[hifidk]

I see your point. I did not dislike the sound of LCD2, I actually liked it. It was just that I liked HD800 and O2 more. Also, LCD2 was very uncomfortable on my head and that was the major deal breaker for me. HD800, O2 and Edition 10 are all very comfortable and can wear them for hours. But anyhow, I may want to try LCD2 again in the future when time and money allows. 
 
Quote:

 
Quote:

All these praises about LCD2 makes me wonder if I should give them a second chance. When I compared LCD2 with HD800 side by side, I preferred HD800 over LCD2. Maybe I was too quick to make the decision to let LCD2 go. Maybe I will buy them again later. 
 
I often see people consider HD800's sound as analytical and LCD2 has more organic and natural sound. Interesting thing is that I consider HD800 as very musical and organic. I know I am going to get shot by a lot of people for saying this but LCD2 was too dark and not engaging enough for me when compared to HD800. I guess I have different ears.   

I have all three and in comparing the three the two orthos are a step up from the HD800 The bass is soft on the HD800 and only goes to 44hz. It is not what you would hear in either a recording studio or live concert. the two orthos achieve that goal. They are also a clearer window into the music. The HD800 is a very airy and soundstage champion. It has air and space something the HE6 achieves but the HE6 has better transparency not as comfortable but better overall. The LCD is the neutral vocal king had leass air and space over the other two and the smallest soundstage in comparison and IMO more comfortable on my head than the HE6 but not as light as the HD800. Overall I still think the LCD2 is the closest to live events that you can hear IMO of course but I bought all three and am keeping all three so it what floats someones boat. But remarkbly both orthos are less expensive

 

[SP Wild]

Quote:

 
Quote:

All these praises about LCD2 makes me wonder if I should give them a second chance. When I compared LCD2 with HD800 side by side, I preferred HD800 over LCD2. Maybe I was too quick to make the decision to let LCD2 go. Maybe I will buy them again later. 
 
I often see people consider HD800's sound as analytical and LCD2 has more organic and natural sound. Interesting thing is that I consider HD800 as very musical and organic. I know I am going to get shot by a lot of people for saying this but LCD2 was too dark and not engaging enough for me when compared to HD800. I guess I have different ears.   

I have all three and in comparing the three the two orthos are a step up from the HD800 The bass is soft on the HD800 and only goes to 44hz. It is not what you would hear in either a recording studio or live concert. the two orthos achieve that goal. They are also a clearer window into the music. The HD800 is a very airy and soundstage champion. It has air and space something the HE6 achieves but the HE6 has better transparency not as comfortable but better overall. The LCD is the neutral vocal king had leass air and space over the other two and the smallest soundstage in comparison and IMO more comfortable on my head than the HE6 but not as light as the HD800. Overall I still think the LCD2 is the closest to live events that you can hear IMO of course but I bought all three and am keeping all three so it what floats someones boat. But remarkbly both orthos are less expensive

I agree that the bass on the HD800 can sound soft, however I think it is extremely tight and controlled until below approx 50-40 hz where it lose the iron fist control.  I EQ'd the HD800 to match the frequency response curve of the LCD2s and the bass ended up sounding very much like my D7000s.  The HD800 still is the fastest voice coil dynamic I ever heard, but I was always under the sensation that there was a slight "veil" to the sound compared to the LCD2s.  There are 70 dollar planars that can come very close to the HD800s speed.  Planars are the way to go for those that cannot afford electrostats IMO.

 

[Roger Strummer]

Quote:

I respectfully disagree, Frank . Lots of music I listen to has very important rhythmic information at 60-20hz and the HD 800 can very much play this... I have also tested with pure sine waves and they indeed go as low as the others, maybe a bit quieter at the same depth though. I do have a bassier HD 800 though. But overall I can see very much how the orthos could have better SQ.

I agree with you, my HD800 go at least to 30hz without much trouble (and even lower, but just as Skylab has mentioned, I  believe that really deep subbass is more a physical experience than a listening one). Now the bass kings in my opinion are the LCD-2, but the 800 are not far behind, although the voicing of both is so different that it is not as easy to say that one is better than the other (and personally I prefer the 800, both driven by a beta22). It seems like Senn's ideal frequency response is not particularly bassy (see HD600, HD800, HE60 and even HE90 if my memory isn't betraying me), meanwhile the guys at Audez'e created a headphone that goes at the bass as flat as it gets, it seems more like a big difference in philosophy  than capabilities IMO.

