[Gary in MD]

Quote:

The difference between the LCD2 and LCD3 actually has little to do with bass and mostly to do with high-frequency detail and extension.

Agreed, with the addition of detail throughout and extension at both ends.  The LCD-3 adds dimension, timbre and depth of sound -- I don't mean sound stage... the sound of each instrument and voice is just more full or 3-D without being flabby, if that makes sense -- across the spectrum.  Attack and decay are incredibly life-like.  On a good recording, the LCD sounds like you are right there with the musicians (vs. the HD-800 which puts you in the mid-back of the orchestra section).  The LCD-3 is just a better headphone than the -2, and I'm driving mine with the headphone jack of a >20-yr.-old SS pre-amp.  The question is whether the -3 is 2X better, and that's totally up to the individual's choice.

 

[jk6661]

Quote:

Agreed, with the addition of detail throughout and extension at both ends.  The LCD-3 adds dimension, timbre and depth of sound -- I don't mean sound stage... the sound of each instrument and voice is just more full or 3-D without being flabby, if that makes sense -- across the spectrum.  Attack and decay are incredibly life-like.  On a good recording, the LCD sounds like you are right there with the musicians (vs. the HD-800 which puts you in the mid-back of the orchestra section).  The LCD-3 is just a better headphone than the -2, and I'm driving mine with the headphone jack of a >20-yr.-old SS pre-amp.  The question is whether the -3 is 2X better, and that's totally up to the individual's choice.

Unfortunately, I've found that my LCD3s make mediocre recordings sound worse than my LCD2s. Oh well--can't have everything.

 

[Solude]

That's the rub.  You can pair the LCD-2 with just about anything and still have a good experience.  The LCD-3 though can make some 'great' gear sound poor and some recordings just unlistenable.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Unfortunately, I've found that my LCD3s make mediocre recordings sound worse than my LCD2s. Oh well--can't have everything.

 
Quote:

That's the rub.  You can pair the LCD-2 with just about anything and still have a good experience.  The LCD-3 though can make some 'great' gear sound poor and some recordings just unlistenable.

Yep...when I wrote my comparative review last year, this was one thing I noticed almost immediately. They sing with a synergistic rig and good recordings. But feed them sub-par recordings and Garbage In = Garbage Out. The LCD-2s were more forgiving (and in turn, less transparent). Funny how the LCD-3s are similar to the HD800s in this regard.

 

[ChrisSC]

Quote:

 
Yep...when I wrote my comparative review last year, this was one thing I noticed almost immediately. They sing with a synergistic rig and good recordings. But feed them sub-par recordings and Garbage In = Garbage Out. The LCD-2s were more forgiving (and in turn, less transparent). Funny how the LCD-3s are similar to the HD800s in this regard.

Do you find that this also is true in comparing 320kbhps mp3s vs. lossless files?  I've always had to strain to hear the difference between the file types, but I'm wondering if the LCD-3s, in your opinion, accentuate the differences?  thanks in advance for your response

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Do you find that this also is true in comparing 320kbhps mp3s vs. lossless files?  I've always had to strain to hear the difference between the file types, but I'm wondering if the LCD-3s, in your opinion, accentuate the differences?  thanks in advance for your response

Funny, you're the second person to ask me this tonight: 

http://www.head-fi.org/t/588429/audeze-lcd-3-appreciation-thread/180#post_8867618

 

[Gary in MD]

Quote:

Do you find that this also is true in comparing 320kbhps mp3s vs. lossless files?  I've always had to strain to hear the difference between the file types, but I'm wondering if the LCD-3s, in your opinion, accentuate the differences?  thanks in advance for your response

I don't know about 320kpbs files, but with the LCD-3s, you can DEFINITELY hear the difference between 192kbps files and FLACS.  I had some stuff I got from other folks, just to see if I liked it enough to buy the CDs, which I then ripped, since it's easier than going and getting the CD to play.  I can't even listen to the MP3 files any more, they sound like crap compared to the FLAC.

 

[Prince Valiant]

Quote:

Quote:

 
Yep...when I wrote my comparative review last year, this was one thing I noticed almost immediately. They sing with a synergistic rig and good recordings. But feed them sub-par recordings and Garbage In = Garbage Out. The LCD-2s were more forgiving (and in turn, less transparent). Funny how the LCD-3s are similar to the HD800s in this regard.

Do you find that this also is true in comparing 320kbhps mp3s vs. lossless files?  I've always had to strain to hear the difference between the file types, but I'm wondering if the LCD-3s, in your opinion, accentuate the differences?  thanks in advance for your response

My headphones are far from high end and I can notice the difference on some music, MP3 is a poor format in my opinion. (Not intending this as a slam, I just don't care for the format in general.)

 

[Cavcalade]

Quote:

I don't know about 320kpbs files, but with the LCD-3s, you can DEFINITELY hear the difference between 192kbps files and FLACS.  I had some stuff I got from other folks, just to see if I liked it enough to buy the CDs, which I then ripped, since it's easier than going and getting the CD to play.  I can't even listen to the MP3 files any more, they sound like crap compared to the FLAC.

 

I used to be obsessed with FLAC until I did a blind test with 320kbps. I simply could not tell the difference. 192kbps, different story.
 
Nonetheless, I still use FLAC for archiving, maybe there will be a new "lossy" format in the future and I want to convert from the lossless file.

 

[m2man]

A FLAC file costs about one half a cent on a modern 1TB drive. You can't swing that?

 

[pp312]

It's not the cost, it's the unwieldyness, the time it takes to transfer multiple files etc. And of course if you want to use a media player you're limited to those that accept FLAC, and even then you have to load your files onto a flash drive, which is going to have to be at least 16gb because each of your song files is the size of an elephant, remember. And it could all have been so easily avoided with 320 MP3.

 

[Golila3]

Phew~ read the whole thing because I wanted to justify wanting the LCD 3 over the LCD 2 dispite the 1k difference. Gotta go back to my local headphone store and try both again.

I also did a blind test with the Wav vs 320 thing and I noticed that I could tell the difference with Rock(what I listen to the most), but not Jpop or Anime songs. I thought I could tell the difference in between classical music, but my results didn't really justify that.

 

[YtseJamer]

My new pair of LCD-3 sound amazing with the Schiit Mjolnir. ($749)

I don't think that it would be possible to replicate the SQ of my new setup with the LCD-2 and a $2000 amplifiers.

 

[commtrd]

How do the LCD3 sound with the Lyr amp? That one has self-adjusting topology that aligns ouputs to match high-impedance phones or say the 50 to 60 ohms impedance of the Audeze cans equally well; along with plenty of power it would seem this would be a good amp to drive the LCD2 or 3s?

 

[MacedonianHero]

Not the best pairing. Sorry didn't do it for me when I owned the Lyr. The LCD3s are a lot pickier IME.