[29029]

Ding ding. Seconds out - round...............

 

[BlackbeardBen]

No, passing a rigorous blind test with enough trials can reveal whether the differences are actually audible.  Sighted listening can't eliminate bias and placebo.
 
Not to say that sighted tests aren't useful.  For most of us, and in most circumstances, blind testing is infeasible - and as the whole Swedish radio codec thing showed that blind tests aren't entirely infallible (or at least the listeners aren't).

 
Quote:

That's just an assumption of yours.  Listening can reveal whether the differences are actually audible. Reality is always what to measure against, not what you think would be reasonable or sensible.
 
Quote:

And don't even get me started on the audible differences between cables. 
 

 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSpenkelink /img/forum/go_quote.gif

[size=6pt]What is this talk of headphones from "yesteryear" and "last gen" headphones? Has the HD800, T1, LCD-2 and HE-6 eclipsed the Grado HP1000, Sony MDR-R10, AKG K1000 and Sony Qualia?[/size]​

[size=6pt]I suspect that some of the older and arguably wiser heads at Head-Fi, who sadly post less here these days (with the exception of Skylab) might disagree that the current crop of top-tier headphones surpass the performance of the legendary out of production dynamic headphones. It seems to me that these "last gen" headphones from "yesteryear" continue to set the standards by which, the newer offerings will be judged.[/size]​

[size=6pt]By all means Head-Fi'ers, enthuse about the headphones that you enjoy but some circumspection wouldn't go astray before conveniently forgetting that there have been some excellent headphones that you haven't heard, which precede the latest Head-Fi darlings. I'm finding the FOTM (even if it does exceed one month's duration), hyperbole and fanboyism that pervade this forum increasingly tiresome.[/size]​

[size=6pt]With regard to the LCD-2, I liked it but it didn't strike me as the last word in hi-fi headphones. It didn't sound any "better" to me than the other highly priced headphones that I recently auditioned; just a different flavour of a high resolution transducer. I think that some Head-Fi'ers get far too carried away with this hobby and are delusional about their hearing abilities. [/size]​

[size=6pt]Some of the posts that I read here are so ridiculous that I almost have to question the sanity of the people writing them; particularly when they claim that they can discern imperceptible differences between headphones drivers such as driver "speed", "PRAT" and the extremes of high and low frequencies. [/size]​

[size=6pt]What are these people doing listening to headphones anyway with such canine hearing abilities? It should be unbearable for them. And don't even get me started on the audible differences between cables. But I suppose being an audiophile has everything to do with fanaticism and very little to do with common sense. [/size] ​

While you're certainly entitled to your opinion, the fact is that the latest offerings from Senn, Beyer, HiFiMan, and Audeze do represent a quantum leap up in capability over previous offerings of dynamic cans from those same companies.  The whole package must be considered, whether we like the particular flavor or not.  By objective measurement this latest crop of dynamics from the aforementioned companies perform in a way that nothing on the market that preceded them could.
 
That is not to say that there is anything wrong with previous generations of phones. They were SOTA for their day and many still are mind blowingly good yet today.  I suspect with the new round of headphone amps coming on the market, we may very well see a resurgence of popularity for some of the headphones of yesteryear, but that does not in any way denigrate the technical achievements brought to the market by the latest generation of the best of the best.  
 
Objectively Yours,
kwkarth
 

 

[ipm]

No offence but, "The LCD-2 sounds like real life." makes no sense at all.
 
Any recoding is edited and put together by the recording engineer.
 
He/she is the only one who knows what real life sounds like for a given piece of music.
 
The end use listener can only hear what the recording engineer meant for them to hear and nothing more, at best.
 
Unless we are recording engineers, we do not know what the original instruments sounded like since we were not there.
 
We can compare the same music from two sources and proclaim which one sounds better to us, but references to reality is moot and not possible.
 
 
 
 
 

 

[Danz03]

I guess you are right in a way. In theory, nothing can sound like real life because even the best microphones in the world will still add a certain amount of coloration or distortion to a recording. That's why I always thought the LCD-2s actually sound closest to a pair of reference monitors.

 

[pp312]

Quote:

  The whole package must be considered, whether we like the particular flavor or not.   

Actually if you don't like the particular flavour there's not much point considering the whole package. There's a whole group of people here who've sampled the HD800 and gone back to their HD650s. That the HD800 may be technically superior in some area or another is irrelevant to them; all that matters is that it doesn't sound as good, that it has an irritating treble peak or whatever. Ultimately reducing distortion by .002% doesn't mean a hill of beans if it doesn't translate into greater listener satisfaction.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Quote:

  The whole package must be considered, whether we like the particular flavor or not.   

