[audi0nick128]

I'm just hunting for black Friday deals here in Germany... My dealer has the MX4 and I hoped to see the LCD 2C to pop up...i went ahead and asked for it.

I was told they will only be available in the UK and not in Germany... @Audeze Is that true?

Cheers

 

[BB 808]

I'm just hunting for black Friday deals here in Germany... My dealer has the MX4 and I hoped to see the LCD 2C to pop up...i went ahead and asked for it.

I was told they will only be available in the UK and not in Germany... @Audeze Is that true?

Cheers

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/aud...pressions-thread.862174/page-26#post-13863460
Audeze said "At the moment these will be direct order only."

 

[Zoom25]

This is all interesting discussion, and I understand your question and had the same one myself @Àedhàn Cassiel

I thought that response indicated all pros and no cons as well.....but of course this is a company trying to sell products. And most of the time, there is no better or worse, but instead personal preference and different characteristics.

I also understood the question. I can understand how the fazor helped clean up and improve the imaging and as a result it changed the sound. Now, same people may or may not like this new sound as it comes down to preference. However, what I (and perhaps others) was wondering about was if there were any tradeoffs with the Fazor technologically. Was it all beneficial from a purely acoustical perspective? You fix the diffraction with the Fazors, but do you create another problem? Again, I'm not talking about preferences of listeners, just from a measurable standpoint.

For example, since I came to this forum, I've always heard of the Sennheiser 6k peak. During my time of Audeze ownership, I've never heard of treble peaks until now. Some may say have said dull or laid back, occasionally bright, but never any mention of peaks or non-coherent treble. I've been reading and going back to see how people liked/disliked the various introductions of Fazor. Lots of comments started popping about the peaks or uncoherent treble.

Now, it may very well be the case that this cleaning up by the Fazor just makes them more revealing and highlights the problems in the recording better which were previously buried in the non-fazor versions. In which case, props to Audeze, for giving us the option to choose between the two models. Although, if there some other tradeoffs happening acoustically because of the Fazor, then wouldn't that be something. All speculation on my end. I cannot even confirm this subjectively as I have yet to hear a Fazor.

Towards the industry in general:

With the 2C, I'd rather take a somewhat dull sound than something with peaks. The HD 800 got annoying when I was constantly switching between my monitors and other headphones. Nothing makes me put a headphone down faster than treble peaks. In fact, I have Sonarworks and for fun the other day I went through a bunch of headphone profiles at 100% calibration. So many bright headphones. The industry needs to stop with making headphones so unnaturally bright just to make it appear detailed. Perhaps, it works for beginners and tricks them into thinking something is more detailed. However, for high-end users who've had experience and aren't fooled easily, I see no reason why new top headphones are still bright.

 

[manishex]

I also understood the question. I can understand how the fazor helped clean up and improve the imaging and as a result it changed the sound. Now, same people may or may not like this new sound as it comes down to preference. However, what I (and perhaps others) was wondering about was if there were any tradeoffs with the Fazor technologically. Was it all beneficial from a purely acoustical perspective? You fix the diffraction with the Fazors, but do you create another problem? Again, I'm not talking about preferences of listeners, just from a measurable standpoint.

For example, since I came to this forum, I've always heard of the Sennheiser 6k peak. During my time of Audeze ownership, I've never heard of treble peaks until now. Some may say have said dull or laid back, occasionally bright, but never any mention of peaks or non-coherent treble. I've been reading and going back to see how people liked/disliked the various introductions of Fazor. Lots of comments started popping about the peaks or uncoherent treble.

Now, it may very well be the case that this cleaning up by the Fazor just makes them more revealing and highlights the problems in the recording better which were previously buried in the non-fazor versions. In which case, props to Audeze, for giving us the option to choose between the two models. Although, if there some other tradeoffs happening acoustically because of the Fazor, then wouldn't that be something. All speculation on my end. I cannot even confirm this subjectively as I have yet to hear a Fazor.

Towards the industry in general:

With the 2C, I'd rather take a somewhat dull sound than something with peaks. The HD 800 got annoying when I was constantly switching between my monitors and other headphones. Nothing makes me put a headphone down faster than treble peaks. In fact, I have Sonarworks and for fun the other day I went through a bunch of headphone profiles at 100% calibration. So many bright headphones. The industry needs to stop with making headphones so unnaturally bright just to make it appear detailed. Perhaps, it works for beginners and tricks them into thinking something is more detailed. However, for high-end users who've had experience and aren't fooled easily, I see no reason why new top headphones are still bright.

