Help decide audeze LCD2 or LCD3
Apr 25, 2012 at 12:47 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 35
DrNope

DrNope

Head-Fier
Joined
May 17, 2011
Posts
55
Likes
0
Been offered to by a set of LCD3 demo ex for abort $400 more than a new set of LCD2. It realy feels like an attractive offer, even though the casing has some scratches. At this pricerange I realy think a new set is attractive, but now I dont know. Can you with experience of both comment on the difference?
Ànother question is if à Little Dot2++ would be good enough to drive those lovely headphones? Need new tubes in that case, otherwise à new amp.
 
Apr 25, 2012 at 1:21 PM Post #2 of 35
I would still buy the LCD-2.  They are built better, have fewer distortion issues than the LCD-3, and cost way less.  In fact if someone were to offer me a free LCD-2 or LCD-3, and I could not sell them, I would go with the LCD-2.  To me it sounds better.  The LCD-2 has a bit more treble that gives it a more open sound.  The LCD-3 is stuffy and with all of the build issues I would shy away from the LCD-3 for now.
 
Apr 25, 2012 at 6:16 PM Post #3 of 35
If you don't want to buy the LCD-3s that you have a line on, please pass the seller's information along to me via Personal Message.
 
Apr 25, 2012 at 8:14 PM Post #4 of 35
Here are my thoughts:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/a/comparisons-of-the-lcd-3-and-the-lcd-2-rev-2
 
Now having my recently RMA'd LCD-3 in house (never had any issues with my unveiled LCD-3, but I did send them in for updating), I can easily say that there is nothing that the LCD-2s do better than the LCD-3s except cost less. The differences IMO are quite profound...2X profound, well that's up to you (I however think they just might be).
 
Apr 26, 2012 at 12:22 AM Post #6 of 35
The lcd3-thread is too long for me to find what issues there is, but veil? RMA?

Might add; Ilistened to them using a burson headphone amp, but the difference between the high and low output was dramatic, the entire soundstage changed. With low output impedance, it was as if they stood playing as close as possible to my head, but with high output impedance soundstage opened up and got spacious and nice, seemed to loose some attack in the bass though. This was not what I had expected, do the lcd3 need à highohmic drive or is This to blame a faulty amp output?
 
Apr 26, 2012 at 1:10 AM Post #7 of 35
I had a chance to hear the 3 and Schiit's latest prototype DAC/amp combo this weekend at The Village... Wow. Best headphone sound I recall hearing.

Can't wait.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
May 7, 2012 at 3:47 AM Post #8 of 35
Think I settle down on a set of LCD2. Are those only available as bamboo with transport-box? Got a bit surpirced when looking at Audeze homepage and couldnt find the rosewood with wooden box anymore. Guess the cable-connectors will remove the issue with cracking wood I read somewhere?
 
May 8, 2012 at 7:01 PM Post #9 of 35
Yeah I cannot tell if the Bamboo is a fix for the cracking issue or not because they cover the cracked area with the new connector body.  I suspect Bamboo to be more flexible than Rosewood, but I could not find the statistics for such things anywhere.
 
I find that there were not many complaints about the LCD-2, but the LCD-3 has a list of issues including a veiled sound, crackling, lack of soundstage, and other driver issues.
 
Looking at the charts I cannot justify paying x2 the cost for hardly any measurable differences:
 
FR:
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=3221&graphID[]=3431
 
Harmonic Distortion ( see notes at the end ):
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=1&graphID[]=3221&graphID[]=3431
 
500Hz Square Wave:
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=4&graphID[]=3221&graphID[]=3431
 
50 Hz Square Wave:
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=3&graphID[]=3221&graphID[]=3431
 
I will admit that the biggest change is in the Harmonic Distortion curves.
Here they are separated.
 
LCD-2:
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=1&graphID[]=3221
 
LCD-3:
http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=1&graphID[]=3431
 
To me these are significant differences, but I had a hard time distorting either pair.  Distortion was not an issue with my setup.  This is the reason I cannot justify the higher cost of the LCD-3.  Add in the flat ribbon cable, the veil, and the driver issues and I really cannot justify it.  I think the LCD-2 is still the most headphone per dollar and probably the best headphone period for the widest range of accurate listening experiences.
 
