[LFF]

Quote:

You pay big bickies for small amounts of refinements, as they are generally hard to achieve.

So, if I come up with an improved headphone that sounds and measures better than an LCD-2, then I should charge $2,000.00+USD because of the minor improvements and small amounts of refinement? I don't think that's right or productive to our hobby. The LCD-3 would have to be a major improvement to justify that high price tag IMHO...and not just in the sound department but in the comfort and ergonomic department as well.

 

[Currawong]

There's still plenty I reckon the LCD-2s don't do right that can be improved on (the 009s showed me that in absolute terms), so a significant improvement (figures be damned) would be a welcome one. I believe I have the equipment to back it up too.

 

[baka1969]

Audeze will charge $2000 because they know people will buy them. There will be forthcoming reviews that will praise them and the swarm of Head-Fi'ers will follow suit with cash on hand. Audeze will reap the benefits of a very high profit margin with a similar cost of production that the LCD2 has. If you don't like it you vote with your wallet. Audeze has already stated an even better headphone is in the pipeline. So the LCD3 isn't even "The Ultimate" in terms of the company's future. They said 1-2 years? I would bet the pulse of the market will determine that release.

I will await until there is a sizable list of impressions and reviews before I make any real decisions. Until then I hope those that get them enjoy them.

 

[oqvist]

Waiting game. It´s been the motto for computer hardware since moores law was invented lol. It´s a good way of saving money knowing anything new you buy will get obsolete very quickly if you have a gearheads mind
 
 

 

[alota]

Quote:

A lighter diaphragm all else being equal means, as N3rDLING said, a faster driver.  It can change atmospheric pressure quicker, which leads to better instrument definition.  Moving more air at a given frequency simply means a higher volume.  Loud bass also need lots of air to be moved.  Better "airiness" in almost all cases pertaining to head-fi, usually just means more of an upper frequency volume in relation to lower frequencies, which also seems to lead many to believe "soundstage" is "deeper".

audeze say that the rev.2 have a lighter diaphragm compared to the rev.1.
but some people still prefere the rev.1.
i believe that the lcd-3 is a better headphone when some head-fier will try the lcd-3 in your house with a very good amplifier.
at the rmaf the lcd-3 sound good connected to the liquid fire, balancing act, etc.
thank you!!!
how many people have at home have these amplifiers?
i listen the lcd-2 in my house with my amplifier.
after this, i go to the rmaf and listen the lcd-3 with the balancing act and i say: wow, beatiful sound.
in any case, i don´t doubt that the lcd-3 is superior compared to the lcd-2 

 

[dyl1dyl]

Quote:

audeze say that the rev.2 have a lighter diaphragm compared to the rev.1.
but some people still prefere the rev.1.
i believe that the lcd-3 is a better headphone when some head-fier will try the lcd-3 in your house with a very good amplifier.
at the rmaf the lcd-3 sound good connected to the liquid fire, balancing act, etc.
thank you!!!
how many people have at home have these amplifiers?
i listen the lcd-2 in my house with my amplifier.
after this, i go to the rmaf and listen the lcd-3 with the balancing act and i say: wow, beatiful sound.
in any case, i don´t doubt that the lcd-3 is superior compared to the lcd-2 

Hopefully Jude will post some more impressions soon with different setups since he managed to get one of the LCD-3s. I would love to hear comparisons with the 009, orpheus and r10 more than with the LCD-2s
 

 

[dBel84]

Quote:

at the rmaf the lcd-3 sound good connected to the liquid fire, balancing act, etc.
thank you!!!
how many people have at home have these amplifiers?
i listen the lcd-2 in my house with my amplifier.
after this, i go to the rmaf and listen the lcd-3 with the balancing act and i say: wow, beatiful sound.
in any case, i don´t doubt that the lcd-3 is superior compared to the lcd-2 

My original review of the LCD2 was with the "Liquid Fire" (parenthesis as there were some design changes after the prototype and yes, it has been around for that long) = I liked the LCD2 and still do. That said I feel that the LCD3 is a step up ( and not an insignificant nit pick looking for subtleties ). Personally I am surprised by this as I never felt that anything was lacking with the LCD2 and still think very highly of it. 
 
..dB

 

[Jalo]

Quote:

Why are you expecting/hoping for this? This is high-end gear we taking about here, not entry level.
You pay big bickies for small amounts of refinements, as they are generally hard to achieve.
 
I am going to speculate that the LCD-3s will be an improvement, sure, but I would not be expecting twenty-plus percent worth.

Just to stick my neck out further on the chopping board, I felt the LCD3 is at least about 10 to 15 % better than the LCD2. If someone want to say 20%, I won't be arguing with that either.  
 

