[Head Injury]

Kittens are okay. The sound signature is too warm for me, and the treble's scratchy.

 

[sphinxvc]

I enjoyed that review, and I agree with a surprisingly large amount of it.
 
Curious, swbfcheater, what headphones have you owned or tried?

 

[swbf2cheater]

I answered that in the third paragraph  
 
and thanks for agreeing, please watch out for the lynch mob that is now after you and I lol, I hear the cave under the waterfall is a place they wont look for us, we can camp out there for a while until that pitch fork mob clears out

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

I answered that in the third paragraph  
 
and thanks for agreeing, please watch out for the lynch mob that is now after you and I lol, I hear the cave under the waterfall is a place they wont look for us, we can camp out there for a while until that pitch fork mob clears out

See, now I know where you're hiding.

 

[sphinxvc]

I know, but I was hoping for a more comprehensive list.
 
I know that feeling of finding something lacking in almost everything.  My one and only nirvana moment remains hearing the R-10s on a $13K rig or what I like to call "stupid money."

 

[rhythmdevils]

I'm pretty frustrated with it too, I don't think a set of headphones exists except for maybe the O2 and a few other very expensive phones which I don't find hugely flawed beyond what 100 dollar speakers are capable of.  I don't even bother with my nice amp and source most of the time because it doesn't matter when the headphones have such glaring problems. 

 

[Hifianddrumming]

Let's get back off topic:
Kittens are fuzzy :3
 
 And my 200th post.... So meaningful

 

[swbf2cheater]

omg kittens, i know right ?   =^-_-^=
 
 
anywho, I'll wait until the tech for audio catches up with the current star date, as it looks right now the tech is just getting bigger and bigger, more uncomfortable and less practical.  Feels totally opposite from what it should be right now and I am really tired of making compromises for the sake of my audiophile status.  If its too big and at all uncomfortable, I won't use it no matter how good it sounds.  No excuses from here on when it comes to my audio gear
 
I refuse to conform to the designs of today, they should be conforming to me so they will no longer have my business or my support.  

 

[olor1n]

I really like the LCD-2 and don't have any issue with its weight or comfort, but strangely I empathise with the OP. Diminishing returns is such a pitfall around these parts, and it's incredibly easy to be drawn in by glowing praise imparted without caveat.
 
I've stated elsewhere that the LCD-2 (rev.2) is superior technically to my previous go to, the HD650, but in no way has it made that headphone redundant for me. If anything, it's made me appreciate the Senns more. Music presented through it isn't in the same ultra high resolution, but ultimately I find it more engaging.

 

[sphinxvc]

TEAM disappointed!

 

[bbophead]

I agree with all the review.  Of course, I only had the rev.1.  I'm sure the rev.2 is waaay better, oh yeah.
 
300 bucks seems like a real sweet spot in headphone land.  I will try the PS500 soon and we'll see.  As we all know, higher prices do not exactly line up with increased quality/performance.  Will $600 sound twice as good as $300?  I wish.
 
And, yes, I've had the $30,000 speaker/amp/source system.  If you're into that sort of thing, it can be fun but expensive and tiring.
 
Headphone amps "can" make a difference but that's waay overrated.
 
I try to remember, it's the music, stupid. 

 

[olor1n]

Quote:

TEAM disappointed!

Not quite. My LCD-2 isn't going anywhere. I'm not going to attack the OP though, as this thread could easily have been made by me. It's a fine line.
 
Quote:

[...]  
I try to remember, it's the music, stupid. 

 
Yep, that's what the HD650 reminds me of.

 

[swbf2cheater]

The rev2 was not that much of an improvement, certainly not enough to merit me keeping them.  Audible sonic change, a minor one at best but still wasn't enough to make me want to sell off my Rev1 just for a rev2.  I didn't own the rev2 but I do have a friend who had it and let me tinker with it multiple times.  I preferred the Rev1, I liked the sound a bit more.  
 
The day I hear an 800$ difference from X brand/set over my $120 used HD 598 is the day I will actually want to keep it.  To date, nothing has done so.  Nothing beyond $300 or so had a justified ratio of price to quality...not one hi fi set.  
 
I mean dont get me wrong, if you want a specific sound and are willing to pay for it, thats great.  But for pure audio quality the price tags make it not worth it.  No price on happiness though, I spent $1500 on the Edition 8s and came really close to happiness...just couldnt justify the price for that level of sound quality

 

[Kwisatz]

Welcome to Head-Fi where dang near everything is exaggerated. While, I don't agree with a lot of what you say about the LCD-2, I wont argue with you. Headphones are a very personal thing, and what works for one person does not mean it will work for everybody. Comfort, HRTFs, and general preference in sonic signature ensure that we will always prefer different things. Even speakers aren't immune to individual preference. The only thing that matters in this hobby is finding what you like, regardless of the cost and what the masses think, and roll with it.

A lot of people here like to make mountains out of mole hills. Subtle differences are exaggerated to the point where if you can't read between the lines, you'd think that the result was two sounds that were nothing alike. The reality is that for all the hyperbole, Joe Shmoe on the street wouldn't be able to discern the difference half the time. Heck, for quite a few of the differences described here, I'd be *very* surprised if the person describing it could even discern the difference in any blind testing. In others still, I'm practically certain the changes they "hear" are figments of their imagination.

Basically, take comments by people with a grain of salt. Try to discern the realistic differences between gear by averaging people's comments and discarding the flamboyant praise and searing hatred. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. If a person calls something the worst thing ever, chances are it isn't. If something is supposed to radically change with X hours of burn in, or by using Y amp, or Z source, then you're looking at a minor change at best. If they start talking about cables and power cords, then it's probably best to increase that grain of salt to a nice heaping pound.

Finally, price and quality are never in a 1:1 ratio to one another. That's why we have the whole concept of diminishing returns. Twice the price != twice as good. It simply has never has been the case, and never will be. For some the difference is worth it. For others it wont be. The only person to be the judge of that is the individual listener.

PS: If the future is earbuds, count me out. I hate having things in my ears for extended periods of time. I'll take the big old heavy LCD-2 any day of the week for extended listening.

 

[hans030390]

Quote:

 Not many of us can afford a full range speaker system

Pick up a pair of Dayton BR-1 bookshelf speakers (a $160 kit from Parts-Express), a used or cheap 2.1 receiver (I know Sherwood has some right under $100 that apparently sound great), and $100-150 on an 8" or 10" subwoofer. If you don't want to drop $50 on revising the crossovers for the speakers (schematics from MurphyBlaster), just EQ them to make up for their slight deficiencies in the midrange. Set the subwoofer's volume to what you like.
 
For $350-450, you can get a 2.1 setup going that, IMO, will give similarly priced headphones some solid competition. I prefer speakers as is. Either way, if a bunch of Head-Fi folk can afford expensive headphones, they can definitely afford a speaker system.