Actually if you don't like the particular flavour there's not much point considering the whole package. There's a whole group of people here who've sampled the HD800 and gone back to their HD650s. That the HD800 may be technically superior in some area or another is irrelevant to them; all that matters is that it doesn't sound as good, that it has an irritating treble peak or whatever. Ultimately reducing distortion by .002% doesn't mean a hill of beans if it doesn't translate into greater listener satisfaction.

Likewise, there is a large group of very happy HD800 owners who are more than satisfied with the sound of their HD800s.  Their opinion is no less valid than yours or mine.  Like you, I happen to not care for the sound of the HD800 myself, but that does not mean that those who like it are any more wrong then you or I. 

 

[babyryoga]

I am pretty new to the headphone game, and I want to make a leap towards higher end stuff from the Denon AH-D2000s I have. Two of the phones that interest me right now are the HD800s, and the LCD2s, so this thread is probably a good place to get some opinions.
 
My third choice out of brand loyalty would be the AH-D7000s, which are a little less high-end than the other two. I would say that the majority of my music fits in some sub-genre of electronic, though I listen to a lot of music from pretty much all genres overall. So, based on this, which of these 3 (or perhaps any other headphones in that price range or cheaper) work best for synthesized sounds?
 
A lot of people in this thread identify the LCD2s as being more realistic sounding, so how are they for the type of music I am describing? Would it be worth it to balance whatever choice I get, or would that actually effect electronic sounds in a negative way?
 
Also looking for a good value desktop amp and DAC that goes well with my end choices. Currently, I just have the AH-D2000s which I will likely try to sell as I purchase a higher end pair of cans, a Headstage Arrow on the way, and A Xonar D2X soundcard, so all of those can be improved upon for my computer setup. No budget, but I am very reluctant to spend money. I want good components that I won't feel the need to upgrade for a long time, and that won't lose obscene amounts of cash to diminishing returns.

 

[Skylab]

Likewise, there is a large group of very happy HD800 owners who are more than satisfied with the sound of their HD800s.  Their opinion is no less valid than yours or mine.  Like you, I happen to not care for the sound of the HD800 myself, but that does not mean that those who like it are any more wrong then you or I. 

 
I wish more people understood this. Very well said, Kevin.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

I wish more people understood this. Very well said, Kevin.

Thanks Rob.  We try, don't we... 

 

 

[MrSpenkelink]

Quote:

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSpenkelink /img/forum/go_quote.gif

[size=6pt]What is this talk of headphones from "yesteryear" and "last gen" headphones? Has the HD800, T1, LCD-2 and HE-6 eclipsed the Grado HP1000, Sony MDR-R10, AKG K1000 and Sony Qualia?[/size]​

[size=6pt]I suspect that some of the older and arguably wiser heads at Head-Fi, who sadly post less here these days (with the exception of Skylab) might disagree that the current crop of top-tier headphones surpass the performance of the legendary out of production dynamic headphones. It seems to me that these "last gen" headphones from "yesteryear" continue to set the standards by which, the newer offerings will be judged.[/size]​

[size=6pt]By all means Head-Fi'ers, enthuse about the headphones that you enjoy but some circumspection wouldn't go astray before conveniently forgetting that there have been some excellent headphones that you haven't heard, which precede the latest Head-Fi darlings. I'm finding the FOTM (even if it does exceed one month's duration), hyperbole and fanboyism that pervade this forum increasingly tiresome.[/size]​

[size=6pt]With regard to the LCD-2, I liked it but it didn't strike me as the last word in hi-fi headphones. It didn't sound any "better" to me than the other highly priced headphones that I recently auditioned; just a different flavour of a high resolution transducer. I think that some Head-Fi'ers get far too carried away with this hobby and are delusional about their hearing abilities. [/size]​

[size=6pt]Some of the posts that I read here are so ridiculous that I almost have to question the sanity of the people writing them; particularly when they claim that they can discern imperceptible differences between headphones drivers such as driver "speed", "PRAT" and the extremes of high and low frequencies. [/size]​

[size=6pt]What are these people doing listening to headphones anyway with such canine hearing abilities? It should be unbearable for them. And don't even get me started on the audible differences between cables. But I suppose being an audiophile has everything to do with fanaticism and very little to do with common sense. [/size] ​

While you're certainly entitled to your opinion, the fact is that the latest offerings from Senn, Beyer, HiFiMan, and Audeze do represent a quantum leap up in capability over previous offerings of dynamic cans from those same companies.  The whole package must be considered, whether we like the particular flavor or not.  By objective measurement this latest crop of dynamics from the aforementioned companies perform in a way that nothing on the market that preceded them could.
 