 

[alota]

Quote:

My original review of the LCD2 was with the "Liquid Fire" (parenthesis as there were some design changes after the prototype and yes, it has been around for that long) = I liked the LCD2 and still do. That said I feel that the LCD3 is a step up ( and not an insignificant nit pick looking for subtleties ). Personally I am surprised by this as I never felt that anything was lacking with the LCD2 and still think very highly of it. 
 
..dB

i´m sorry if i have seemed rude.
i don´t doubt your opinion or jude opinion or the lcd-3 qualities.
my post was not referring to you but it was generally.
i mean that one listening session, under controlled conditions and with the same system, can provide a complete analysis compared to one listening session at the rmaf.

 

[Jalo]

Quote:

audeze say that the rev.2 have a lighter diaphragm compared to the rev.1.
but some people still prefere the rev.1.
i believe that the lcd-3 is a better headphone when some head-fier will try the lcd-3 in your house with a very good amplifier.
at the rmaf the lcd-3 sound good connected to the liquid fire, balancing act, etc.
thank you!!!
how many people have at home have these amplifiers?
i listen the lcd-2 in my house with my amplifier.
after this, i go to the rmaf and listen the lcd-3 with the balancing act and i say: wow, beatiful sound.
in any case, i don´t doubt that the lcd-3 is superior compared to the lcd-2 

First of all, when I auditioned the LCD3 through two portable amps (MKIII and SR71b), the improvement over LCD2 did carry over to these portable amps.  So you don'r have to have desktop stuff like liquid fire etc to enjoy the LCD3 (just ask Jude, I think he listened to them two nites at RMAF w/ the SR71b), even though that doesn't hurt either.  I think the LCD3, like the LCD2 can be driven relatively easily.  I know a lot of you are skeptic over portable amp.  But ALO and RSA were showing the LCD2/3 with portable amps connected to nice source.  Ray uses his Meridian Transport output to the SR71b driving the LCD2 and that sounded very nice.  That is one more advantage the LCD line has over other phones (like the HD600/650/800 etc) is that one can enjoy the phone under most circumstances.  
 

 

[dBel84]

I was not offended in the least. In fact I agree that show listening can only take you so far. This is why I don't try and make detailed reviews of equipment when at a show, when I first got into the hobby I would keep little reminder notes etc but reality is that there are too many variables to truly review equipment while at a show. I trust my hearing enough that with music I know ( I took my own disc ) it only takes about 20 sec from each track to have a pretty good feel for what it is I am listening to. I do plan on spending a LOT of time with the LCD3 in the future ..dB

 

[alota]

Quote:

I was not offended in the least. In fact I agree that show listening can only take you so far. This is why I don't try and make detailed reviews of equipment when at a show, when I first got into the hobby I would keep little reminder notes etc but reality is that there are too many variables to truly review equipment while at a show. I trust my hearing enough that with music I know ( I took my own disc ) it only takes about 20 sec from each track to have a pretty good feel for what it is I am listening to. I do plan on spending a LOT of time with the LCD3 in the future ..dB

i´m waiting your impressions with the lcd-3 in your home

 

[alota]

Quote:

First of all, when I auditioned the LCD3 through two portable amps (MKIII and SR71b), the improvement over LCD2 did carry over to these portable amps.  So you don'r have to have desktop stuff like liquid fire etc to enjoy the LCD3 (just ask Jude, I think he listened to them two nites at RMAF w/ the SR71b), even though that doesn't hurt either.  I think the LCD3, like the LCD2 can be driven relatively easily.  I know a lot of you are skeptic over portable amp.  But ALO and RSA were showing the LCD2/3 with portable amps connected to nice source.  Ray uses his Meridian Transport output to the SR71b driving the LCD2 and that sounded very nice.  That is one more advantage the LCD line has over other phones (like the HD600/650/800 etc) is that one can enjoy the phone under most circumstances.  
 

everyone is free do to what he wants, of course.
if the lcd-2 sound good with portable amps, no problem

 

[Draygonn]

and then use the LCD-3 as your bathroom rig.

I lol'ed and almost spit juice all over my keyboard.

A Partner at a firm I was with had his office broken into and $3000 stolen from his desk drawer. The investigating cops asked him why he had that much in his desk. They were slack jawed when he responded 'it was pocket change'.

on-topic: There's plenty of room to R&D these ortho drivers. Hopefully the big boys will notice Audeze's success and start selling orthos themselves.

 

[Steve Eddy]

Quote:

A lighter diaphragm all else being equal means, as N3rDLING said, a faster driver.  It can change atmospheric pressure quicker, which leads to better instrument definition.

You better hope that's not what it's doing. If it were, your music would start sounding like The Chipmonks.
 
se