[Kukuk]

After getting some time with these, I feel comfortable posting some impressions. The first thing I'll say is these sound more like my ESP-950s than I expected. I thought they might sound lush, edging on lazy, but they really don't. Not to my ears, anyway. They're remarkably close to neutral, aside from the slightly set back treble region. There's no boost to bass whatsoever, which makes me wonder why people rave about the bass so much. It's not bad by any means, it does what it needs to do, but it's not leaving any lasting impressions with me. I think the DT1770s have me spoiled. They have the same level of control as these, but it's boosted, which makes it more impressive to me. In my mind the DT1770 will remain the king of bass.

The treble is pretty much what I expected, in terms of being set back a bit. You can see that just by looking at frequency response graphs. What did take me by surprise is how detailed the sound is. These have taken a page from the CD900STs book on detail by having the treble set back, but extending very high and having fantastic control. Really, these aren't far behind the CD900ST in terms of detail retrieval. They're kind of a middle ground between the CD900ST and the ESP-950, where the 950 leans toward being forgiving, and the CD900ST leans toward ruthless. With these I can either focus 100% on critical listening and enjoy every little nuance of a track, or just zone out and properly enjoy poorly mastered music. I was also concerned these might be lacking sparkle, giving cymbals and the like a lifeless sound, but they aren't at all, no doubt thanks to the great extension.

Mid range, like treble, is about what I expected. The upper end of the mids drops off a bit, removing some of the fatigue from vocals that are particularly shouty. One standout for me is Another Side of Bob Dylan. The vocals are very shouty on almost all songs on this album, but the LCD-2s kind of rope that in. It doesn't completely change the character of the sound, but it makes it just a little more bearable. The ESP-950s and CD900STs have a similar effect, and it's part of why I love those headphones so much. That album is an absolute nightmare on something like the AKG K612, which accentuate that shoutiness.

Soundstage and imaging are both very impressive. Not the best at either, but still plenty impressive in their own right. I think the ESP-950s image a little better, but have a smaller soundstage. My T5Ps might have bigger soundstage, but don't image as well. These strike a good balance.

Build and comfort here are both superb. Every bit as good as the DT1770. I think in the past I've raved about how well-made the DT1770 are, so it's high praise to say the LCD-2s are on their level. Every material, every moving part, every connection just feels high quality. They even got the cable just right: not too long, not too short, it's not noisy, and it looks and feels nice. One thing that's a little unsettling about the comfort is when you take the headphones on or off there's a lot of pressure on your ears as the air escapes and enters the ear cups. Despite it being an open headphone, it really is sealed, at least in terms of air flow.

I'm not 100% sure this is going to be a headphone I own forever. As mentioned before, they're very similar to the ESP-950 to my ear. The 950's bass doesn't extend quite as low, but from the mids on up they have a VERY similar tonal balance. Despite having better bass extension than the 950, they don't satiate my bass lust like the DT1770s do. The mids do everything right in my book, but so do several of my other headphones. These are in sort of a weird place in my headphone collection: they do everything well, but they don't stand out. It's odd that I would, without any hesitation, recommend these to someone looking for a headphone in this price range, and yet I'm luke-warm on them. I feel like if they had a flaw I might enjoy them more. Like, if they had a boosted lower mid range I might be crazy about them.

 

[WildStyle-R11]

After getting some time with these, I feel comfortable posting some impressions. The first thing I'll say is these sound more like my ESP-950s than I expected. I thought they might sound lush, edging on lazy, but they really don't. Not to my ears, anyway. They're remarkably close to neutral, aside from the slightly set back treble region. There's no boost to bass whatsoever, which makes me wonder why people rave about the bass so much. It's not bad by any means, it does what it needs to do, but it's not leaving any lasting impressions with me. I think the DT1770s have me spoiled. They have the same level of control as these, but it's boosted, which makes it more impressive to me. In my mind the DT1770 will remain the king of bass.

The treble is pretty much what I expected, in terms of being set back a bit. You can see that just by looking at frequency response graphs. What did take me by surprise is how detailed the sound is. These have taken a page from the CD900STs book on detail by having the treble set back, but extending very high and having fantastic control. Really, these aren't far behind the CD900ST in terms of detail retrieval. They're kind of a middle ground between the CD900ST and the ESP-950, where the 950 leans toward being forgiving, and the CD900ST leans toward ruthless. With these I can either focus 100% on critical listening and enjoy every little nuance of a track, or just zone out and properly enjoy poorly mastered music. I was also concerned these might be lacking sparkle, giving cymbals and the like a lifeless sound, but they aren't at all, no doubt thanks to the great extension.

Mid range, like treble, is about what I expected. The upper end of the mids drops off a bit, removing some of the fatigue from vocals that are particularly shouty. One standout for me is Another Side of Bob Dylan. The vocals are very shouty on almost all songs on this album, but the LCD-2s kind of rope that in. It doesn't completely change the character of the sound, but it makes it just a little more bearable. The ESP-950s and CD900STs have a similar effect, and it's part of why I love those headphones so much. That album is an absolute nightmare on something like the AKG K612, which accentuate that shoutiness.

