[Mach3]

@plakat. I see you have the SPL phonitor 2 on your profile page. How is it with the th900, especially compared to Violectric v281?

Off topic but how these two German titans compare? Can you give us some impressions with the headphones you currently own

 

[LSD25]

Might be getting mine very soon! I hope the TH900 will be a good companion to my HD800.
 
I usually have to resort to M50s whenever I feel like listening to some bass heavy EDM stuff. HD800s usually leaves me unsatisfied in that compartment... but so does going from HD800 to M50s lol

 

[up late]

reckon it would complement the hd800 nicely

 

[MunDa]

The LCD 3 is way more neutral than HD650. The Fazor is indeed on the more neutral side.
What kind of music do you like and what kind of sound would you like your headphone to have?

Thank you very much.
 
I see you own both, th 900 and lcd 3f, could you kindly eloborate more on the differences/similarities of these two cans?

 

[citraian]

Might be getting mine very soon! I hope the TH900 will be a good companion to my HD800.

I usually have to resort to M50s whenever I feel like listening to some bass heavy EDM stuff. HD800s usually leaves me unsatisfied in that compartment... but so does going from HD800 to M50s lol

Great complement for the HD800s, good choice

 

[citraian]

Thank you very much.

I see you own both, th 900 and lcd 3f, could you kindly eloborate more on the differences/similarities of these two cans?

Well, they are actually very different. But that is normal since the TH-900s are v-shaped and the LCD-3Fs are neutralish with a hint of sweetness or tube-like sound if you will - I call this kind of sound natural. Now let's see:
BASS:
The TH-900s have a bigger bass that extends and kicks more into the sub-bass region
The LCD-3Fs have a more detailed, textured and layered bass that has a bit more kick into the mid and upper bass region
MIDS:
Unfortunately there is no contest here Since the TH-900 is V-shaped the mids, while nice, seem a little bit distant and without emotion. The LCD-3Fs have great sweet mids with creat clarity and details.
TREBLE:
The TH-900s are brighter. They have a bit more sparkle but this could sometimes lead to sibilance and/or tiring sound...
The LCD-3Fs are well extended into the treble region with good clarity and details but are not as tiring as the TH-900s.
Depending on the song someone could like the TH-900s treble more due to the added sparkle or less due to the treble spike that becomes sibilant
SOUNDSTAGE:
Here... I can't help you. They are both very open headphones but still far from what the HD-800s have to offer. The thing is that in my experience the soundstage is affected by both treble and mids. For some treble-based-soundstage songs the TH900 seems more open. For other tracks that involve the mids as well the LCD-3F seems to soundstage better. The TH-900 also seems to portray the end of the room better while the LCD-3F fills the room better - I don't know if this is clear enough.

For me, the LCD-3F is what the HD-650 should always have been or what the people expected from the HD-700 - a mixture between HD-650 and HD-800

Sorry for the formatting and the eventual mistakes. I wrote this from my phone

 

[MunDa]

Well, they are actually very different. But that is normal since the TH-900s are v-shaped and the LCD-3Fs are neutralish with a hint of sweetness or tube-like sound if you will - I call this kind of sound natural. Now let's see:
BASS:
The TH-900s have a bigger bass that extends and kicks more into the sub-bass region
The LCD-3Fs have a more detailed, textured and layered bass that has a bit more kick into the mid and upper bass region
MIDS:
Unfortunately there is no contest here

Since the TH-900 is V-shaped the mids, while nice, seem a little bit distant and without emotion. The LCD-3Fs have great sweet mids with creat clarity and details.
TREBLE:
The TH-900s are brighter. They have a bit more sparkle but this could sometimes lead to sibilance and/or tiring sound...
The LCD-3Fs are well extended into the treble region with good clarity and details but are not as tiring as the TH-900s.
Depending on the song someone could like the TH-900s treble more due to the added sparkle or less due to the treble spike that becomes sibilant
SOUNDSTAGE:
Here... I can't help you. They are both very open headphones but still far from what the HD-800s have to offer. The thing is that in my experience the soundstage is affected by both treble and mids. For some treble-based-soundstage songs the TH900 seems more open. For other tracks that involve the mids as well the LCD-3F seems to soundstage better. The TH-900 also seems to portray the end of the room better while the LCD-3F fills the room better - I don't know if this is clear enough.