 

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Quote:

 
Quote:

All these praises about LCD2 makes me wonder if I should give them a second chance. When I compared LCD2 with HD800 side by side, I preferred HD800 over LCD2. Maybe I was too quick to make the decision to let LCD2 go. Maybe I will buy them again later. 
 
I often see people consider HD800's sound as analytical and LCD2 has more organic and natural sound. Interesting thing is that I consider HD800 as very musical and organic. I know I am going to get shot by a lot of people for saying this but LCD2 was too dark and not engaging enough for me when compared to HD800. I guess I have different ears.   

I have all three and in comparing the three the two orthos are a step up from the HD800 The bass is soft on the HD800 and only goes to 44hz. It is not what you would hear in either a recording studio or live concert. the two orthos achieve that goal. They are also a clearer window into the music. The HD800 is a very airy and soundstage champion. It has air and space something the HE6 achieves but the HE6 has better transparency not as comfortable but better overall. The LCD is the neutral vocal king had leass air and space over the other two and the smallest soundstage in comparison and IMO more comfortable on my head than the HE6 but not as light as the HD800. Overall I still think the LCD2 is the closest to live events that you can hear IMO of course but I bought all three and am keeping all three so it what floats someones boat. But remarkbly both orthos are less expensive

I agree that the bass on the HD800 can sound soft, however I think it is extremely tight and controlled until below approx 50-40 hz where it lose the iron fist control.  I EQ'd the HD800 to match the frequency response curve of the LCD2s and the bass ended up sounding very much like my D7000s.  The HD800 still is the fastest voice coil dynamic I ever heard, but I was always under the sensation that there was a slight "veil" to the sound compared to the LCD2s.  There are 70 dollar planars that can come very close to the HD800s speed.  Planars are the way to go for those that cannot afford electrostats IMO.

I think classifying planars as some sort of compromise is not entirely fair.
 
I haven't heard the O2 but the 404 and 303 didn't make envious at all, rather they reaffirmed my belief I made an excellent choice.
 
IMO the HD 800 sounds "controlled" all the way down it just gets quieter quicker than the LCD-2 but can still do all the same bass frequencies.

 

[SP Wild]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

 
Quote:

All these praises about LCD2 makes me wonder if I should give them a second chance. When I compared LCD2 with HD800 side by side, I preferred HD800 over LCD2. Maybe I was too quick to make the decision to let LCD2 go. Maybe I will buy them again later. 
 
I often see people consider HD800's sound as analytical and LCD2 has more organic and natural sound. Interesting thing is that I consider HD800 as very musical and organic. I know I am going to get shot by a lot of people for saying this but LCD2 was too dark and not engaging enough for me when compared to HD800. I guess I have different ears.   

I have all three and in comparing the three the two orthos are a step up from the HD800 The bass is soft on the HD800 and only goes to 44hz. It is not what you would hear in either a recording studio or live concert. the two orthos achieve that goal. They are also a clearer window into the music. The HD800 is a very airy and soundstage champion. It has air and space something the HE6 achieves but the HE6 has better transparency not as comfortable but better overall. The LCD is the neutral vocal king had leass air and space over the other two and the smallest soundstage in comparison and IMO more comfortable on my head than the HE6 but not as light as the HD800. Overall I still think the LCD2 is the closest to live events that you can hear IMO of course but I bought all three and am keeping all three so it what floats someones boat. But remarkbly both orthos are less expensive

I agree that the bass on the HD800 can sound soft, however I think it is extremely tight and controlled until below approx 50-40 hz where it lose the iron fist control.  I EQ'd the HD800 to match the frequency response curve of the LCD2s and the bass ended up sounding very much like my D7000s.  The HD800 still is the fastest voice coil dynamic I ever heard, but I was always under the sensation that there was a slight "veil" to the sound compared to the LCD2s.  There are 70 dollar planars that can come very close to the HD800s speed.  Planars are the way to go for those that cannot afford electrostats IMO.

I think classifying planars as some sort of compromise is not entirely fair.
 
I haven't heard the O2 but the 404 and 303 didn't make envious at all, rather they reaffirmed my belief I made an excellent choice.
 
IMO the HD 800 sounds "controlled" all the way down it just gets quieter quicker than the LCD-2 but can still do all the same bass frequencies.