Soundstage and imaging are both very impressive. Not the best at either, but still plenty impressive in their own right. I think the ESP-950s image a little better, but have a smaller soundstage. My T5Ps might have bigger soundstage, but don't image as well. These strike a good balance.

Build and comfort here are both superb. Every bit as good as the DT1770. I think in the past I've raved about how well-made the DT1770 are, so it's high praise to say the LCD-2s are on their level. Every material, every moving part, every connection just feels high quality. They even got the cable just right: not too long, not too short, it's not noisy, and it looks and feels nice. One thing that's a little unsettling about the comfort is when you take the headphones on or off there's a lot of pressure on your ears as the air escapes and enters the ear cups. Despite it being an open headphone, it really is sealed, at least in terms of air flow.

I'm not 100% sure this is going to be a headphone I own forever. As mentioned before, they're very similar to the ESP-950 to my ear. The 950's bass doesn't extend quite as low, but from the mids on up they have a VERY similar tonal balance. Despite having better bass extension than the 950, they don't satiate my bass lust like the DT1770s do. The mids do everything right in my book, but so do several of my other headphones. These are in sort of a weird place in my headphone collection: they do everything well, but they don't stand out. It's odd that I would, without any hesitation, recommend these to someone looking for a headphone in this price range, and yet I'm luke-warm on them. I feel like if they had a flaw I might enjoy them more. Like, if they had a boosted lower mid range I might be crazy about them.

Quite a lot of us, who have a craving for more bass have them paired with loki with a range of bass boost we use. Some have it higher, some not as much, I have the loki turned to just past 3o clock which gives me 6-7 dB? into 20Hz. Not how high I would recommend turning it, but I am okay with the drawback which comes on past about 2o clock-ish.

 

[nicholars]

Why people do not use EQ I have no idea, for example they even have a plugin called Reveal which is basically an EQ for them.

 

[marcan]

Why people do not use EQ I have no idea, for example they even have a plugin called Reveal which is basically an EQ for them.

Because all eq has a price. What you get on your frequencies you will pay it with pre-echo, post-echo, noise, harmonic distortion and phase distortion.

 

[nicholars]

Because all eq has a price. What you get on your frequencies you will pay it with pre-echo, post-echo, noise, harmonic distortion and phase distortion.

You just wont though really, the complaint was "not enough bass", you can add a very simple few DB onto the bass using even the Foobar 31 band EQ, this will increase the bass with no obvious problems. If you start doing crazy EQ with it all over the place then yes it will not be good.

 

[marcan]

You just wont though really, the complaint was "not enough bass", you can add a very simple few DB onto the bass using even the Foobar 31 band EQ, this will increase the bass with no obvious problems. If you start doing crazy EQ with it all over the place then yes it will not be good.

I was just answering to your "Why people do not use EQ I have no idea".
Now you might have an idea.

 

[nicholars]

Ok thanks for enlightening me, I will definitely not EQ any headphones to make them sound better in future.

 

[marcan]

Yes right. You wouldn't hear the difference anyway...

 

[ryanlowry]

Just upgraded to the LCD2c from HD6xx - super happy with my decision, paired with my Schiit Ragnarok sounds INCREDIBLE. The bass is so tight and juicy!

 

[Sorgiulio]

Because all eq has a price. What you get on your frequencies you will pay it with pre-echo, post-echo, noise, harmonic distortion and phase distortion.

And also dry mouth and constipation I heard

 

[nicholars]

Yes right. You wouldn't hear the difference anyway...

Yes you are right, I would not hear the difference from a minor shelf EQ to increase the bass, because there is literally almost no audible negative difference other than the increase in volume of the bass, for example the fact that they even have a plugin called "reveal", which is exactly an EQ, also the fact that in production music will be EQ'd. Overall you are just spouting "elitist tripe".

If you are 100% happy with them without EQ, then that is great for you. But telling people not to use it, for reasons that are literally inaudible, is bad advice. He was saying "I am not impressed with the bass, there is not enough of it", I am saying "increase the bass with EQ then (no crazy EQ, just a simple shelf for the lower frequencies below 50hz), you are saying "no do not do this, for reasons that are basically inaudible". It is like complaining about a DAC that has noise at -130db, pointless, compared to the advantages.

 

[Kukuk]

I guess I don't really get why the LCD-2 specifically, when using EQ to boost bass. You can use equalizers to boost bass in any headphone, and plenty respond well to it. I can dump basically infinite bass into my XB700s and have it remain fairly clean. I could use an equalizer to make my ESP-950s sound like the LCD-2 quite easily.

Moreover, the DT1770 has the bass that (evidently) everyone is EQing toward, without the need to carry that EQ from one device to another. I'm sort of a purist when it comes to using EQ, mainly because of the convenience of having consistent sound across all the devices I use (portable, home theater, computer, etc.)

It just doesn't really seem right to say the LCD-2 has godly bass, but only with the use of an EQ. It's something you could say about just about any headphone.