For me, the LCD-3F is what the HD-650 should always have been or what the people expected from the HD-700 - a mixture between HD-650 and HD-800

Sorry for the formatting and the eventual mistakes. I wrote this from my phone

great, thx for the quick response!
 
I guess it's best to try and compare the cans myself.

 

[citraian]

No, not yet. In turn, I liked the LCD-3 (old) much more than the LCD-X with the fazor. I also liked it much more than the HD650. I can imagine the LCD-3 with the fazor may sound slightly more open. I think the LCD-3 (either old, or new) is the one to buy from Audeze. I could perhaps make peace with the darker sound, but the sound stage is also narrower (yet well focused and enjoyable) compared to the other ones I like with enough genres (TH900, HD800, K812, Stax 007 and 009). The TH900 is the only closed headphone which plays with the big ones for my taste (I didn't like the D7000 that much), and its bass is better overall than all of the big ones (again, I have to specify that I made earpad and damper mods to the TH900 - the LCD3 has better, albeit less spacious bass than the stock TH900).

If I do a totally subjective comparison (inherently flawed, because genre variations) between these phones, when each is amped close to its best:
(mTH900 and m007 refers to my modded ones; ~= means more or less similar, with some variance, perhaps better; > means better in most cases that matter to me; >= means mostly better or similar)
- bass impact, slam, energy: mTH900 > LCD3 >= TH900 > m007 > 009 > K812 > HD800. Take that to movies, electronica, metal, rock.
- perceived instrumental bass quality (musical resolution, dynamic gradation, speed, control): 009 ~= m007 > mTH900 > LCD3 > 507 > K812 > HD800 > TH900. Mostly with jazz, instrumental, classical.
- mids (resolution, tone, harmonics): 009 > m007 > K812 ~= HD800 > mTH900 > TH900. With any music.
- treble (naturalness, musicality): m007 > 009 > K812 >= mTH900 = TH900 >= LCD3 > HD800. With any music, except classical, where the HD800 sometimes moves up 1-3 positions.
- sound stage: 009 ~= m007 ~= HD800 > K812 >= mTH900 > TH900 > LCD3. The HD800 sound stage is biggest (tallest), but not always the best. Both Stax can enchant me more, for instance with big orchestra.

Now comes the twist. When I rank for my own musical enjoyment in general (and I listen to almost all genres):
009 ~= m007 >> mTH900 > K812 > HD800 > TH900 > LCD3.
YMMV! I am sure many people would have different preferences and ranking. Any of these headphones is "good enough" to enjoy music.
If I could tolerate dark sound more, the LCD3 would move up 3 positions with many genres.
Looks I am basically a Stax guy who enjoys the TH900 enough to keep it for the office and don't miss much of the Stax when they are not around. In all honesty, nowadays I use the m007 even for movies, giving up some of the bass impact for the better overall sound. But when bass energy is needed, the mTH900 so far has no peers. I miss that bass energy from all other headphones, except the LCD3 which comes close, and I repeat I don't miss much from the Stax when they are not around to make a direct comparison.

Note that I miss Hifiman completely, since I didn't like the HE6 and HE500, and heard but haven't compared the new ones (e.g. HE560), and Oppo, to the list above. They may rank well on this list, but I doubt they are better than the LCD3 or others on this list.

I need to note that when you're using something like the Smyth Realiser A8, or a good equalizer (already a compromise, but often not so bad) this list is totally different:
009 > m007 > HD800 > K812 > LCD3 > mTH900 >TH900. I think this is an interesting point, and refers to something like "neutral enough sound with good resolution and sound stage, and enough reserves in the bass to be tweakable without audible distortions". I mention this because I know people who opted for the Realizer for many reasons, and I consider them valid. A Realiser with a Lambda or a HD800 can be enough for many people. I myself am more like a purist, the simpler and shorter signal paths, the better. And if I want the best phone in all circumstances, it's still Stax at the moment . Feel free to disagree, but don't shoot .

Oh man, you should hear the LCD-3Fs. Totally different monsters.