That is not to say that there is anything wrong with previous generations of phones. They were SOTA for their day and many still are mind blowingly good yet today.  I suspect with the new round of headphone amps coming on the market, we may very well see a resurgence of popularity for some of the headphones of yesteryear, but that does not in any way denigrate the technical achievements brought to the market by the latest generation of the best of the best.  
 
Objectively Yours,
kwkarth
 

 
I am not disputing that the latest headphones from the three companies you mentioned are not an improvement over their previous models. However, there are a number of Head-Fi'ers who have heard the HD650 and HD800 and find themselves preferring the former, despite the technical merits of the latter. You also appear to have overlooked the Sennheiser Orpheus HE-90 electrostat, which is still widely regarded as the benchmark headphone from that company.
[size=medium]  [/size]
[size=medium] [size=medium]Be that as it may, the headphones that I referred to were not manufactured by the companies that you mentioned. I am familiar with your enthusiastic posts extolling the technical merits of the the Audeze LCD-2. You often cite the impressive frequency response and square wave response graphs in support of your obvious belief that the LCD-2 is the "best" dynamic headphone currently available.[/size][/size]
[size=medium]  [/size]
[size=medium] [size=medium]However as you must know, these measurements though useful, cannot reproduce the complex relationship between the headphone, pinna and ear canal. They do not show for example, that some listeners find the LCD-2 to have a rather dark sound signature with detailed but "shelved down" treble presentation. They also do not show that there are others who find the soundstaging smaller than they would like and the bass presence too strong. The LCD-2 may well be an improvement over the LCD-1 and the HiFiMan HE-6 superior to the HE-5 but it is not a fact that they are "better" than the Sony MDR-R10 or Grado HP1000. This is a matter of opinion, not fact.[/size][/size]
[size=medium]  [/size]
[size=medium] [size=medium]I trust that your valediction was written with tongue firmly planted in cheek because your opinion is subjective by any measure. [/size][/size]

 

[dallan]

Quote:

 

 There's a whole group of people here who've sampled the HD800 and gone back to their HD650s. That the HD800 may be technically superior in some area or another is irrelevant to them; all that matters is that it doesn't sound as good, that it has an irritating treble peak or whatever. Ultimately reducing distortion by .002% doesn't mean a hill of beans if it doesn't translate into greater listener satisfaction.

.002% has nothing to do with it.  I know not many 800 owners want to come out here and squabble with the LCD-2 owners, I personally know some who won't bother with it, but i personally feel that the 800's are way more coherent and natural sounding than the LCD-2 and i have listened a lot to them and was even on the preorder list for months. As far as people going back to the 650's, I can't imagine what to even say.  I currently own both and occasionally will put on the 650's because i really like them, but going back to the 800's is just a whole other level.  It is hard to even compare them the 650 is not even on the same playing field.  Someone might have gone back, but that really would baffle me.  Maybe an amping or source issue that they are trying to cover up with the 650's smearing it for them or something.
 
So there is the other side of the coin i guess.

 

[pp312]

Quote:

Quote:

 

 There's a whole group of people here who've sampled the HD800 and gone back to their HD650s. That the HD800 may be technically superior in some area or another is irrelevant to them; all that matters is that it doesn't sound as good, that it has an irritating treble peak or whatever. Ultimately reducing distortion by .002% doesn't mean a hill of beans if it doesn't translate into greater listener satisfaction.

.002% has nothing to do with it.  I know not many 800 owners want to come out here and squabble with the LCD-2 owners, I personally know some who won't bother with it, but i personally feel that the 800's are way more coherent and natural sounding than the LCD-2 and i have listened a lot to them and was even on the preorder list for months. As far as people going back to the 650's, I can't imagine what to even say.  I currently own both and occasionally will put on the 650's because i really like them, but going back to the 800's is just a whole other level.  It is hard to even compare them the 650 is not even on the same playing field.  Someone might have gone back, but that really would baffle me.  Maybe an amping or source issue that they are trying to cover up with the 650's smearing it for them or something.
 
So there is the other side of the coin i guess.

