1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice

Audeze LCD-2C Classic - Impressions Thread

Discussion in 'Headphones (full-size)' started by XERO1, Oct 7, 2017.
130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150
  1. Rinsushi
    trellus likes this.
  2. Slim1970
  3. Rinsushi
    Yea no problem! It doesn't work on my DT990 though cause of where the cables are.
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2018
  4. wazzupi
  5. anoxy
    Yeah these don't even really need a stand or hanger. They stand up on their own, so I just set them on a soft mat on my table.
  6. ShamuellJackson
    I been leaving my headset on a mouse pad on my desk. Would like to get a stand of some sort to get it off the top of my desk since my desk space is limited. I have coat hooks I been using for many of my headphones but they kind of crease the head band weird on the 2C so I just been leaving them on my desk.
  7. mikewr
    Haven't seen some impressions for a little bit so i thought I would add mine. I've had the 2c's for a couple of days, as well as my new Burson Conductor V1 (a.k.a Virtuoso). I was fortunate enough to find one used with both dac chips, the Sabre ESS9018 and the Burr Brown 1793. Sabre is supposedly analytical, the other is more warm/analog-ish.

    i also owned the LCD-X pre-2015 model for while. I made a few comparisons between the two (from memory mind you, so take with a grain of salt. I did own the X for almost three years though). Also, the 2c is the first headphone I'm using this amp/dac with so unfortunately I don't have a baseline as to how the amp sounds with other phones. It's also my first "high end" amp/dac so bare that in mind too.

    -The difference in weight is immediately noticeable. Holding it in my hand, they don't even feel like a pair of Audeze haha (I previously owned an LCD-X for 3 years mind you, the weight was always a little annoying with those, I even made a head strap for those out of an old belt). I'm pleasantly surprised by how light these feel, but time will tell how much better these really are in that department.

    -bass has a softer "attack" than the X i.e. it isn't hitting as hard in the mid-bass "thump". The weight/hefty feeling to the bass is still there though [edit: I'm fairly certain of this after listening to a few more electronic tracks I know pretty well.]

    -High notes can be kind of shouty. I don't remember the X's being this treble sensitive, but again I'm using a completely new amp/dac so it could be that. [edit: definitely a bit sibilant with poorly mastered music; again though, it could be the ESS9018 which is considered analytical and/or dry sounding from what I've read.]

    -While treble is peaky imo (with a brighter source like the ESS9018 as far as I know), overall sound sig is "dark"-ish.
    i.e: Overall, I do think the treble as a whole is laid back, it just has certain peaks that I can hear on certain high notes as i think some have mentioned here. If you listen to poor quality music then forget it, it's peak city. [edit: actually, the more I listen to some of the poorer recordings I have, the more I'm realizing the sound sig on these goes really well with poorer mixes so... I guess for the most part it's ok except for the odd ball high note here and there.]

    -If you REALLY like mid base, don't count on these to deliver the best experience. I'm A/Bing with a cheaper set of headphones I consider to have only a slight V-shaped FR and it's actually kind of funny that those cheap, plastic little headphones have noticeably more "thump" to them than the Audeze. Not a complaint (at least for me), just pointing out that these are not for some bass-heads. Going back to the X's again, the impact on the bass on these just isn't as visceral from memory. [edit: i wanna re-emphasize that I'm referring to mid-bass here. 2c's sub-bass has fantastic weight to it. From memory, same as the X.]

    -guitar strings have a nice reverb to them. I can understand someone wanting a brighter headphone for a little more bite/sparkle, and i did/do agree on some tracks, but I think one can appreciate the added resonance from plucks of an acoustic guitar on these. A bit of a trade off I guess. [edit: overall, if you listen to a lot of acoustic or live recordings, imo this presentation is a lot less fatiguing over long listening sessions than a brighter pair.

