[Lunatique]

Quote:

There's no such thing as a neutral recording so why would reproduction gear be any different; as I have said before you pick your poison/preference and go with it. I like to change things up from time to time and the easiest way to do so is to change headphones.
 

 

 
Quote:

There is no neutrality anywhere. Room temperature, humidity, people, no people, barriers, no barriers, they all change so what I agree with is, get the magic. The magic for me is my neutrality. It is my music and I do get there, at times. So many variables, just enjoy the music is what I strive for and the LCD-2 help me, in a big way, get there. 

Actually, it's not as simple as you might think. Please take a look at this discussion thread on the misconceptions of neutral/accurate:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/564465/misconception-of-neutral-accurate
 

 

[Windsor]

I've spent many hours listening to music live and participating in performance situations, both acoustically and amplified, and that has contributed to forming my opinion of what natural sounds like to me.
 
When I discovered head-fi a few months ago, my aim was to find headphones that would replicate recorded music so it would sound like I was at a concert performance or listening in a high-end studio. I'm currently using the LCD-2 rev.2 and Lavry DA10 - the most transparent/accurate DAC/Amp I've come across, after doing much research - and whilst it's the most accurate headphone monitoring setup I've discovered, the overall sound of recordings seems to be brighter than natural. The cause of that brightness could be due to variance in hardware components, recordings, and even my current state of hearing, due to whichever physical and mental factors are occurring. But to me, all audio gear I have heard seems to be coloured, having its own distinctive sonic character. 
 
If I'm listening to music and focusing on the musical language and message of the music on display, then as long as the equipment allows me to clearly hear what the performer/s is/are saying, it seems to matter less what equipment I listen with. In that way, I have enjoyed music very much with sub-summit-fi head gear including the Sennheiser HD600, the HD 25-1, or even the Apple In-Ear Headphones, which I still enjoy when I'm out and about. I tend to find myself in a dreamier state of mind when that happens, and a imagination/presence balance definitely occurs in a flux-like continuum. Einstein apparently said that, 'Imagination is more important than knowledge,' and whilst that can be interpreted in a number of ways, what seems to matter for me most when listening to music these days is my imagination being stimulated by what I hear in a way that is enjoyable and life-enhancing. The LCD-2 certainly facilitate that.
 
Obviously, different people may have different listening priorities. A mix engineer may want accuracy, whereas a casual listener may want to just enjoy their music; whatever my listening requirements, I'm continually satisfied with my current LCD-2 setup. 
 
When I come back to the present moment after parting with the dream of the music, it's a wonderful experience to be experiencing the sonic brilliance of the LCD-2. For that I am grateful.

 

[Argo Duck]

I agree with WA. Remember this Ashleigh Brilliant quote "I have abandoned my search for truth and am now looking for a good fantasy".
 
That said, I think "bright and sibilant" sounds different dependent on what the rest of the headphone is doing. An overall brightly balanced (obviously not neutral and accurate) headphone may make bright and sibilant sound painful.
 
Either version of the LCD2 though provide so much texture and other information in the mids and bass that - even if it were completely "accurately" reporting bright and sibilant parts of a recording - the balance is quite different.
 
It's a matter not only of the bright and sibilant information in the recording, but also of everything else in the recording. The LCD2 (and other "neutral/accurate/natural" heaphphones) draws cognitive or listening attention to the other information in the recording at the same time as the sibilant stuff is happening. This makes a difference to the final experience. I surmise this might, conceivably, appear "forgiving".

 

[milosz]

When I think of the word "neutral" in reference to a transducer, I tend to think that term indicates that the transducer neither emphasizes nor de-emphasizes any audible frequency. I don't tend to think of 'resolution' or 'prat' or 'punch' etc., just frequency response.
 
Obviously no transducer has totally flat frequency response, but some 'phones come closer than others.  These are closer to 'neutral.'  This is especially true through the midrange and treble below about 4,000~6,000 Hz, human hearing is very discriminating in these frequency regimes.
 
As far as accuracy  in domains besides frequency- well that is another matter- there's the time domain, there's the aspect of distortion, and so on.  But when I think of a transducer described as "neutral" I tend not to think of transient behavior, distortion etc- maybe I'm old school, but to me "neutral" is a frequency response descriptor.

