[marcan]

I have the LCD2rev2 and the LCD2C.
The LCD2rev2 has more more low end and top end. Sub are deeper. The LCD2C is more in the mids but is faster.
The rev2 is king of warm and lush while having a tad more top end, the LCD2C is a bit more precise.
This is confirmed by a friend who has both as well.

 

[betula]

Nighthawk wins on comfort hands down. 2C might as well be a torture vice by comparison. Hawks are by far the better headphone for forgetting about everything but the music. You never really forget the 2C’s presence.

Nighthawk wins on comfort against any other headphone. I also agree that NH offers the smoothest and easiest listen out there, but it is technically nowhere near to the 2C. NH is smooth, dark, warm, with a significant mid-bass hump. It can also sound a little bit hollow at times, like it was in a cave. Trebles is held back quite a bit, percussion can sound like there was a 'sliencer' on them. That said it is the lushest and easiest listen out there. I loved it a couple of years ago, I still like it but don't consider it to be on the same level as the 2C.
The 2C in comparison has a precise and well balanced bass that extends deeper and doesn't have mid-bass hump. It sounds more spacious and more natural. Soundstage is bigger and instruments can breath. Treble is still laid back but has some energy. 2C is also more resolving in comparison.
Both are good headphones for different purposes. I can imagine a scenario when someone prefers to put the NH on his head, but from a technical point of view the 2C is vastly superior. Of course, you need a more serious DAC/amp combo to drive the Audeze to its full potential but if you do, IMO there is no contest between these two.

 

[Ultrainferno]

We've received so many requests to review more full sized headphones like in the good old days. So today we have for you a full review of the Audeze LCD-2 Classic.

Now on Headfonia!

https://www.headfonia.com/audeze-lcd2-classic-review/

 

[omniweltall]

Nighthawk wins on comfort against any other headphone. I also agree that NH offers the smoothest and easiest listen out there, but it is technically nowhere near to the 2C. NH is smooth, dark, warm, with a significant mid-bass hump. It can also sound a little bit hollow at times, like it was in a cave. Trebles is held back quite a bit, percussion can sound like there was a 'sliencer' on them. That said it is the lushest and easiest listen out there. I loved it a couple of years ago, I still like it but don't consider it to be on the same level as the 2C.
The 2C in comparison has a precise and well balanced bass that extends deeper and doesn't have mid-bass hump. It sounds more spacious and more natural. Soundstage is bigger and instruments can breath. Treble is still laid back but has some energy. 2C is also more resolving in comparison.
Both are good headphones for different purposes. I can imagine a scenario when someone prefers to put the NH on his head, but from a technical point of view the 2C is vastly superior. Of course, you need a more serious DAC/amp combo to drive the Audeze to its full potential but if you do, IMO there is no contest between these two.

Too bad I havent listened to the NH. Dont know why I was never interested in Audioquest cans. The same with the Cascade. It was there on one meet that I went; I just didnt try it.

 

[TeaShirt]

I have the LCD2rev2 and the LCD2C.
The LCD2rev2 has more more low end and top end. Sub are deeper. The LCD2C is more in the mids but is faster.
The rev2 is king of warm and lush while having a tad more top end, the LCD2C is a bit more precise.
This is confirmed by a friend who has both as well.

Thank you for your answer.

After reading your message I realized that even original pre-fazor LCD2 has many revisions. From what I've gathered rev 2 might be the one I should go for.

What is the easiest way to tell different revisions apart from each other by looking at them? I see these going on eBay quite frequently but hardly anyone states which revision they are selling. I wonder if they even know it themself.

 

[Ultrainferno]

I see these going on eBay quite frequently but hardly anyone states which revision they are selling. I wonder if they even know it themself.

That's exactly the case...
Audeze once stated somewhere that they also don't communicate every little change they do to the units, so it's almost impossible to know what exact version you have. In the beginning with the 2.1 it was easier

 

[marcan]

Thank you for your answer.

After reading your message I realized that even original pre-fazor LCD2 has many revisions. From what I've gathered rev 2 might be the one I should go for.

What is the easiest way to tell different revisions apart from each other by looking at them? I see these going on eBay quite frequently but hardly anyone states which revision they are selling. I wonder if they even know it themself.

Yes rev2 is considered toi be the best of the line. Mine was rev1 at the origin. One driver died and audeze replace the drivers with the rev2. Couldn't be more happy.