 

[nicholars]

I guess I don't really get why the LCD-2 specifically, when using EQ to boost bass. You can use equalizers to boost bass in any headphone, and plenty respond well to it. I can dump basically infinite bass into my XB700s and have it remain fairly clean. I could use an equalizer to make my ESP-950s sound like the LCD-2 quite easily.

Moreover, the DT1770 has the bass that (evidently) everyone is EQing toward, without the need to carry that EQ from one device to another. I'm sort of a purist when it comes to using EQ, mainly because of the convenience of having consistent sound across all the devices I use (portable, home theater, computer, etc.)

It just doesn't really seem right to say the LCD-2 has godly bass, but only with the use of an EQ. It's something you could say about just about any headphone.

The do have very good bass with EQ, in stock form they have very good bass extension, but not actually very much bass quantity, however they respond very well to EQ if you want "more" bass. I would have to agree that they are not "bassy" without EQ, with EQ though they would be classed as very good bass in quantity, quality, extension. Without EQ they would be classed as good bass in "extension" and "quality".

This is also because Planars generally have flat bass, whereas Dynamic drivers generally have more mid bass, which is what you are hearing on the DT1770. Just saying if you like the 2C other than the bass quantity, just stop being a "purist" about it and EQ that bass up, then you will be happy with the quantity. They also do not have massive bass "impact" compared to dynamic drivers, again mostly because they are open and planar.

Also its not really something you can say about any headphones, most headphones will distort or cannot handle EQ, or simply just do not have much detail or quality in the bass. Maybe you should try Fostex headphones, they are "semi closed", but have arguably better bass than the planars, because it is also good quality, but has more "punch" and is more "fun" sounding.

If your only complaint is "lack of bass quantity", then just EQ them to have more bass, if you are not happy with other areas of the sound, then maybe try some different headphones, but they also sound better using the reveal plugin which increases the upper midrange and improves the treble.

BTW I don't actually have these any more, because of various reasons, but just saying the 2C do certainly have better bass than most headphones. I do somewhat enjoy the bass on Fostex equally or even more, because of the reasons I described above. Maybe try those if you do not like the bass on the 2C, but do like the bass on the 1770.

 

[betula]

I guess I don't really get why the LCD-2 specifically, when using EQ to boost bass. You can use equalizers to boost bass in any headphone, and plenty respond well to it. I can dump basically infinite bass into my XB700s and have it remain fairly clean. I could use an equalizer to make my ESP-950s sound like the LCD-2 quite easily.

Moreover, the DT1770 has the bass that (evidently) everyone is EQing toward, without the need to carry that EQ from one device to another. I'm sort of a purist when it comes to using EQ, mainly because of the convenience of having consistent sound across all the devices I use (portable, home theater, computer, etc.)

It just doesn't really seem right to say the LCD-2 has godly bass, but only with the use of an EQ. It's something you could say about just about any headphone.

I am on your side here. I think 80% of EQ-ing that folks do actually degrades the sound.

A lot of people use EQ to compensate the shortcomings of incapable gear. For example an amp with lean bass. You will get much better sound if you actually buy an amp which is able to put out a good bass response without EQ. And again, instead of EQ-ing the hell out of a HD800 just buy a pair of headphones that actually suits your sound preference. The result of EQ-ing incapable equipment will only be the faint shadow of a truly capable amp or headphone.

Another reason for limitless EQ-ing is bad habit. If folks are used to an unnatural level of bass quantity they will EQ the hell out of refined higher-end cans too.

Proper EQ-ing in my opinion requires higher than average hearing, higher than average knowledge and higher than average equipment and necessary only in rare circumstances.

 

[nicholars]

I am on your side here. I think 80% of EQ-ing that folks do actually degrades the sound.

A lot of people use EQ to compensate the shortcomings of incapable gear. For example an amp with lean bass. You will get much better sound if you actually buy an amp which is able to put out a good bass response without EQ. And again, instead of EQ-ing the hell out of a HD800 just buy a pair of headphones that actually suits your sound preference. The result of EQ-ing incapable equipment will only be the faint shadow of a truly capable amp or headphone.

Another reason for limitless EQ-ing is bad habit. If folks are used to an unnatural level of bass quantity they will EQ the hell out of refined higher-end cans too.

Proper EQ-ing in my opinion requires higher than average hearing, higher than average knowledge and higher than average equipment and necessary only in rare circumstances.

I think you are right with what you said about "limitless EQ-ing" and "proper EQ-ing", my suggestion was to use "proper EQ-ing" though, which is a bit of a learned art and not something you can just do straight away, it is about balancing the advantages and disadvantages, to get something you are overall happier with.

But for example you could simply load up foobar with the 31 band EQ, add a small shelf in the lower frequencies, this would then overall give you "more" bass on the 2C and would overall sound better. I am not talking about crazy rollercoasters of EQ here. You can also get better EQ programs but the Foobar 31 band EQ is easy to use and decent. Also the Reveal plugin makes them sound better IMO.