[Skylab]

Quote:

Really? I thought of LCD-2 as clear and pure sounding like clear vodka, whereas HD800 seems to have a very distinct fine flavor of it's own.
While vodka can go with any food without altering the taste, the wrong combination of food and red wine can ruin both, that's just how my logic works. 

 
Quote:

Wow - I was going to post just the opposite - LOL.

 

As with sound, it all depends on your tastes.  I think vodka is clear but sterile, and while it gets you drunk, provides no enjoyment of the process, while with a good red, or the LCD-2, the process is highly enjoyable
 
Of course, YMMV.

 

[29029]

 
Quote:

As with sound, it all depends on your tastes.  I think vodka is clear but sterile, and while it gets you drunk, provides no enjoyment of the process, while with a good red, or the LCD-2, the process is highly enjoyable

 

+1

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

LCD-2 = Memphis ribs
HD800 = Carolina ribs

Mmmmmm....ribs!

 

[rhythmdevils]

Quote:

Quote:

Really? I thought of LCD-2 as clear and pure sounding like clear vodka, whereas HD800 seems to have a very distinct fine flavor of it's own.
While vodka can go with any food without altering the taste, the wrong combination of food and red wine can ruin both, that's just how my logic works. 

 

As with sound, it all depends on your tastes.  I think vodka is clear but sterile, and while it gets you drunk, provides no enjoyment of the process, while with a good red, or the LCD-2, the process is highly enjoyable
 
Of course, YMMV.

Awesome!  I was starting to think I was the only one who used food analogies around here anymore.  Here's another analogy...
 
The HD800 is a high resolution digital print and the LCD-2 is an analog print from an 8x10 negative.  Both are gorgeous and both wow you with incredible amounts of information and detail.  The digital print looks very clear and may be more resolving in an absolute sense, but the 8x10 print just looks more like real life because it has circular grain rather than square pixels. 

 

[Currawong]

If we're going to go with photograph analogies, I'd say the LCD-2s are like an Ansel Adams print.

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Really? I thought of LCD-2 as clear and pure sounding like clear vodka, whereas HD800 seems to have a very distinct fine flavor of it's own.
While vodka can go with any food without altering the taste, the wrong combination of food and red wine can ruin both, that's just how my logic works. 

 

As with sound, it all depends on your tastes.  I think vodka is clear but sterile, and while it gets you drunk, provides no enjoyment of the process, while with a good red, or the LCD-2, the process is highly enjoyable
 
Of course, YMMV.

Awesome!  I was starting to think I was the only one who used food analogies around here anymore.  Here's another analogy...
 
The HD800 is a high resolution digital print and the LCD-2 is an analog print from an 8x10 negative.  Both are gorgeous and both wow you with incredible amounts of information and detail.  The digital print looks very clear and may be more resolving in an absolute sense, but the 8x10 print just looks more like real life because it has circular grain rather than square pixels. 

I was unaware that dot matrix, inkjet, direct imaging, and above all, LightJet printers printed squares instead of round dots, or no dots at all (in the case of LightJet printers, where RGB lasers expose silver-halide print paper)...
 
I think all of these analogies are flawed; and I know no one is ever going to agree on them all...

 

[orkney]

Quote:

I just realized that the LCD2/HD800/T`1/HE6 is just a continuation of the past battles. With the LCD2 = HD650, HD800 = K701, T1 = HD600, HE6 = DT880.

Dead on here. Great post.
 
o

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Quote:

I just realized that the LCD2/HD800/T`1/HE6 is just a continuation of the past battles. With the LCD2 = HD650, HD800 = K701, T1 = HD600, HE6 = DT880.

Dead on here. Great post.
 
o

except I find it offensive he compares the HD 800 to the K701 XP
 

 

[nigeljames]

Or the LCD-2 to HD650's

 

[BlackbeardBen]

Or the T1 to the HD 600...

 

[dallan]

I hope at a meet in the near future someone will have a T1.  Are they that unpopular, can't believe that at all the meets i have been to since their release there hasn't been one.

