LCD2 Rev 1
 

Rev 2 . The parting glance.

 

[Yoga]

Keeping the R1s goofy. I might be doing the same :¬)
 
WNBC - thanks for the great review.
 
HK - if you hav the time, would be interested to see.

 

[tupac0306]

i have already put my rev.2 for sale