[MrViolin]

whoa mama. He's definitely got it all. It'll be a while before I'll be able to try such flagships, if ever xD

 

[jerg]

Quote:

Same here,but when the guy who "creates" them says they are "nearly identical",then we must have a hearing problem....or he has!

Maybe he is only interested in the design and development of the headphones, and someone else is responsible for the fine-tuning of the sound signature? It's very possible.

 

[silversurfer616]

From a marketing point it would be a little disaster to have the current model not as good reviewed as the previous model.So I understand where Sankar is coming from....no review of the Rev2 is a"good review"!

 

[GenpattonJames]

Hi David,
 
Thanks for your comments and please don't get the wrong impression. You must have put an incredible amount of work into your review and it is appreciated by everyone including me. I look forward to an update if you get a new set of Audeze LCD-2's. Thanks again for all your efforts.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

From a marketing point it would be a little disaster to have the current model not as good reviewed as the previous model.So I understand where Sankar is coming from....no review of the Rev2 is a"good review"!

 
Not sure if that reference holds any value for people here but here it goes.
 
The Spectacularly Yummy Audeze LCD-2 and LCD-3 Measurements
 

 
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyll
 
Before we get to the current headphone measurements, I thought it would be interesting to have a look at the evolution of these headphones over time. In the graph above you'll see the measurements of the various iterations of the LCD-2. The blue trace is the original LCD-2. You'll note that it falls off at the very lowest frequencies a bit more then the others, this is likely the somewhat stiffer pads not providing the quality seal of the softer subsequent pads.
In the region around 1kHz you can see the original LCD-2 had a bit of a presence bump. The Rev. 2 reduced this bump, but probably by a bit too much. The later revisions shoot right down the middle and remain more linear on their way down to 5kHz. (This sloping response from ~2kHz to ~5kHz is desired) From 5kHz to 11kHz, the Rev. 1 headphone exhibits a strong peak, the remaining cans tend to perform a little more linearly in this area. In the very top octave between 10kHz and 20kHz you can see the overall amount of energy slowly rising over time in the various revisions, likely in response to customers comments of "shelved" highs. The overall trend over time is toward a better behaved headphone and to me indicates a fairly good grip on the part of Audeze of the physics and workings of their headphones.

 

[LugBug1]

Thats interesting to see thanks. Not a great lot of difference but the rev1 is clearly more jagged and bumpy!

 

[MrViolin]

I thought they released the LCD-2 only twice... but 4 times 

 

[GenpattonJames]

Quote:

I thought they released the LCD-2 only twice... but 4 times 

I work in the Electronics industry and its quite common to find revisions of a product, you just don't get told about it. I will bet that other manufacturers of headphones do similar things but no one is told. Although Audeze made some pretty major revisions, I will give you that.

 

[GenpattonJames]

Now that is a very interesting graph. Notice the close to 5 db spread between the older series and the new model around 9 to 10k. That's quite significant!
Quote:

 
Not sure if that reference holds any value for people here but here it goes.
 
The Spectacularly Yummy Audeze LCD-2 and LCD-3 Measurements
 

 
 

 

[DavidMahler]

Quote:

As someone who has owned Rev1 and owns now Rev2,I am surprised that Audeze's Sankar thinks they"are nearly identical"(see David's post somewhere above) in sound!
A lot of people who have owned both,do favour one or the other.....because they are NOT identical:not even "nearly"!

To paraphrase what Sankar told me: "the later revisions have a very-slightly-thinner driver in comparison to the original.  This impacts the transient response and decay." This is of course me paraphrasing
 
Quote:

Yup I enjoy the read as well.  Thanks for your time and effort.
 
Cheers
 

Thank you!
Quote:

I know people how say REV2 is better, but i also know people saying REV1 ist better.
I think, both might have done the right decision, there is a spread for standard factory models.

It would not surprise me for the REV1 to be no-less good
Quote:

Lol @ those seeking validation for their LCD-2 rev.2 purchase. Imagine the backlash if Dave were to succumb to pressure and review the latest iteration... only to rank it below the rev.1. My God... it would be so entertaining. 

HA! that would be funny, but if you've heard different revisions and prefer one over the others, my opinion on this matter should mean very little to you.
Quote:

Same here,but when the guy who "creates" them says they are "nearly identical",then we must have a hearing problem....or he has!

Eh, he said the differences are marginal.  It's all relative.  To someone who creates a product, knowing the slight techinical differences between versions could allow someone to perceive very little sonic difference, while not knowing the slight techinical differences between revisions could allow someone to perceive these sonic differences as large.  It's sorta like the question "what does a minute really feel like?".... to a newborn baby, a minute may feel like 10 years to a 50 year old person.  Neither is wrong.
Quote:

 
Not sure if that reference holds any value for people here but here it goes.
 
The Spectacularly Yummy Audeze LCD-2 and LCD-3 Measurements
 

 
 

Notice that the frequency responses are not all that different.  Yes there are variances, but its clearly from the same mold.  The sonic differences, according to Sankar have less to do with the FR.
Quote:

I work in the Electronics industry and its quite common to find revisions of a product, you just don't get told about it. I will bet that other manufacturers of headphones do similar things but no one is told. Although Audeze made some pretty major revisions, I will give you that.

Yes this is definitely true!

 

[pp312]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgs9200m /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
they actually made me nauseous sometimes.

 
Really? I'm sure we'd all like to hear more about that.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Now that is a very interesting graph. Notice the close to 5 db spread between the older series and the new model around 9 to 10k. That's quite significant!

Not really when you take into account some variability at higher frequencies of the measurement system:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/expert-tests-innerfidelitys-headphone-measurement-repeatability-and-reproducibility

 

[MrViolin]

:3 I knew that companies made revisions, but yes you're right, these are big revisions. Just that I didn't expect big revisions constantly since I'd only thought there was the rev1, rev2, and lcd-3

 

[dan.gheorghe]

 

[EDWARIS]

What a great job!!! The best, most detailed and most complete headphones review I've ever read. Can I ask a question? Maybe someone asked here before - but haven't time to read everything. You said HD800 require very careful choice of amp. What do you suggest and what worked best for you? I've just bought Sennheiser a couple days ago and now try them at my old Perreaux sxh2 on my desktop. But thinking for upgrade for another room in the future. What would be the best choice? I have the very close mucis preferences with you.