[joebobbilly]

Haha, yes that does make sense since you're comparing to such high-tier cans.  It would definitely be interesting if someone ever put together a similar review for IEMs, since IMHO they are the best options for portable (esp. public transit) listening.  It would be glorious if you compiled one for IEMs but I know it would probably be asking for too much!  Thanks again!

 

[Brooko]

Quote:

Hi David,
 
I know you're not a huge fan of IEM's, but since you had the Shure SE 535s here I got curious... how would you rate the SE 425s in comparison to the SE 535s?  I haven't heard the SE 535s myself, but I've heard/read from others that the difference between them isn't worth the price difference (~$270 for SE425 vs. ~$450 for SE535).  So if the SE535 were scoring a "C" value rating, how would the SE 425 stack up?

 
I don't know if this helps - but I formerly owned the SE425, and stepped up to the SE535 Ltd Ed.  I loved the 425's when I had them, especially the mid-range on them.  My only complaint with the 425 was the roll-off particularly on the treble.  I was originally going to go with the standard 535s, but had heard that they also lacked some sparkle and extension.  So when the chance came to try the 535 Ltd Ed (reds) I took the chance and am very glad I did.
 
It has the same lush mid-range, but sparkle up top.  Definitely (to me) added clarity, and a little more bass extension as well.  I was expecting more bass impact - but instead get better layering and clarity of the bass.  They also respond well to EQ.
 
They are expensive - but I have no regrets buying them.  I think there are better iems for the money now (there has been an explosion in higher end offerings over the past 3-4 years), but for me personally the fit, isolation, form and sound signature are perfect.  I wish Shure would offer the 535 Ltd Ed in Nth America - as I think the signature may suit a lot more people.
 
David - I'll be in touch early next year.  Looks like I'll be in NY late Feb, and the offer is still there if you want to grab the 535 Reds for a few hours.  I'd be interested in your thoughts - even from an albeit fleeting period of time. 

 

[Brooko]

@joebobbilly
Just realised you in Toronto.  I'll also be there for 2 days late Feb.  If you can wait before making decision, I can let you know where I'll be so you can sample the reds as well if you like.  PM me later if interested.
 
Paul

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

 
Thank you for your valuable info! Unfortunately, I do not have an option to measure LCD-3 myself so I can only use measurements available here... Do you think your LCD-3 is the veiled, or unveiled version? They should be different in their responses...
 
Purrin's graph: 
 

 
 
Headphone.com:
 

 
 
Innerfidelity:
 

 
 
Official unveiled (Neumann KU 100):
 

 
Official veiled (Neumann KU 100):
 

 
 
My graph of LCD-2 rev2:
 

 
Innerfidelity's Rev2:
 
 

 
I would say both Audeze phones are fairly neutral... HD800 do not have flat bass by any margin and their treble is also not neutral. Mids are allright. HE-6 have too much treble and the bass is also not ruler flat.
 
Also, I am free to EQ my pair to neutrality very easily as I have the measurement available with me... I have my EQ curve already done but prefer their natural response for my rock and metal music so far. But for more critical listening, I have it ready! This is also why I don't think Audezes are only an audiophile phone... You get the graph, this is very rare. Lunatique prefers Audeze over Staxes so far for their sound even for professional work (neutralised by EQ, of course)... That's interesting.

Neutral is still a weird concept to me, so maybe someone can enlighten me.
 
Every time I've tried the LCD-2 (3 times at 3 different Head-Fi meets), I've never really been impressed with them. I'm probably in the minority here.
The bass sounded well-defined but the overall sound signature is consistently too dark for my preferences, and I know I'm not the only one to mention it. The highs are not very sparkly and the soundstage seems extremely congested for an open-back headphone.
Based on these observations, is my definition of neutral off? Is this how my music is supposed to sound like if this headphone is so-called neutral?
 
The definition of neutral according to Stereophile is:
Quote:

neutral Free from coloration.

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

Neutral is still a weird concept to me, so maybe someone can enlighten me.
 
Every time I've tried the LCD-2 (3 times at 3 different Head-Fi meets), I've never really been impressed with them. I'm probably in the minority here.
The bass sounded well-defined but the overall sound signature is consistently too dark for my preferences, and I know I'm not the only one to mention it. The highs are not very sparkly and the soundstage seems extremely congested for an open-back headphone.
Based on these observations, is my definition of neutral off? Is this how my music is supposed to sound like if this headphone is so-called neutral?
 
The definition of neutral according to Stereophile is:

 
Well, I feel the need to put emphasis on that there is no WOW moment involved in Audezes phones... They just sound very natural, that's "all" (actually, that's ALL I ever wanted from my headphones and got it only with Audezes).
 
The problem is that the majority of phones is just too much bright to be considered neutral... However, it's much harder to get a consensus here. Most people are going to agree that flat bass and mids are desirable but almost no one is going to say that neutral treble is what they want to listen preferably (including myself). I do very appreciate neutrality but for casual listening, I like the added texture with a bit recessed treble in the region of 3 - 9 khz where overtreble is a major problem for me. But there are simply tons of people who find T1 to be the best cans evah, you know (I would rather listen to a dishwasher because of that horribly emphasised treble).
 
Neutrality is not spectacular. It's just accurate and is going to sound equally good with every sort of sound you use. There is no coloration involved as you said...
 
There is no perfect neutrality available with headphones so far... You always need to use EQ in order to achieve that.
 