I have learned not to anger the STAX mafia...

 

[rgs9200m]

Well, maybe it's just me, but I don't feel the HD800s are "bass-light" at all. My favorite bass test is Stevie Wonder's Innervisions CD, and the quality and quantity of bass is
as good as it gets for me on the Senns. I've been listening to this album since it came out in the mid 70s.
 
The LCD2s sound a bit fuller on this CD, but it sounds like the deepest bass notes linger longer, with a small reverb affect,
whereas on the Senns, a bass note just comes on fast and deep with great impact, and then is gone, and this sounds very realistic to me,
and is also really pleasing.
 
Also, the bass on the Senns seems connected to the musical component that generates it, so it's localized in a particular place, rather than being everywhere, like a  mediocre subwoofer might do.
 
I used to have Wilson Watt Puppy 6 speakers, and they would do this too with the bass, and I loved it.
So, for me, I feel that the HD800's have the best, most natural bass of any headphone (an maybe speaker) I have ever heard.
 
I used to have Stax Omegas (007t amp), and the bass notes were also there-and-gone, but I did not hear anywhere near the impact that the HD800s have.
 
To my ears, the LCD2 bass, while not boomy or or opaque, is not nearly as well defined or precise as the HD800's.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

To my ears, the LCD2 bass, while not boomy or or opaque, is not nearly as well defined or precise as the HD800's.

While I do agree with your HD800 comments, when driven with sufficient power, the LCD-2's bass does surpass the HD800s in depth, precision, and definition to my ears. Not to say the HD800's bass quality isn't amazing...it is. I think the bass "quality" on the HD800s is better than the T1's bass quality by a small margin, but not up to the planar's standards.

 

[Roger Strummer]

Quote:

Well, maybe it's just me, but I don't feel the HD800s are "bass-light" at all. My favorite bass test is Stevie Wonder's Innervisions CD, and the quality and quantity of bass is
as good as it gets for me on the Senns. I've been listening to this album since it came out in the mid 70s.
 
The LCD2s sound a bit fuller on this CD, but it sounds like the deepest bass notes linger longer, with a small reverb affect,
whereas on the Senns, a bass note just comes on fast and deep with great impact, and then is gone, and this sounds very realistic to me,
and is also really pleasing.
 
Also, the bass on the Senns seems connected to the musical component that generates it, so it's localized in a particular place, rather than being everywhere, like a  mediocre subwoofer might do.
 
I used to have Wilson Watt Puppy 6 speakers, and they would do this too with the bass, and I loved it.
So, for me, I feel that the HD800's have the best, most natural bass of any headphone (an maybe speaker) I have ever heard.
 
I used to have Stax Omegas (007t amp), and the bass notes were also there-and-gone, but I did not hear anywhere near the impact that the HD800s have.
 
To my ears, the LCD2 bass, while not boomy or or opaque, is not nearly as well defined or precise as the HD800's.

I don't completely agree with the LCD-2 not being as defined or precise as the 800, I think they both are pretty much equal in that regard. Now you do say an interesting point that I agree with, I think the LCD-2 go deeper into sub bass frequencies with more authority (and that was I say they are the bass champs since they accomplish that without any bloat nor interfering with other sound frequencies), but what you say about the localized bass of the 800 is quite remarkable and personally I've only heard it in only few other cans (the bass heavy K1K). And in frequencies above sub bass there is not that much difference in response between the two, taking into consideration what you mentioned.

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Quote:

I respectfully disagree, Frank . Lots of music I listen to has very important rhythmic information at 60-20hz and the HD 800 can very much play this... I have also tested with pure sine waves and they indeed go as low as the others, maybe a bit quieter at the same depth though. I do have a bassier HD 800 though. But overall I can see very much how the orthos could have better SQ.

I agree with you, my HD800 go at least to 30hz without much trouble (and even lower, but just as Skylab has mentioned, I  believe that really deep subbass is more a physical experience than a listening one). Now the bass kings in my opinion are the LCD-2, but the 800 are not far behind, although the voicing of both is so different that it is not as easy to say that one is better than the other (and personally I prefer the 800, both driven by a beta22). It seems like Senn's ideal frequency response is not particularly bassy (see HD600, HD800, HE60 and even HE90 if my memory isn't betraying me), meanwhile the guys at Audez'e created a headphone that goes at the bass as flat as it gets, it seems more like a big difference in philosophy  than capabilities IMO.