    -I think the combination of the FR and the pretty god imaging (imo) on these give off a sense of space similar in characteristic to the LCD-X from memory. People always talked about the X having this spacious and revolving sound stage like your not wearing headphones but I never heard it. I feel the 2c's and the X are less about sound stage width and more about a... "intimate sense of space" is what I came up with long ago with the X. With the 2c's, it's not the widest sounding by any means. However, in a way, it gives off a more noticeable or impressive (in terms of imaging) sense of space than a headphone with a really wide sound stage; for me anyway. The mid-range, particularly vocals, are less in your face and a little more out there and the placement of instruments/voices is less dependent on sound stage and more so on the bare imaging of the headphones. I got that impression when I compared the X to the OG HE-400's a while back and I get the same impression with the 2c.

    -Having just said that, this is the first time I have actually had a sense of TRUE depth to the sound. As I said about the X, I never had that "out of head" experience with the sound, however for the first time ever I'm actually getting a sense of depth to the sound stage rather than just left/right/& up. Again... as I'm typing this I'm looking at the Burson and just thinking "is this what a $1,500+ amp/dac sounds like?" so be mindful of that when reading these impressions. [edit: wow. I just want to emphasize how noticeable this is to me, I keep hearing this sensation on certain tracks.]

    -Treble is definitely tuned down a bit. Peaks don't "hurt" as much. If I had to describe the change: with the sabre, if someone asked me if the 2c's ever got sibilant I would say "yeah there are some notes that kind of just 'shout out' at you" but with the burr brown I would say "it almost does, but it stops JUST before it get to that point."

    -Treble is much more tamed as a whole. I really like how the 2c's sound with some of my R&B tracks now!

    -I'm loving and hating string instruments on the 2c. On some tracks with a "brighter" guitar... I wanna say it just doesn't sound quite right. However, heavy strings like from a bass guitar for example just sound so good. Like I said before, they have a nice reverb and have this appealing weight to their notes.

    -One difference that I know for a fact I'm hearing is that need to turn up the volume a bit more to get the same energy in the treble on the burr brown. (edit: i guess that's kind of self explanatory from my previous statements lol).

    Sorry for the over-elaboration on certain topics. i like using lame mans terms rather than fancy terms to be as honest and as clear as possible. I don't participate in too many discussions on this forum due to my limited experience with only a few headphones (see my profile).
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2018
  8. colinallcarz
    I ended up returning mine. The small problems I noticed in the highs persisted throughout more and more of my listening, so I sent them back. Definitely a very cool headphone and I love what they did with the fit, but they just weren't for me. The search continues...
  9. alphanumerix1
    Sibilant highs are my kryptonite.
  10. gLer
    Mine too. I thought the LCD-2C was 'darker' than the LCD-2F (latest revision)? My LCD-2F has plenty of treble detail but is never sibilant. I know because I tested it against songs that were clearly sibilant with the often over-enthusiastic treble of the Fostex TH-X00, and the LCD-2 is just so smooth in comparison. So either the LCD-2C has more piercing treble than the LCD-2F, or I'd look closely at your source if you're still experiencing sibilance. An underpowered amp or very bright dac could easily be the reason for LCD-2 sibilance.
    alphanumerix1 likes this.
  11. anoxy
    Literally no hint of sibilance in the 2C. Can we stop with that BS here.

    Something else in your chain was probably not up to par or you didn't allow your ears enough time to adjust.
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2018
  12. lentoviolento
    i don't remember lcd2f being sibilant... how can lcd2c be sibilant if it based upon the same driver without fazor????? it should be even less sibilant!!
  13. gLer
    Exactly right!
  14. gLer
  15. Berakotxa
    I have a teac p50 and i dont find the sound i was specting from this audeze. It has 160 mw on 32 ohms. I have plenty of power to drive them loud enought but do you think that a more powerfull amp will give me better sq? Im thinking on fx audio dac X6 and i dont want to spend more then 100€ on a dac/amp combo.
130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139
141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150

Share This Page