Audeze LCD-3 Impressions Thread
Oct 2, 2014 at 1:04 AM Post #3,091 of 6,040

Kiats

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Posts
5,261
Likes
4,892
It has 2 babies.. one called Stax SR-009 and the other Abyss!


Haha! I would venture that the Abyss is more likely because of the sub bass kick. :)
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 1:42 AM Post #3,092 of 6,040

dnlee480

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Posts
135
Likes
20
I would be all over a Stack Sr009. But I don't like the fact that it uses different type of amp topology and connection thus not allowing me to use my current amps and limits the number of available amps.
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 2:39 AM Post #3,093 of 6,040

Somphon

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 31, 2014
Posts
402
Likes
38
I would be all over a Stack Sr009. But I don't like the fact that it uses different type of amp topology and connection thus not allowing me to use my current amps and limits the number of available amps.

I had some time with both and also prefer SR-900, but thats another 10,000$ investments... 
 
Sticking to my LCD-3f for now.
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 3:22 PM Post #3,095 of 6,040

dnlee480

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Posts
135
Likes
20
BTW the Abyss looks like headphones made for Frankenstein!  LOL  looks so obnoxious and ugly.  I would be embarrassed to be caught wearing them.  I dare someone to walk outside with these on or go to a coffee shop and put these on when doing some work.  Would love to see people's reaction.  haha
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 3:30 PM Post #3,096 of 6,040

Androb

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Posts
921
Likes
60
Didn't think the Abyss was THAT superior to LCD-3 tbh. :)))
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 3:35 PM Post #3,097 of 6,040

Badas

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 9, 2014
Posts
3,240
Likes
842
  BTW the Abyss looks like headphones made for Frankenstein!  LOL  looks so obnoxious and ugly.  I would be embarrassed to be caught wearing them.  I dare someone to walk outside with these on or go to a coffee shop and put these on when doing some work.  Would love to see people's reaction.  haha


Agreed. They are obnoxious and even a bit ugly. But I like that. I don't think they designed them for the coffee crowd. I actually like big bulky in ya face headphones. It sends a message. It's like bugger you I'm not designed for a iPhone. I'm designed to produce the best sound ever.
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 4:36 PM Post #3,098 of 6,040

isquirrel

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
1,738
Likes
554
I read over in the Studio Six thread that Mike Mercer found the Abyss not enjoyable, I think he said he couldn't connect with the music. Anyway I haven't heard either them or the Stax 009. 
 
The Australian Hi-Fi show is on mid October so I will be able to listen to both then. I am sure they will do some things better/differently to my LCD-X and 3F's but if they don;t have the emotional connection then frankly I don't care.
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 5:31 PM Post #3,099 of 6,040

Argo Duck

Formerly known as "AiDee"
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Posts
2,245
Likes
421
I suspect emotional or musical connection is a listener/gear synergy thing, rather than an absolute property of the gear necessarily. Maybe the Abyss just doesn't work for Mike. Or didn't on that occasion.

Though I do think fine-scale dynamics contribute a lot to retrieving emotional expression from skilled voices and well-played instruments. That arguably is largely a gear thing.
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 8:38 PM Post #3,100 of 6,040

hmorneau

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 1, 2012
Posts
144
Likes
19
  Hmorneau, how would you compare and contrast the LCD-3F and the Beyer T1s? I'm looking at purchasing the T1's and was hoping they stack up close to the LCD-3s. Thanks in advance.

LCD-3 and T1 are very different. 
 
Right now I have the perfect amp for the T1 (SPL Auditor) but less then perfect one for the LCD-3 (Schitt Vali), so my comparaison is probably unfair. I'm looking into buying an amp for the LCD-3, but I don't know yet what to get.
 
 T1LCD-3
TrebleDetailed, impressive, clear and sharp, can be sibilant sometimeSoft, precise, never sibilant
BassFast, impressive, lot of slam, much more bass then the DT880 and extend lower. Deep, rounded, 
MidClear, in your face presentationrealistic, lay back
AcousticClear, sharp, you get every detailsYou get all the details, but more in the background. Lifelike?
VoiceReally good sometime and other time notMore forgiving, really nice and rounded. I think it's where the LCD-3 shine. 
ClassicalLifeless but detailedOverall good, but less detailed
SoundstageHuge soundstage without being artificial. The T1 really shine here.Smaller, more like the DT-880. Compared to the T1, it's poor.
DetailsLots of details, if there is a glitch you will notice it easilyMuch more forgiving, everything is there, but not in your face.
Day to dayFun if you like to listen to every details, I do. Very comfortable even after many hours.Easy to listen to. Engaging headphone. 
 