Your observations on LCD-2 seem to be quite right about the soundstage... However, I do not worry about this as I use TB Isone with them in order to get extremely authentic/realistic experience. It's better than a live concert. I know, it sounds a bit fanboyish but I just love to close my eyes and feel like I am at the studio or gig with the band. No pair of headphones has been able to deliver me this feeling even though I used TB Isone with all of them. I feel like I do not need to travel to gigs to listen to that horribly overpowered sound anymore...

 

[DavidMahler]

Quote:

 
David - I'll be in touch early next year.  Looks like I'll be in NY late Feb, and the offer is still there if you want to grab the 535 Reds for a few hours.  I'd be interested in your thoughts - even from an albeit fleeting period of time. 

Thanks again.  I'll definitely let you know!  What are you coming to NY for again?
 
Quote:

Neutral is still a weird concept to me, so maybe someone can enlighten me.
 
Every time I've tried the LCD-2 (3 times at 3 different Head-Fi meets), I've never really been impressed with them. I'm probably in the minority here.
The bass sounded well-defined but the overall sound signature is consistently too dark for my preferences, and I know I'm not the only one to mention it. The highs are not very sparkly and the soundstage seems extremely congested for an open-back headphone.
Based on these observations, is my definition of neutral off? Is this how my music is supposed to sound like if this headphone is so-called neutral?
 
The definition of neutral according to Stereophile is:

 
For me, neutral is a reference strictly with regard to tonality.  When I say something is neutral, I am not speaking of anything but tonality.   A headphone sounds neutral when you are listening to music and there is no area of the frequency response which brings attention to itself.  This is different than when you measure headphone and see that there is a peak at 7KHz or a roll off at 50Hz.... I speak of neutral strictly by listening.  It is possible to some that the LCD-3 may measure more neutrally than the HD800 (though I would disagree with this opinion).  However, when listening to sweep or music of any kind, I'd be surprised if the majority of users found that the LCD-3 was more neutral than HD800.  However, it is true that no headphone is PERFECT with regard to neutrality.  And as every person hears and processes differently, there never will be.

 

[Brooko]

Quote:

Thanks again.  I'll definitely let you know!  What are you coming to NY for again?
 

 
I sell New Zealand Lamb around the world.  One of my clients is in New York so this is an annual trip.  Besides the Thursday and Friday with them, I also get 1/2 a weekend here - so with luck may be able to catch up with you.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

Thanks again.  I'll definitely let you know!  What are you coming to NY for again?
 
 
For me, neutral is a reference strictly with regard to tonality.  When I say something is neutral, I am not speaking of anything but tonality.   A headphone sounds neutral when you are listening to music and there is no area of the frequency response which brings attention to itself.  This is different than when you measure headphone and see that there is a peak at 7KHz or a roll off at 50Hz.... I speak of neutral strictly by listening.  It is possible to some that the LCD-3 may measure more neutrally than the HD800 (though I would disagree with this opinion).  However, when listening to sweep or music of any kind, I'd be surprised if the majority of users found that the LCD-3 was more neutral than HD800.  However, it is true that no headphone is PERFECT with regard to neutrality.  And as every person hears and processes differently, there never will be.

 
 
OK,
 
So to me the LCDx brings attention to the bass region.  If neutral = free of coloration, by listening  the LCDx would be colored - no?   How can a headphone be considered not neutral if a bit of emphasis is tilted towards the treble and a different headphone is considered to be neutral with a clear emphasis tilted towards the bass?  Of course this is all by listening.

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

 
 
OK,
 
So to me the LCDx brings attention to the bass region.  If neutral = free of coloration, by listening  the LCDx would be colored - no?   How can a headphone be considered not neutral if a bit of emphasis is tilted towards the treble and a different headphone is considered to be neutral with a clear emphasis tilted towards the bass?  Of course this is all by listening.

 
People always tend to pay attention on things they've never experienced before... And we are not talking about sound only.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
People always tend to pay attention on things they've never experienced before... And we are not talking about sound only.

 
 
What do you mean?

 

[DavidMahler]

Quote:

 
 
OK,
 
So to me the LCDx brings attention to the bass region.  If neutral = free of coloration, by listening  the LCDx would be colored - no?   How can a headphone be considered not neutral if a bit of emphasis is tilted towards the treble and a different headphone is considered to be neutral with a clear emphasis tilted towards the bass?  Of course this is all by listening.

 I can't tell, are you asking me or someone else?

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 I can't tell, are you asking me or someone else?

 
 
This was in response to your post.

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

 
 
What do you mean?

 
Basically that if you find something extraordinary (based on your previous experience), it doesn't necessarily need to be extraordinary in reality... And therefore it's difficult to judge neutrality with your ears (you can feel the bass to be emphasised on particular cans but this may be that you only do not hear enough bass on the rest of your headphone inventory for example).
 
I do appreciate David's experience and great judgement if you realise he only evaluated neutrality of all those phones by his ears.

 

[TMRaven]

I'm not sure if it's been asked and answered, or if I even asked this question in this thread before, but.. on the topic of neutrality,
 
What is the correlation between transparency and neutrality in this case?  In your review, David, you said you may favor the LCD-2's transparency over the HE-6 and HD800, making it seem to sound more realistic.  Wouldn't a more realistic sound be a more neutral and true-to-life sound?  Or are you making that sentence based on an HD800 with 'improper amp?'  Are you saying that with the right amp, HD800 is more natural sounding?

 

[MHOE]

I still hope that David will find an opportunity to hear LCD-2 rev2... They should be the most neutral of all Audez'es and from my experience they definitely are very near as they are, judging on my experience and graphs (having done neutralisation by EQing on several phones so far).