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

Nighthawk wins on comfort against any other headphone. I also agree that NH offers the smoothest and easiest listen out there, but it is technically nowhere near to the 2C. NH is smooth, dark, warm, with a significant mid-bass hump. It can also sound a little bit hollow at times, like it was in a cave. Trebles is held back quite a bit, percussion can sound like there was a 'sliencer' on them. That said it is the lushest and easiest listen out there. I loved it a couple of years ago, I still like it but don't consider it to be on the same level as the 2C.
The 2C in comparison has a precise and well balanced bass that extends deeper and doesn't have mid-bass hump. It sounds more spacious and more natural. Soundstage is bigger and instruments can breath. Treble is still laid back but has some energy. 2C is also more resolving in comparison.
Both are good headphones for different purposes. I can imagine a scenario when someone prefers to put the NH on his head, but from a technical point of view the 2C is vastly superior. Of course, you need a more serious DAC/amp combo to drive the Audeze to its full potential but if you do, IMO there is no contest between these two.

The Nighthawk I always say gives the best perception of smoothness but it's so rough sounding underneath all that mid bass. The peaks are quite nasty and it's such a roller coaster. I agree the 2C is a much better headphome in terms of refinement it is smoother through the FR. Skylar wanted to create a headphone that sounded like speakers but failed in my mind.

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

I have to say apart from the Abyss the LCD-2C sounds more speaker like than any other headphone. The way it presents bass is superior to even the upper end Audeze models because it has the extension and dynamism.

 

[omniweltall]

I have to say apart from the Abyss the LCD-2C sounds more speaker like than any other headphone. The way it presents bass is superior to even the upper end Audeze models because it has the extension and dynamism.

Define "superior". The 2C bass is boomy, instead of tight. Hence, speaker like too. The X is tighter and deeper.

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

Define "superior". The 2C bass is boomy, instead of tight. Hence, speaker like too. The X is tighter and deeper.

For me personally I enjoy the boomy sound. Despite being boomy it's so clean. It's not as tight as say an LCD-4 but it gives a sense of power I don't get with other headphones and it reminds me of the abyss. My Verum for example sounds like headphones where as the 2C I dunno it has that presence that makes them sounds dimensional and powerful. Hard to describe.

I don't find any of the fazor LCDs dynamic.

 

[omniweltall]

For me personally I enjoy the boomy sound. Despite being boomy it's so clean. It's not as tight as say an LCD-4 but it gives a sense of power I don't get with other headphones and it reminds me of the abyss. My Verum for example sounds like headphones where as the 2C I dunno it has that presence that makes them sounds dimensional and powerful. Hard to describe.

Yeah that boomy bass does have its character. I know what you mean. To me, it is a different flavor.

 

[betula]

I have to say apart from the Abyss the LCD-2C sounds more speaker like than any other headphone. The way it presents bass is superior to even the upper end Audeze models because it has the extension and dynamism.

Define "superior". The 2C bass is boomy, instead of tight. Hence, speaker like too. The X is tighter and deeper.

2C bass is not what I would call boomy. Nighthawk or Fidelio X2 is boomy. It is relative I guess.

If we compare 2C bass to LCD4 or Clear, then yes from lesser source and amp it can sound comparatively boomy.
Out of quality amp though, (TT2 + MScaler) for example) the 2C is not boomy even compared to those more expensive headphones.

Sure, out of the whole LCD line the 2C has the biggest bass quantity. That's why it needs a great SS amp to control the beast. When it is under control, it becomes tight, clean and clear while the quantity and weight remains pretty much the same. Yes, LCD4 bass is more refined. But I find 2C bass out of a good amp more enjoyable than LCD4.

 

[omniweltall]

2C bass is not what I would call boomy. Nighthawk or Fidelio X2 is boomy. It is relative I guess.

If we compare 2C bass to LCD4 or Clear, then yes from lesser source and amp it can sound comparatively boomy.
Out of quality amp though, (TT2 + MScaler) for example) the 2C is not boomy even compared to those more expensive headphones.

Sure, out of the whole LCD line the 2C has the biggest bass quantity. That's why it needs a great SS amp to control the beast. When it is under control, it becomes tight, clean and clear while the quantity and weight remains pretty much the same. Yes, LCD4 bass is more refined. But I find 2C bass out of a good amp more enjoyable than LCD4.

Describing sound can be difficult sometimes. We may use the same word but different meaning. Sometimes I even use one word to describe two different things haha. Lack of audio vocab?

Easiest way is to compare the X and the 2C. Thats what I meant tight vs boomy. The 2C bass sound grand. Point of impact is larger.

 

[betula]

Describing sound can be difficult sometimes. We may use the same word but different meaning. Sometimes I even use one word to describe two different things haha. Lack of audio vocab?

Easiest way is to compare thr X and the 2C. Thats what I meant tight vs boomy. The 2C bass sound grand. Point of impact is larger.

Audio vocab is indeed a bit hazy. There is noone using it perfectly.