 

[adydula]

WA calls it 'magic' I call it an "illusion".
 
I agree that the magical illusion that we all look for is often contrasted to a live performance or a comparison to our 2 ch setups....well it never will be like that with the transducers we have todate as far as I am concerned.
 
That said there is a LOT of stuff and choices that can and do affect how this magical illusion is generated in our heads...
 
Looking at a  frequency plot can help make decisions on how good a part will play in making the illusion grand or not...
 
Many devices, headphones, speakers, rooms etc are not FLAT, NEUTRAL whatever you want to call them.
 
But you have to start somewhere...we all know there is stuff out there that is really well...crap!!
 
I have spent most of my years on the same "rock" as WA and the rest of us....(just in case there are a few aliens amongst us..) listening and looking for the stuff that facilitates the illusion...
 
I have found in my journey those devices that have flat or close to flat curves seem to aid in the magic 'better' than those that dont...
 
If my chain of stuff is as flat as possible then I can play material and start lookng for the real good stuff that is well recorded and mastered that stimulates my neural sensors!
 
Way too much time spent on what the definitions of what neutral, flat etc are,,,,in the dictionary...its what in the head that counts!!
 
Alex

 

[jax]

 
Quote:

I don't consider the LCD's Neutral/accurate/natural.   In all my sorry days on this rock I've never heard any piece of gear that is Neutral/accurate/natural.   But I'm probably the only person you'll ever meet who will say that so...    Also, Neutral/accurate/natural is not what I look for in playback gear.  I just want my gear to have that magic.  the magic that does it for me. 
 
{SNIP}

Well said, WA.  I'm on the same page in the same chapter in the same book.  One man's N/A/N is another man's colored and warm.  Ultimately what matters is whether or not YOU enjoy what your hearing.  At the end of the day, nothing else matters.  Nothing!  There's lots of chasing the proverbial carrot on a stick to achieve some sort of bizarre concept of audio enlightenment.  N/A/N, PRAT, and other creative vernacular like creaminess and  warmth and holographic soundstaging....it's all verbal attempts at describing what we're hearing, and, though it may help in the tiresome discussion of the pursuit of what we're after (and really, nothing wrong at all with that - I actually enjoy some of it), it all comes down to what you alone prefer.  Subjective....entirely subjective.  I suppose if you are an audio engineer, then NAN would have a different sort of importance, and that's a whole other discussion.  I don't know that it would be any more enlightening a discussion though, but those standards are for goals that are no longer about the listeners personal enjoyment of the music, so an objective standard takes on a different meaning.  I still would doubt that NAN exists, but I'd say the standards are far more narrow than they are in the home audio arena.  Anyway, I'm glad there's a choice of so many ways to enjoy music.
 
It occurs to me that what makes discussions of the hardware so tiresome to me, and fortunately this is not always the case, is hearing from those who address this stuff with a myopic viewpoint that there is some sort of right and wrong, and especially some kind of hierarchy of enlightenment that usually comes with $ invested, rather than just simply being a singular humble opinion that someone is sharing with others who also happen to enjoy music (supposedly).  Now in a discussion of music, you just don't get that same glorified sense of separate worlds of privilege and hierarchy.  Yet there doesn't seem to be that much difference between the two in my mind - they are both subjective and they are both about one persons personal enjoyment of music.  It would seem ludicrous in a discussion of music for someone to argue that their tastes are the best and beyond reproach, and their music blows away all the other music...listening to their special music, which blows away all other music, jaws will drop and a land of creaminess and nirvana awaits you over the hill if you only had this one album that is long out of print and costs $3,000 for the right of passage to own it.  How idiotic that would sound?  Well, it sounds idiotic here, in a discussion of hardware, as well...at least to me.
 

 

[tupac0306]

neither rev.1 nor 2 sounds neutral to me. They just have that magical LCD 2 sound. both of them. even though they have a little sound difference.(rev.2 is slightly more "neutral" than rev.1 if we have to say one)

 

[Yoga]

50+ hours burn in - a definite change in sound. Smoother, softer, without losing any detail.
 