 
As far as the picture analogy i could make one that would be opposed to some of yours but i am done with the debate at this point.  Once you acclimate I am sure the LCD-2 is the cat's meow, it does have an interesting sound and i almost did end up buying one.  Hopefully when the next generation of ortho/plantar's or what ever come out they will be better integrated and will seduce me, or not(poor beat up wallet

).

 

[Skylab]

I hope at a meet in the near future someone will have a T1.  Are they that unpopular, can't believe that at all the meets i have been to since their release there hasn't been one.

 
That is odd, because at Can Jam the T1 was literally everywhere.

 

[dallan]

Quote:

 
That is odd, because at Can Jam the T1 was literally everywhere.

"Maybe it is a Southern California thing, and since no one has the opportunity to hear them, no one is buying them so it continues.  At the last meet it was actually a topic that none of us had had the chance to hear a pair.
 

 

[MrSpenkelink]

It's nice to be ban... err, back. Before I begin, the usual caveats apply. These are my subjective listening impressions and your individual mileage may and most probably will vary et cetera.
[size=medium]  
[size=small][size=medium]I listened to the LCD-2 some weeks ago at a headphone meet and was impressed. I posted my impressions in the LCD-2 thread but to recap, it had a fulsome presentation with a meaty midrange and powerful bottom end; perhaps too much so. Treble detail was there but it did sound toned down to me. It lacked a liveliness in that frequency range that I felt should have been there. I can understand how this phone is described as dark sounding but it does make for a non-fatiguing listen. Comfort was surprisingly good but it is a heavy headphone and I wonder how it would fare for longer listening sessions.[/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]I also tried the HD800 there and again more recently. I initially noticed the treble detail, which was prominent. I can understand how it might be too much for some. The sound stage was not exaggerated but the presentation was distant rather than intimate. Though well defined, I found the bass presence somewhat lacking overall. The midrange was there but not forward. The overall sound signature was highly detailed with a treble emphasis. Comfort was less than ideal for me, with the earcups feeling too large and pressing into my cheekbones. Build quality appeared excellent and it felt solid in my hands.[/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]If I had to choose between the two based on sound alone, I would pick the LCD-2. I preferred it but it's not flawless and I don't think that "real life" sounds quite as dark in the treble region. The HD800 also impressed but the treble did sound "tipped-up" and the bass damped. I think there is potential for listening fatigue with this headphone. [/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]I've also listened to three different Stax headphones now and feel that they strike the right balance for me between the robustness of the LCD-2 and refinement of the HD800. Each model manages to redress the shelved-down treble of the LCD-2 without sounding forced like the HD800. Bass was more present than the HD800, without sounding dominant like the LCD-2. The midrange was liquid and "musical" without sounding thick. The electrostats have a delicacy that the earthy LCD-2 lacked but seemed more visceral than the cerebral HD800. Clarity, imaging and detail retrieval were superb and every bit the equal of the two dynamics. The timbre of acoustic instruments sounded true. And as we so often read about electrostatic headphones, it was all done effortlessly and without a hint of harshness. Plus they were light and comfortable to wear. I now understand why there is a Stax mafia.[/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]Now if I could just audition a PS1000...[/size][/size]
 
Source and amps for HD800: CEC CD player, (failed to note make and model of CD player used at meet), Antique Sound Lab MG-Head OTL mark 3, DNA Sonett, Lehmann Black Cube Linear
[size=medium]  [/size]
[size=medium] [size=medium]Source and amp for LCD-2: macbook, Metric Halo ULN2, Leben CS300XS [/size][/size]
[size=medium]  [/size]
[size=medium] [size=medium]Source and Stax systems: CEC CD player, [/size](failed to note make and model of CD player used at meet), SR-404 LE + SRM-600 Limited, SR-507 + SRM 600 Limited, SRS-3050A[/size]
 

PS Having heard the HD800, LCD-2 and the T1, I wondered if there really is any basis to claims that the current crop of flagship dynamics eclipse past legends such as the Grado HP1000, Sony MDR-R10, AKG K1000 and Sony Qualia. I guess I'll never know without hearing them for myself.
 