Don't want to get into a "tis--tisn't" situation here, but I'm not imagining the posts from people who've said they couldn't live with the treble peak of the HD800 and went back to their 650s, or something else. I'm surprised you've (apparently) not encountered them yourself. The HD800 clearly has something in its treble that bothers quite a few people, and its measured FR (below) would seem to indicate that they're not imagining things. If you like it that's fine; I'm sure it's a very revealing headphone, but perhaps revealing isn't everyone's top priority. I myself have not heard it so I have no axe to grind; I'm simply pointing out that because a headphone has great technical specs and is much more expensive than its manufacturer's previous flagship, it's not necessarily going to please everyone, and this one clearly doesn't. As for the LCD-2, I didn't actually mention them in my post--that was MrSpenkelink--but since you bring them up I must say that if I had to buy a headphone purely on reviews without listening these are the ones I'd choose. However, they clearly don't please you much so there you go--we all hear differently.
 
As for the HD650, there are those who, like you, assure us they've been completely superceeded and others who reassure us that they're still competitive. I'm still enjoying mine, and to me that's all that matters.
 
 

 

[dallan]

 
 
Originally Posted by pp312

 

Don't want to get into a "tis--tisn't" situation here, but I'm not imagining the posts from people who've said they couldn't live with the treble peak of the HD800 and went back to their 650s, or something else. I'm surprised you've (apparently) not encountered them yourself. The HD800 clearly has something in its treble that bothers quite a few people, and its measured FR (below) would seem to indicate that they're not imagining things. If you like it that's fine; I'm sure it's a very revealing headphone, but perhaps revealing isn't everyone's top priority. I myself have not heard it so I have no axe to grind; I'm simply pointing out that because a headphone has great technical specs and is much more expensive than its manufacturer's previous flagship, it's not necessarily going to please everyone, and this one clearly doesn't. As for the LCD-2, I didn't actually mention them in my post--that was MrSpenkelink--but since you bring them up I must say that if I had to buy a headphone purely on reviews without listening these are the ones I'd choose. However, they clearly don't please you much so there you go--we all hear differently.

 

As for the HD650, there are those who, like you, assure us they've been completely superceeded and others who reassure us that they're still competitive. I'm still enjoying mine, and to me that's all that matters.

 

 
 
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
I brought up the LCD-2 because that is the topic of this thread.  
 
I don't comment on headphones i haven't heard or base my comments on reviews or what other people have written as you.  I am aware of what people have written and arguing or debating with someone who hasn't even heard them is one reason the people happy with their 800s don't even bother wasting their time.  
 
I generally wouldn't buy based on a review without hearing a pair, and i agree that based on the reviews I may choose the LCD-2.  Good thing that I got a bunch of time with them and found the reviews lacking in some respects.
 
Hope you can find some HD800s to hear with a good amp and copper cable, at that point your comments will carry weight.  We can all read what people who have actually heard them have written or read reviews on many sites.   Until then enjoy your HD650's, I do enjoy mine still and have the luxury of going back and forth between them and the 800s if need be.  Gotta say again though, it is hard to imagine anyone who has both spending much, if any time with the 650's. 

 

[sokolov91]

I still don't see why it is so hard to separate objective merits and subjective merits... they are not mutually exclusive, but they are also not causal.
 
Like Kevin said the new generation of flagships are leaps and bounds better in technical terms and please many a head-fier... some prefer a particular FR or psychoacoustic happening and will stick with what they like which is fine, smart even. But their preference has no bearing on reality.
 
It's really not a difficult concept to graph: a Headphone can be technically better IE lower distortion, quicker driver etc but still not be the sound flavour someone is looking for... and that is normal. If it was so damned easy to make the one headphone to please everyone it would have been done.
 
 
As for the HD 800 vs the LCD-2 I prefer the LCD-2 but both are exceptional headphones and people should use their judgements.
 
Personally I find the LCD-2 subjectively better AND they seem to be OBJECTIVELY better than the HD 800 in a number of areas like linearity in response - the square wave plots especially are impressive. They are lacking a bit in comfort and "ease of use" IMO.
 
The HD 800 seem to have clearer highs and this is backed up by the boost in dB and better phase of the HD 800 in the highs as well as lower distortion IIRC. The HD 800 also have very nice imaging for such a huge soundstage which is no easy feat. The LCD-2 sounds like it images much more realistically and precisely to me, but then you trade a smaller soundstage for that. Again there is no perfect headphone but that does not mean we are not moving forward in a very real way with these new flagships.
 
But ultimately the HD 800 and LCD-2 are on par once you weight all the pros and cons of each headphone.
 
If people still want to listen to their HD 650 all the power to them... but they are not a better headphone, they are just better suited to that person's taste.
 
Hell the HD 600/650 are one of the few headphones known to actually sound "slow" and for those of you who refuse to look at any technical data, that is a strong anecdotal implication. None of the new flagships are said to sound like they are lacking any "speed".