The 800s are over an octave and a half behind the LCD-2s.  That's a huge difference for the foundation of the music, but if you listen to the right music, there is no content an octave an a half below 40Hz on the 800s.  16Hz is very clearly audible on the LCD-2s.  16Hz on the LCD-2s is at bout the same output level as 40Hz is on the HD-800s, well, maybe 35Hz.

 

[MrSpenkelink]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

 
Quote:

All these praises about LCD2 makes me wonder if I should give them a second chance. When I compared LCD2 with HD800 side by side, I preferred HD800 over LCD2. Maybe I was too quick to make the decision to let LCD2 go. Maybe I will buy them again later. 
 
I often see people consider HD800's sound as analytical and LCD2 has more organic and natural sound. Interesting thing is that I consider HD800 as very musical and organic. I know I am going to get shot by a lot of people for saying this but LCD2 was too dark and not engaging enough for me when compared to HD800. I guess I have different ears.   

I have all three and in comparing the three the two orthos are a step up from the HD800 The bass is soft on the HD800 and only goes to 44hz. It is not what you would hear in either a recording studio or live concert. the two orthos achieve that goal. They are also a clearer window into the music. The HD800 is a very airy and soundstage champion. It has air and space something the HE6 achieves but the HE6 has better transparency not as comfortable but better overall. The LCD is the neutral vocal king had leass air and space over the other two and the smallest soundstage in comparison and IMO more comfortable on my head than the HE6 but not as light as the HD800. Overall I still think the LCD2 is the closest to live events that you can hear IMO of course but I bought all three and am keeping all three so it what floats someones boat. But remarkbly both orthos are less expensive

I agree that the bass on the HD800 can sound soft, however I think it is extremely tight and controlled until below approx 50-40 hz where it lose the iron fist control.  I EQ'd the HD800 to match the frequency response curve of the LCD2s and the bass ended up sounding very much like my D7000s.  The HD800 still is the fastest voice coil dynamic I ever heard, but I was always under the sensation that there was a slight "veil" to the sound compared to the LCD2s.  There are 70 dollar planars that can come very close to the HD800s speed.  Planars are the way to go for those that cannot afford electrostats IMO.

I think classifying planars as some sort of compromise is not entirely fair.
 
I haven't heard the O2 but the 404 and 303 didn't make envious at all, rather they reaffirmed my belief I made an excellent choice.
 
IMO the HD 800 sounds "controlled" all the way down it just gets quieter quicker than the LCD-2 but can still do all the same bass frequencies.

I don't know whether I would go so far as to describe orthodynamic headphones as a compromise between moving coil dynamics and electrostats. However, I do think that the LCD-2 is at a definite disadvantage when it to comes to long-term wearability compared to the electrostats, HD800 and T1 that I tried.
 
It was considerably heavier on my head, despite the well thought-out weight distribution and that is presumably a direct consequence of the planar magnetic technology utilised in its production. I understand that the HE-6 weighs almost as much. I do think that the designs of both orthodynamics are inherently compromised in that regard and this is an important consideration for me. 
 
Whereas the sound of the Stax SR-507, SR-404 LE and the SRS-3050A combined with their light weight and comfort, gave them a clear advantage over the LCD-2 in my view.  

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I respectfully disagree, Frank . Lots of music I listen to has very important rhythmic information at 60-20hz and the HD 800 can very much play this... I have also tested with pure sine waves and they indeed go as low as the others, maybe a bit quieter at the same depth though. I do have a bassier HD 800 though. But overall I can see very much how the orthos could have better SQ.

I agree with you, my HD800 go at least to 30hz without much trouble (and even lower, but just as Skylab has mentioned, I  believe that really deep subbass is more a physical experience than a listening one). Now the bass kings in my opinion are the LCD-2, but the 800 are not far behind, although the voicing of both is so different that it is not as easy to say that one is better than the other (and personally I prefer the 800, both driven by a beta22). It seems like Senn's ideal frequency response is not particularly bassy (see HD600, HD800, HE60 and even HE90 if my memory isn't betraying me), meanwhile the guys at Audez'e created a headphone that goes at the bass as flat as it gets, it seems more like a big difference in philosophy  than capabilities IMO.