A (very) brief report will follow after 200 hours.
 
tupac: you still reaching for the R1s more than the R2s? :¬)

 

[tupac0306]

Yeah, I am afraid so after I burned in both cans. rev.1 is still the one for me. 
 
Quote:

50+ hours burn in - a definite change in sound. Smoother, softer, without losing any detail.
 
A (very) brief report will follow after 200 hours.
 
tupac: you still reaching for the R1s more than the R2s? :¬)

 
 

 

[sphinxvc]

Thanks for all the answers guys.
 
Quote:

When I think of the word "neutral" in reference to a transducer, I tend to think that term indicates that the transducer neither emphasizes nor de-emphasizes any audible frequency. I don't tend to think of 'resolution' or 'prat' or 'punch' etc., just frequency response.
 
Obviously no transducer has totally flat frequency response, but some 'phones come closer than others.  These are closer to 'neutral.'  This is especially true through the midrange and treble below about 4,000~6,000 Hz, human hearing is very discriminating in these frequency regimes.
 
As far as accuracy  in domains besides frequency- well that is another matter- there's the time domain, there's the aspect of distortion, and so on.  But when I think of a transducer described as "neutral" I tend not to think of transient behavior, distortion etc- maybe I'm old school, but to me "neutral" is a frequency response descriptor.

Milosz, normally I do define it as you do, but in this case I did mean accuracy in the frequency domain.

 

[castlevania32]

they still sound more neutral than 95% of the cans out here...let's keep it real.

 

[Br777]

got my sr71b today.. loving it.. hopefully converting my stock cable to balanced tonight. cant wait!
 
ATTENTION BASSHEADS: - this next part is for you.
 
using the equalizer app, i have created a dance preset for all my hiphop and dubstep needs. 
I have added about 16db worth of sub bass to the mix.  This is a LOT of sub bass and obviously a preset that is not meant for most genres of music listening
 
all i can say to anyone considering these cans for dance music, or bass head music that is willing to use an eqalizer is hold on to your ******* hats because the amount of sub-bass these cans can produce is nothing short of ASTONISHING.  all the way down to the chest rattling bass-ment.    This is a bass revelation for me.  absolutely increduble!!!
 
WOW!! i have never even come CLOSE to hearing a headphone that can shake like these can.  and its so clean!
 
dang am I glad i got these headphones!!!!
 
 

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

got my sr71b today.. loving it.. hopefully converting my stock cable to balanced tonight. cant wait!
 
ATTENTION BASSHEADS: - this next part is for you.
 
using the equalizer app, i have created a dance preset for all my hiphop and dubstep needs. 
I have added about 16db worth of sub bass to the mix.  This is a LOT of sub bass and obviously a preset that is not meant for most genres of music listening
 
all i can say to anyone considering these cans for dance music, or bass head music that is willing to use an eqalizer is hold on to your ******* hats because the amount of sub-bass these cans can produce is nothing short of ASTONISHING.  all the way down to the chest rattling bass-ment.    This is a bass revelation for me.  absolutely increduble!!!
 
WOW!! i have never even come CLOSE to hearing a headphone that can shake like these can.  and its so clean!
 
dang am I glad i got these headphones!!!!
 
 

Oh yeah! I hear that.
 
However, I don't find I need an EQ since the vast majority of audio gear can't come close to touching the bass of these bad boys so just the stark contrast alone is good enough for me.
 
Now, when I am listening to Nero and Deadmau5 I do tend to get a little adventurous with the EQ.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

50+ hours burn in - a definite change in sound. Smoother, softer, without losing any detail.
 
A (very) brief report will follow after 200 hours.
 
tupac: you still reaching for the R1s more than the R2s? :¬)

 
Where do you purchase time a time machine to make accurate comparisons like that?
 
I am having trouble on Ebay, Amazon, and even craigslist... well there are some on craigslist but they don't seem legit.

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

I have added about 16db worth of sub bass to the mix.  This is a LOT of sub bass and obviously a preset that is not meant for most genres of music listening
 
 

You'll have to list again the frequencies your boosting.   16db thats a lot of energy.  Even if you have a hard cutoff at 60Hz I can't imagine 16 db of amplitude increase not sending amplitude distortion and second and third order harmonic distortion upwards into the rest of the spectrum.  Are you extending that energy into the 100-120hz range?