Many here will disagree, and I agree to disagree, it's just my opinion on both of them. Note that I spend much more time with the T1 and my LCD-3 are still "burning in" (read my ears are still adapting to it's sound signature, I don't buy into burning and cable stuff). To answer your question do they stack close? Yes, they are both really nice headphone, but at the same time very different. If you buy the T1, I guess at first you won't like them, it did the same with the LCD-3, they are so different. 
 
An other fun thing that say how different they are, most people with the T1 try to find an amp with tube warm sound to "remove" sibilance and gain on bass. Those with the LCD-3 say they prefer SS because it bring treble and more details. On my side I'm at the opposite, I have the T1 with a SS and I try to find a warm amp for the LCD-3 (considering the woo 6 or woo 22). When I want all the details I go for the T1 (but it's hard doing something else, you just want to focus on everything, it so incredible), when I want to relax I go for the LCD-3. 
 
I would say that the LCD-X is closer to the T1, probably a good balance between both. My guess is that the LCD-X is the best Audeze headphone right now, they could have named it LCD-4 and everybody would have say how better it is to the LCD-3, but by doing so, it would have been hard to continue to sell the LCD-3 full price, so instead they call it their "flagship". Then why I went with the LCD-3F? Because I wanted something as far apart from the T1. 
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 10:24 PM Post #3,101 of 6,040

dnlee480

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Posts
135
Likes
20
Agreed. They are obnoxious and even a bit ugly. But I like that. I don't think they designed them for the coffee crowd. I actually like big bulky in ya face headphones. It sends a message. It's like bugger you I'm not designed for a iPhone. I'm designed to produce the best sound ever.


All good points. I wouldn't wear the lcd or hd800 in public either. They look nice to look at but when on, they look funny. The T1 looks more handsome. I know it's not a fashion show but I have a point where I have to draw the line. Even my home speakers. My wife would kill me if got speakers that were huge and ugly. I barely was able to get approval for my dynaudio c4. Anyhow the abyss is one of the ugliest headphones I have ever seen but I'm sure they sound amazing.
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 11:13 PM Post #3,103 of 6,040

isquirrel

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 29, 2012
Posts
1,738
Likes
554
From my experience I invariably choose the LCD-3 over my X for most of my listening. I hear a more refined sound and can hear more of the micro detail that goes into what makes a performance a rewarding experience. Yes the X has more bass, but I don't miss it with the 3 because I think its overall performance is enchanting. I find my attention wanders with the X and I ultimately go and do something else.
 
I believe it is exactly that musical characteristic that makes the LCD-3 a special headphone. It might not be the last word in resolution or sound staging but it involves in a way no other headphone has yet. I wonder when/if Audeze will make a LCD-4?
 
Oct 2, 2014 at 11:23 PM Post #3,104 of 6,040

Argo Duck

Formerly known as "AiDee"
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Posts
2,245
Likes
421
Very nice table - makes it very easy to compare :beerchug:

I agree almost completely concerning the T1. My only point of difference - I'm with "most people" that of the amps I've tried it's best with tube.

OTOH I differ a lot with your LCD3 descriptions: I just don't recognise the 3 (actually 3F) I hear in most of it. I think you are right to finger the Vali as putting the 3 in an unfair light. I think you are in for a treat once you find the right amp.

As well, I think many do in fact prefer tube with the 3. I'm one, and I personally would never mate a warm or syrupy tube amp with an LCD3. As it happens there are a number of "SS-like" tube amps in the sense they don't sound syrupy yet offer other advantages, tuning the sound being the most obvious.

LCD-3 and T1 are very different. 

Right now I have the perfect amp for the T1 (SPL Auditor) but less then perfect one for the LCD-3 (Schitt Vali), so my comparaison is probably unfair. I'm looking into buying an amp for the LCD-3, but I don't know yet what to get.



















































 T1LCD-3
TrebleDetailed, impressive, clear and sharp, can be sibilant sometimeSoft, precise, never sibilant
BassFast, impressive, lot of slam, much more bass then the DT880 and extend lower. Deep, rounded, 
MidClear, in your face presentationrealistic, lay back
AcousticClear, sharp, you get every detailsYou get all the details, but more in the background. Lifelike?
VoiceReally good sometime and other time notMore forgiving, really nice and rounded. I think it's where the LCD-3 shine. 
ClassicalLifeless but detailedOverall good, but less detailed
SoundstageHuge soundstage without being artificial. The T1 really shine here.Smaller, more like the DT-880. Compared to the T1, it's poor.
DetailsLots of details, if there is a glitch you will notice it easilyMuch more forgiving, everything is there, but not in your face.
Day to dayFun if you like to listen to every details, I do. Very comfortable even after many hours.Easy to listen to. Engaging headphone. 