 

The 800s are over an octave and a half behind the LCD-2s.  That's a huge difference for the foundation of the music, but if you listen to the right music, there is no content an octave an a half below 40Hz on the 800s.  16Hz is very clearly audible on the LCD-2s.  16Hz on the LCD-2s is at bout the same output level as 40Hz is on the HD-800s, well, maybe 35Hz.

I don't know why such statements have to create such controversy here sometimes when it has nothing to do with personal opinion... Has nothing to do with how people hear or feel about a given headphone... we know for a fact both the LCD-2 and HD 800 go to 20hz and below. That is they can do bass long after any of us can still perceive it.
 
I was simply stating the HD 800 go just as deep as the LCD-2 in an absolute sense -they can both play 20hz fine and they can both do 10hz (albeit the HD 800 have a 5dB roll off in doing so, not that anyone could hear it anyways). The HD 800 are just quieter in doing so and it might get drowned out by other frequencies in a song, but if using test tones, it is easy to tell they both go as deep.
 
Loudness and deepness are two very different things.
 
And I don't see how 16hz is "clearly audible" on the LCD-2 or any headphone as it is a subsonic frequency... maybe you meant "clearly palpable"? which I might would buy because the LCD-2 really can move a lot of air.
 
 
All that being said the perceived difference in bass between the two headphones is rather large and I am not trying to downplay this either.

 

[Frank I]

 
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I respectfully disagree, Frank . Lots of music I listen to has very important rhythmic information at 60-20hz and the HD 800 can very much play this... I have also tested with pure sine waves and they indeed go as low as the others, maybe a bit quieter at the same depth though. I do have a bassier HD 800 though. But overall I can see very much how the orthos could have better SQ.

I agree with you, my HD800 go at least to 30hz without much trouble (and even lower, but just as Skylab has mentioned, I  believe that really deep subbass is more a physical experience than a listening one). Now the bass kings in my opinion are the LCD-2, but the 800 are not far behind, although the voicing of both is so different that it is not as easy to say that one is better than the other (and personally I prefer the 800, both driven by a beta22). It seems like Senn's ideal frequency response is not particularly bassy (see HD600, HD800, HE60 and even HE90 if my memory isn't betraying me), meanwhile the guys at Audez'e created a headphone that goes at the bass as flat as it gets, it seems more like a big difference in philosophy  than capabilities IMO.

 

The 800s are over an octave and a half behind the LCD-2s.  That's a huge difference for the foundation of the music, but if you listen to the right music, there is no content an octave an a half below 40Hz on the 800s.  16Hz is very clearly audible on the LCD-2s.  16Hz on the LCD-2s is at bout the same output level as 40Hz is on the HD-800s, well, maybe 35Hz.

Kevin thanks for the input on the HD800. I find the bass on the HD800 soft in comparison to both planars not what I would hear live. That being said both the LCD2 and HE6 have bass more like what I would hear live. But I do like the HD800 for claasical music more so than either of my orthos because of the huge soundstage.

 

[Skylab]

Quote:

While I do agree with your HD800 comments, when driven with sufficient power, the LCD-2's bass does surpass the HD800s in depth, precision, and definition to my ears. Not to say the HD800's bass quality isn't amazing...it is. I think the bass "quality" on the HD800s is better than the T1's bass quality by a small margin, but not up to the planar's standards.

 
THIS.  Agree totally.  The HD800 does have great bass quality, but it is not better than the LCD-2 in ANY dimension - not just weight. 
 


Quote:

The 800s are over an octave and a half behind the LCD-2s.  That's a huge difference for the foundation of the music, but if you listen to the right music, there is no content an octave an a half below 40Hz on the 800s.  16Hz is very clearly audible on the LCD-2s.  16Hz on the LCD-2s is at bout the same output level as 40Hz is on the HD-800s, well, maybe 35Hz.

This was also my experience when I measured them.  Not the world's most precise measurement, but a scientific one at least, and the HD800 are down massively at 20Hz - maybe the most of the "uber-cans".
 


Quote:

Kevin thanks for the input on the HD800. I find the bass on the HD800 soft in comparison to both planars not what I would hear live. That being said both the LCD2 and HE6 have bass more like what I would hear live. But I do like the HD800 for claasical music more so than either of my orthos because of the huge soundstage.

Also agree - both the HE-6 and LCD-2 have more bass, and BETTER bass, than the HD800.

 

[MrSpenkelink]

Quote:

I don't know why such statements have to create such controversy here sometimes when it has nothing to do with personal opinion... Has nothing to do with how people hear or feel about a given headphone... we know for a fact both the LCD-2 and HD 800 go to 20hz and below. That is they can do bass long after any of us can still perceive it.
 