I also think it can comes down to age, there's a positive correlation between age and preference for the HD800 which may be due to the reduced sensitivity to treble that comes with age, just like salt in food.
Just as you,I find the HD800 unbearable, I'm 23 and can still hear 18KHz so I actually find the majority of high end headphones slightly too bright for my taste.

 

[Audeze]

However, what I (and perhaps others) was wondering about was if there were any tradeoffs with the Fazor technologically.

We don't know of any tradeoffs with Fazor except, for some users with large Pinna the fazor could touch their ears. We had even posted some comsol, but headfi seems to have lost the image.

I've been reading and going back to see how people liked/disliked the various introductions of Fazor. Lots of comments started popping about the peaks or uncoherent treble.

Whenever you introduce a new feature, there is the instantaneous reaction and some of it is inevitably knee-jerk and negative. But over a period of time the opinion comes around. A similar example is Facebook. People complained about the timeline feature incessantly for days, but also used FB more. The data and the comments always do not correlate.
Between both units (Fazor and NonFazor) the basic transducer design is the same. Adding fazor cleans up and improves high frequency and imaging. But it cannot create peaks etc.

 

[I g o r]

I'm just hunting for black Friday deals here in Germany... My dealer has the MX4 and I hoped to see the LCD 2C to pop up...i went ahead and asked for it.

I was told they will only be available in the UK and not in Germany... @Audeze Is that true?

Cheers

Who is your dealer? I just moved to Germany and would like to know a good dealer for Audeze. Thank you.

 

[audi0nick128]

Who is your dealer? I just moved to Germany and would like to know a good dealer for Audeze. Thank you.

This would be Projekt Akustik

They have an MX4 as Black Friday offer

http://www.projekt-akustik.de/Black-Friday/LCD-MX4-Black-Friday::7162.html

Cheers

 

[Grumpy Old Git]

Oh, two unrelated questions I meant to ask earlier but didn’t think about at the time:

1. When does the $600 price for the LCD2C end?

To quote the Audeze website..........'Holiday Special Price $599 (MSRP $799), so I would assume after Christmas/New Year the price will be $799?

 

[I g o r]

This would be Projekt Akustik

They have an MX4 as Black Friday offer

http://www.projekt-akustik.de/Black-Friday/LCD-MX4-Black-Friday::7162.html

Cheers

Thank you!

 

[Zoom25]

I also think it can comes down to age, there's a positive correlation between age and preference for the HD800 which may be due to the reduced sensitivity to treble that comes with age, just like salt in food.
Just as you,I find the HD800 unbearable, I'm 23 and can still hear 18KHz so I actually find the majority of high end headphones slightly too bright for my taste.

Yes, age and hearing loss (notched in some cases) can definitely be a significant factor.

On the other hand, I also think that the brain (central auditory nervous system) and ear (inner ear hair cells) can get used to reasonable, non damaging brightness in certain contexts. For example, if the only thing you are listening to is the HD 800, then you still may find it bright but you might be able to listen to it longer, say for 2 hours, before you have to put it down.

On the other hand, if you have non-bright headphones and speakers that you are constantly using and switching, then the tolerance for the HD 800's bright nature may go down, to say 30 mins in comparison to above scenario in isolation listening.

Thanks for the reply @Audeze. Good to know that you guys didn't find anything wrong with the Fazor. I agree that can people can have different impressions based on their long standing preferences, auditory acuity, and as well as the context under which they have been listening as I mentioned above. I'll be giving these a fair shot.

 

[boxxi]

We don't know of any tradeoffs with Fazor except, for some users with large Pinna the fazor could touch their ears. We had even posted some comsol, but headfi seems to have lost the image.


Whenever you introduce a new feature, there is the instantaneous reaction and some of it is inevitably knee-jerk and negative. But over a period of time the opinion comes around. A similar example is Facebook. People complained about the timeline feature incessantly for days, but also used FB more. The data and the comments always do not correlate.
Between both units (Fazor and NonFazor) the basic transducer design is the same. Adding fazor cleans up and improves high frequency and imaging. But it cannot create peaks etc.

The Fazor or new production diaphragms produced a noticeable drop in resolution compared to the non-fazor units, as well as apparent sub-bass roll off. This has been established awhile now, that the old Audeze magic has been lost with the introduction of fazors. Many still desire the 'classics', pre-fazor era, proven by the resales and demand of pre-fazor units(LCD2.2, LCD 3), so this sentiment is not a 'knee jerk' reaction. Why else will the LCD 2C be released?