Many here will disagree, and I agree to disagree, it's just my opinion on both of them. Note that I spend much more time with the T1 and my LCD-3 are still "burning in" (read my ears are still adapting to it's sound signature, I don't buy into burning and cable stuff). To answer your question do they stack close? Yes, they are both really nice headphone, but at the same time very different. If you buy the T1, I guess at first you won't like them, it did the same with the LCD-3, they are so different. 

An other fun thing that say how different they are, most people with the T1 try to find an amp with tube warm sound to "remove" sibilance and gain on bass. Those with the LCD-3 say they prefer SS because it bring treble and more details. On my side I'm at the opposite, I have the T1 with a SS and I try to find a warm amp for the LCD-3 (considering the woo 6 or woo 22). When I want all the details I go for the T1 (but it's hard doing something else, you just want to focus on everything, it so incredible), when I want to relax I go for the LCD-3. 

I would say that the LCD-X is closer to the T1, probably a good balance between both. My guess is that the LCD-X is the best Audeze headphone right now, they could have named it LCD-4 and everybody would have say how better it is to the LCD-3, but by doing so, it would have been hard to continue to sell the LCD-3 full price, so instead they call it their "flagship". Then why I went with the LCD-3F? Because I wanted something as far apart from the T1. 
 
Oct 3, 2014 at 12:32 AM Post #3,105 of 6,040

adamaley

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Posts
591
Likes
97
  LCD-3 and T1 are very different. 
 
Right now I have the perfect amp for the T1 (SPL Auditor) but less then perfect one for the LCD-3 (Schitt Vali), so my comparaison is probably unfair. I'm looking into buying an amp for the LCD-3, but I don't know yet what to get.
 
 T1LCD-3
TrebleDetailed, impressive, clear and sharp, can be sibilant sometimeSoft, precise, never sibilant
BassFast, impressive, lot of slam, much more bass then the DT880 and extend lower. Deep, rounded, 
MidClear, in your face presentationrealistic, lay back
AcousticClear, sharp, you get every detailsYou get all the details, but more in the background. Lifelike?
VoiceReally good sometime and other time notMore forgiving, really nice and rounded. I think it's where the LCD-3 shine. 
ClassicalLifeless but detailedOverall good, but less detailed
SoundstageHuge soundstage without being artificial. The T1 really shine here.Smaller, more like the DT-880. Compared to the T1, it's poor.
DetailsLots of details, if there is a glitch you will notice it easilyMuch more forgiving, everything is there, but not in your face.
Day to dayFun if you like to listen to every details, I do. Very comfortable even after many hours.Easy to listen to. Engaging headphone. 
 
Many here will disagree, and I agree to disagree, it's just my opinion on both of them. Note that I spend much more time with the T1 and my LCD-3 are still "burning in" (read my ears are still adapting to it's sound signature, I don't buy into burning and cable stuff). To answer your question do they stack close? Yes, they are both really nice headphone, but at the same time very different. If you buy the T1, I guess at first you won't like them, it did the same with the LCD-3, they are so different. 
 
An other fun thing that say how different they are, most people with the T1 try to find an amp with tube warm sound to "remove" sibilance and gain on bass. Those with the LCD-3 say they prefer SS because it bring treble and more details. On my side I'm at the opposite, I have the T1 with a SS and I try to find a warm amp for the LCD-3 (considering the woo 6 or woo 22). When I want all the details I go for the T1 (but it's hard doing something else, you just want to focus on everything, it so incredible), when I want to relax I go for the LCD-3. 
 
I would say that the LCD-X is closer to the T1, probably a good balance between both. My guess is that the LCD-X is the best Audeze headphone right now, they could have named it LCD-4 and everybody would have say how better it is to the LCD-3, but by doing so, it would have been hard to continue to sell the LCD-3 full price, so instead they call it their "flagship". Then why I went with the LCD-3F? Because I wanted something as far apart from the T1. 

Wow! Great comparison. Thanks for taking the time. You're one of the few to really describe the T1s sound as being very analytical. I'll keep that in mind.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top