 
[size=small][size=medium]  [/size][/size]
 

[/size]
[size=medium] [size=medium] [/size][/size]

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

 
[size=medium] [size=small][size=medium]It's nice to be ban... err, back. Before I begin, the usual caveats apply. These are my subjective listening impressions and your individual mileage may and most probably will vary et cetera.[/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]I listened to the LCD-2 some weeks ago at a headphone meet and was impressed. I posted my impressions in the LCD-2 thread but to recap, it had a fulsome presentation with a meaty midrange and powerful bottom end; perhaps too much so. Treble detail was there but it did sound toned down to me. It lacked a liveliness in that frequency range that I felt should have been there. I can understand how this phone is described as dark sounding but it does make for a non-fatiguing listen. Comfort was surprisingly good but it is a heavy headphone and I wonder how it would fare for longer listening sessions.[/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]I also tried the HD800 there and again more recently. I initially noticed the treble detail, which was prominent. I can understand how it might be too much for some. The sound stage was not exaggerated but the presentation was distant rather than intimate. Though tight and detailed, I found the bass presence somewhat lacking overall. The midrange was there but not forward. The overall sound signature was highly detailed with a treble emphasis. Comfort was less than ideal for me, with the earcups feeling too large and pressing into my cheekbones. Build quality appeared excellent and it felt solid in my hands.[/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]If I had to choose between the two based on sound alone, I would pick the LCD-2. I preferred it but it's not flawless and I don't think that "real life" sounds quite as dark in the treble region. The HD800 also impressed but the treble did sound "tipped up" and the bass damped. I think there is potential for listening fatigue with this headphone. [/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]I've also listened to three different Stax headphones now and feel that they manage to strike the right balance for me between the robustness of the LCD-2 and refinement of the HD800. Each model redressed the shelved-down treble of the LCD-2 without sounding forced like the HD800. Bass presence was more prominent than the HD800, without sounding dominant like the LCD-2. The midrange was liquid and "musical" without sounding thick. The electrostats have a delicacy that the LCD-2 lacks. Detail retrieval and imaging were superb and every bit the equal of the two dynamics. The timbre of acoustic instruments sounded true. And as we so often read about electrostatic headphones, it was all done effortlessly and without a hint of harshness. Plus they were light and comfortable to wear.[/size][/size]
 
[size=small][size=medium]Now if I could just audition a PS1000... [/size][/size]
 
[size=small]PS Having heard the HD800, LCD-2 and the T1, I wondered if there really is any basis to claims that the current crop of flagship dynamics eclipse past legends such as the Grado HP1000, Sony MDR-R10, AKG K1000 and Sony Qualia? I guess I'll never know without hearing them for myself.[/size]
 
 
[size=small][size=medium]  [/size][/size]
 

[/size]
[size=medium] [size=medium] [/size][/size]

Well there is definitive objective bases... just look at the qualia measurements... they are god awful. R-10 is not the best either although it is a can with quite the following and I sure it is warranted.
 
There are also lots of subjective bases.
 
Not to  say the other headphones aren't worth considering but I would say hinting the newer flagships are more hype than substance is pretty bold .
 
Biggest thing is preference and music being played though and if a headphone does what people want it is the best.
 
For example, I love the LCD-2 for classical pieces because the low end really gives orchestras some life and substance and some people love having really treble heavy headphones for the same music...
 
 
I just know that I would never go back to my HD 600, SR 325i or any of the other headphones I had prior to my flagships and it has nothing to do with price - just the sonics. The other headphones were great and very enjoyable.. but I have the money, so why settle for less?
 
Whereas before I loved having plenty of sound signatures, I actually now hate having distracting differences in headphones. The HE-6 I got recently is wonderful and is everything people have said about them, but it takes away time from my LCD-2 and HD 800... with headphones this good I would very much be happy with only one and will probably end up selling one or two just to make time for my favorites. The neutrality (to my ears) of the LCD-2 has really killed that whole "this headphone for this music" mentality because the new crop of flagships have so few short comings.
 
That being said, the LCD-2 and HD 800 are a great combo to have. Great complementary characteristics.
 
my 2c