 

[Justin_Time]

Described earlier in this thread:
- order replacement pads (and optionally mounting plates) from your local Fostex importer
- earpad filling changed to active carbon foam (105/70 diameter, 15-17mm high at the back and 8-10mm high at the front). You can buy that from amazon. 15 mm thick works fine, the optimum is around 17 (so better buy 25 mm thick and trim). This made most change in clarity, bass, sound stage.
- foam damper changed to 5 mm thick 100% wool felt (e.g. from meervilt.nl), 73/48 mm ext/int diameter. This made most change in filling up the midrange, but the original damper is not that bad either with the new pads.
- polyfill in the cups halved in thickness (alternatively use 2 mm thick meervilt.nl wool felt, 78mm diameter). Optional.
Buy an Olfa cutter from amazon for cutting wool felt disks with precision.
I developed these mods together with @playitloud
 and we are still fine-tuning it. Total materials cost is less than $100. You will spend days or weeks fine-tuning it, but you will like the process . Be amazed of what difference small changes can do.
I have tried the basic Lawton mod and discarded it completely in favor of the above. Actually it caused a 2 month side-tour around the better (for me) solution. 

The mod done for the 007 is similar: I got 009 pads in which I changed the foam filling to active carbon foam. The dimensions are absolutely critical and are different from the original filling. Still fine-tuning, but improved enormously the already nice 007's, especially in opening up the sound, improving sound stage and perceived resolution, elevating a bit the slightly subdued treble, and making the bass deeper and with bigger impact.

Thank you. Zolkis for sharing your experience.

I attempted to do the modification you so enthusiastically encourage but got stuck on the very first step: I cannot find any "active carbon foam" anywhere on Amazon. There are foam pads and active carbon filter and prefilter, that is it. Perhaps this active carbon foam is called something else in the US Amazon. If you could specify the original intended use of this foam pad or the shape or size this foam is originally sold, perhaps that would help. Otherwise the project is unfortunately a non-starter for me.

Anyone here with better luck finding this active carbon foam?

 

[playitloud]

Here you go.
 
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Finest-Filters-Activated-Impregnated-Aquarium-Filters/dp/B005AK9FQ0/ref=pd_sim_sbs_petsupplies_3?ie=UTF8&refRID=0H3F7BFGM160W7R74DKX
 
Well Justin_time, maybe I, and I am certain Zolkis will do the same, can send you some of my stuff. I can send you a sample of a pair of carbon foam pads (105mm outer diameter, 70mm inner diameter, height 15mm back, 10mm front). I can also send you a pair of 5mm felt dampers cut to the 'right' dimensions. I can even send you some 2mm wool felt for the cups. If interested please contact me with PM.

 

[Mach3]

Well, they are actually very different. But that is normal since the TH-900s are v-shaped and the LCD-3Fs are neutralish with a hint of sweetness or tube-like sound if you will - I call this kind TH-900 is V-shaped phone

I recently received my LCD3 back from Audeze with the fazor upgrade and even though it's more detail in term of sound. I still think it has a much more darker signature than the TH900. IMO the TH900 is more U shaped sound signature than V.

 

[up late]

how do they compare for clarity and air?

 

[citraian]

I recently received my LCD3 back from Audeze with the fazor upgrade and even though it's more detail in term of sound. I still think it has a much more darker signature than the TH900. IMO the TH900 is more U shaped sound signature than V.

Note that the LCD-3C with fazor upgrade is not the same thing as the LCD-3F since the drivers in the F were changed as well.
The LCD-3F is very close to neutral but still a tiny bit smooth in the treble. The TH-900 is however a bit more above neutral when treble is concerned. So it's not like the LCD-3Fs are too dark - the TH900s are a bit bright.

 

[citraian]

how do they compare for clarity and air?

Well, it depends on what you're looking for when thinking of clarity. As overall transparency, details, textures LCD-3F is superior. The TH900, due to its treble peak does sounds more... fresh aired if you will

 

[plakat]

@plakat. I see you have the SPL phonitor 2 on your profile page. How is it with the th900, especially compared to Violectric v281?

 
TH900 + Phonitor is a nice, very detailed and spacious combination with good dynamics. I don't like TH900+V281 on the other hand... but two colleagues at our last meet in Vienna did like the combination. To me its simply too much bass... but maybe I'm a bit sensitive in that regard.