May 8, 2012 at 8:46 PM Post #10 of 35
^^ FWIW, the most recent pairs (since around March) seem to be fairly consistent with regards to precision of sound. Those graphs on Headroom are most likely of a veiled pair from when they were posted back in January-ish so they're basically meaningless now.
 
Funny my pair (original release) were very good (as were Muppetface's, Skylab's and many others), but some did seem to suffer from a veil effect. But if you look at the ones released since the March timeframe, they look very similar.
 
I did send mine back to be "upgraded" to the latest version and here are my thoughts:
 
So after some reports of LCD-3 owners sending back their "unveiled" LCD-3s to Audeze and for a check up and having the returned ones sounding even better, I got really curious. I contacted Sankar and he offered that I return them too. The thicker foam in front of the drivers has been replaced with a thin fabric that is quite a bit more transparent than the original foam. Purrin took his unveiled LCD-3s apart to find that the damping behind the drivers was changed too.
 
So how do they sound? They aren't totally different from the non-veiled pair that I sent in last week, but the mids are a bit more forward and the treble seems less pushed back (but still smooth, not peaky like the LCD-2 r.2s...only in comparative terms...the LCD-2 r.2's treble is still outstanding and better than most cans). My returned FR graph looks like the ones posted on the LCD-3 thread now. My original looked almost identical to the one Skylab posted on his review. Overall I'm even happier now.
 
The improvements in the LCD-3s now make the 2x price tag much easier to take IMO.
 
My first FR graph with my headphones when I received them in Nov. 2011:

 
And now my new FR graph from Audeze (I've gotta say all of the recently released LCD-3 graphs all look very similar):

 
May 9, 2012 at 4:18 AM Post #11 of 35
NA-blur: Looking at the 50 and 500Hz squarewaves, there's slightly more gain at 50Hz in LCD2 compared to LCD3, and there's a resonance (gain-peak) at higher frequnecy in the LCD3 compared to the LCD2 but equal Q. Also, theres less distortion in the LCD3 but this is at -85dBc for LCD3 and -75dBc for LCD2- guess this cant be detected by the ear anyway? Looks like a (about) 300Hz resonance as well in the LCD3 which is not seen in the LCD2?
 
Question:
Would phase-linearity/delay v.s. frequency (group delay?) show how good they might be in reproducing imaging?
 
Anyway, since the LCD3 I looked at was a demo-ex I think they are the old ones and with better measured bass-extension even though so slight and probably better quality of the LCD2s (they should have sorted most of the issues with problems when going to production by now I guess) I'm even more leaning towards those. I would also assume that the crack with rose-wood is how they built the connectors, when turning the head it puts too much force into the small part of the wood which is also taken care of by going to the LCD3-style of connector.
 
MacedonianHero: Peaky highs in the LCD2s? I think my hearing is slightly damaged, which is why I look at Audeze to start with (have a set of Grado SR80). So I really need a smooth and lean HP which will not introduce too much highs from the lousy recordings of today. With the grados I can't listen to most of the newly released records for more then 1 or 2 songs, after that I'm so tired in my ears I can hardly listen to any music for a few hours.
 
May 9, 2012 at 7:56 PM Post #12 of 35
Quote:
drnope said:
MacedonianHero: Peaky highs in the LCD2s? I think my hearing is slightly damaged, which is why I look at Audeze to start with (have a set of Grado SR80). So I really need a smooth and lean HP which will not introduce too much highs from the lousy recordings of today. With the grados I can't listen to most of the newly released records for more then 1 or 2 songs, after that I'm so tired in my ears I can hardly listen to any music for a few hours.
Click to expand...

 
To clarify, not peaky highs in absolute terms on the LCD-2 r.2, but in comparison to the brilliantly smooth highs of the LCD-3s. No Audeze has Grado-like etched treble. They're all smooth, just different levels of smooth.
smile.gif

 
May 9, 2012 at 9:52 PM Post #13 of 35
Quote:
fgjlsw said:
Now having my recently RMA'd LCD-3 in house (never had any issues with my unveiled LCD-3, but I did send them in for updating), http://www.beats-bydre.netI can easily say that there is nothing that the LCD-2s do better than the LCD-3s except cost less. The differences IMO are quite profound...2X profound, well that's up to you (I however think they just might be)
Click to expand...


??? Why the link?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top