To quote the Audeze website..........'Holiday Special Price $599 (MSRP $799), so I would assume after Christmas/New Year the price will be $799?

The price jump to $799 after Christmas, the lack of Pelican case with the 2C... And I thought that Audeze went with sensible pricing. Was wrong again.

 

[gLer]

The Fazor or new production diaphragms produced a noticeable drop in resolution compared to the non-fazor units, as well as apparent sub-bass roll off.

Um, no, if anything the fazor produced a perceivable increase in resolution. Whether or not that’s a ‘good’ thing depends on your preferences. Some people like a more forgiving sound - the LCD2F is slightly less forgiving of bad sources because the fazor directs the sound waves more accurately and resolves more perceived detail, especially in the higher frequencies. That’s also why there’s a ‘perceived’ roll off in the sub bass, because you’re hearing more of the upper mids and treble more accurately with the fazor. Again, some people like this, others don’t.

The price jump to $799 after Christmas, the lack of Pelican case with the 2C... And I thought that Audeze went with sensible pricing. Was wrong again.

Well, for $200 more you can have the case and a fazor, but not the new headband. It’s a tradeoff. They had to cut costs somewhere - the LCD-2 is still worth the $995 asking price, it’s a TOTL headphone after all. So is the LCD-2C, so if you don’t like the fazor sound and don’t need the case, $799 is still very good and $599 is a bargain. These are premium LCD headphones, not mid-fi replicas

 

[the fool]

I hope this time Audeze doesn't screw up again, I hope this time Audeze really tested their product before it release, moreover please no more update version like the lcd-4, from 100Ohm to 200Ohm.

 

[manishex]

The Fazor or new production diaphragms produced a noticeable drop in resolution compared to the non-fazor units, as well as apparent sub-bass roll off. This has been established awhile now, that the old Audeze magic has been lost with the introduction of fazors. Many still desire the 'classics', pre-fazor era, proven by the resales and demand of pre-fazor units(LCD2.2, LCD 3), so this sentiment is not a 'knee jerk' reaction. Why else will the LCD 2C be released?



The price jump to $799 after Christmas, the lack of Pelican case with the 2C... And I thought that Audeze went with sensible pricing. Was wrong again.

The 2016 revision LCDs don't have a sub-bass roll off

 

[boxxi]

Um, no, if anything the fazor produced a perceivable increase in resolution. Whether or not that’s a ‘good’ thing depends on your preferences. Some people like a more forgiving sound - the LCD2F is slightly less forgiving of bad sources because the fazor directs the sound waves more accurately and resolves more perceived detail, especially in the higher frequencies. That’s also why there’s a ‘perceived’ roll off in the sub bass, because you’re hearing more of the upper mids and treble more accurately with the fazor. Again, some people like this, others don’t.

Well, for $200 more you can have the case and a fazor, but not the new headband. It’s a tradeoff. They had to cut costs somewhere - the LCD-2 is still worth the $995 asking price, it’s a TOTL headphone after all. So is the LCD-2C, so if you don’t like the fazor sound and don’t need the case, $799 is still very good and $599 is a bargain. These are premium LCD headphones, not mid-fi replicas

It is interesting to view the fazors units as in increase in resolution, but I will still have to disagree with you here. I have done comparisons with LCD3 and LCD3F with pretty resolving gear(Yggy and EC ZDS/ BW2) and noted a decrease in detail, bass texture and instrument definition. I do hear better instrument separation and staging though. Overall it the new lineup sounds confused to me, wanting to be something it is not, and failed at it. I prefer the non fazored units but that is just my opinion.
Regarding the subbass rolloff, I feel that it is not as present as the non fazors, as measured in FR graphs.

Of course opinions will differ based on gear and changing preferences, such is the subjective nature of this hobby. Just my 2 cents.

One of my pet peeves is that headphones nowadays charge too much, and Audeze's driver QC and build quality does not sit well with me. A premium headphone should not have that many revisions and comfort issues. ZMF has heavy headphones with good weight distribution. MrSpeakers has a brialliant headband system. I just don't see why Audeze cannot do that without the ridiculous $200 carbon headband that should be stock for all LCD series. Granted, it is not all terrible, their customer service is excellent to sort out driver issues.

I digress. I will be hearing the 2C at a meet in the future, and will be posting impressions of them, favorable or not. Audeze's approach back to the classics will be interesting.