I was simply stating the HD 800 go just as deep as the LCD-2 in an absolute sense -they can both play 20hz fine and they can both do 10hz (albeit the HD 800 have a 5dB roll off in doing so, not that anyone could hear it anyways). The HD 800 are just quieter in doing so and it might get drowned out by other frequencies in a song, but if using test tones, it is easy to tell they both go as deep.
 
Loudness and deepness are two very different things.
 
And I don't see how 16hz is "clearly audible" on the LCD-2 or any headphone as it is a subsonic frequency... maybe you meant "clearly palpable"? which I might would buy because the LCD-2 really can move a lot of air.
 
 
All that being said the perceived difference in bass between the two headphones is rather large and I am not trying to downplay this either.

Bass went deep with both headphones to my ears but the LCD-2's bass was powerful and the HD800's polite. So yes, the LCD-2's bass was more prominent and visceral compared to the HD800; even if both do extend well beyond the limits of our hearing.
 
I can hazard a guess as to "why such statements have to create such controversy here sometimes when it has nothing to do with personal opinion..." and that's because it has everything to do with personal perception, preference and opinion; regardless of what the frequency measurements show.
 
Not that objective measurement and subjective perception have to be mutually exclusive approaches to assessing and comparing headphones I hasten to add.  

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

All these praises about LCD2 makes me wonder if I should give them a second chance. When I compared LCD2 with HD800 side by side, I preferred HD800 over LCD2. Maybe I was too quick to make the decision to let LCD2 go. Maybe I will buy them again later. 
 
I often see people consider HD800's sound as analytical and LCD2 has more organic and natural sound. Interesting thing is that I consider HD800 as very musical and organic. I know I am going to get shot by a lot of people for saying this but LCD2 was too dark and not engaging enough for me when compared to HD800. I guess I have different ears.   

I have all three and in comparing the three the two orthos are a step up from the HD800 The bass is soft on the HD800 and only goes to 44hz. It is not what you would hear in either a recording studio or live concert. the two orthos achieve that goal. They are also a clearer window into the music. The HD800 is a very airy and soundstage champion. It has air and space something the HE6 achieves but the HE6 has better transparency not as comfortable but better overall. The LCD is the neutral vocal king had leass air and space over the other two and the smallest soundstage in comparison and IMO more comfortable on my head than the HE6 but not as light as the HD800. Overall I still think the LCD2 is the closest to live events that you can hear IMO of course but I bought all three and am keeping all three so it what floats someones boat. But remarkbly both orthos are less expensive

I agree that the bass on the HD800 can sound soft, however I think it is extremely tight and controlled until below approx 50-40 hz where it lose the iron fist control.  I EQ'd the HD800 to match the frequency response curve of the LCD2s and the bass ended up sounding very much like my D7000s.  The HD800 still is the fastest voice coil dynamic I ever heard, but I was always under the sensation that there was a slight "veil" to the sound compared to the LCD2s.  There are 70 dollar planars that can come very close to the HD800s speed.  Planars are the way to go for those that cannot afford electrostats IMO.

I think classifying planars as some sort of compromise is not entirely fair.
 
I haven't heard the O2 but the 404 and 303 didn't make envious at all, rather they reaffirmed my belief I made an excellent choice.
 
IMO the HD 800 sounds "controlled" all the way down it just gets quieter quicker than the LCD-2 but can still do all the same bass frequencies.

I don't know whether I would go so far as to describe orthodynamic headphones as a compromise between moving coil dynamics and electrostats. However, I do think that the LCD-2 is at a definite disadvantage when it to comes to long-term wearability compared to the electrostats, HD800 and T1 that I tried.
 
It was considerably heavier on my head, despite the well thought-out weight distribution and that is presumably a direct consequence of the planar magnetic technology utilised in its production. I understand that the HE-6 weighs almost as much. I do think that the designs of both orthodynamics are inherently compromised in that regard and this is an important consideration for me. 
 
Whereas the sound of the Stax SR-507, SR-404 LE and the SRS-3050A combined with their light weight and comfort, gave them a clear advantage over the LCD-2 in my view.  

For you it is clear that you should buy a Stax and forget about Orthos.  Stop worrying over it.  As Nike would say, Just Do It.