BB, I'm not sure you can go by the FR. Headroom has a screed on how to interpret their graphs and it talks about the ideal subjective response as being one where the treble rolls off from around 1khz. A dead flat response on any phone would be way too bright as it fails to take account of the way we hear. If you find the LCD-2 too dull that's one thing, but I would be wary of supporting your argument with the measured FR by claiming it should be flat.
Thanks for the caution but I'll defer to Tyll Hertsen's expertise in this area, and he found that the LCD-2 had a measurable treble roll-off. He hears it this way too and so do I.
Thanks for the caution but I'll defer to Tyll Hertsen's expertise in this area, and he found that the LCD-2 had a measurable treble roll-off. He hears it this way too and so do I.
If you want to consider treble as beginning at 1 kHz, then sure, you can call it "rolled off"
I fail to see why suggesting we use accurate descriptions of technical phenomenon to facilitate discourse is so bad. If you guys prefer to be inaccurate for the purpose of making your point forcefully, then enjoy.
It is technically inaccurate to describe the treble of the LCD-2 as "rolled off". It simply is not. Rolled off means a declining amplitude and frequency increases. This is very clearly not the case as all of the LCD-2 measurements show.
The correct term for the LCD-2's treble response is "shelved down". You can love it or hate it, but that is what it is. Not rolled off.
If "rolled off" is the incorrect term then I stand corrected. I seem to recall Tyll Hertsen using the same term to describe the LCD-2's highs, but I could very well be mistaken. However, l did attempt to cover my bases by writing that "the LCD-2's highs are rolled-off, recessed, shelved-down - call it whatever you like". I quite like muted. Is muted good for you?
This is an interesting question of terminology in my opinion. Should the terms "trebles" and "highs" really be used interchangeably on head-fi? I understand that in the arena of music production, "mids" are often referenced as extending up to around 4khz. However, coming from a fairly serious music performance background (both choral and instrumental), "treble", to me, signifies treble voices, treble instruments, and more generally, frequencies encompassed within the treble clef. Middle C is only 256hz (or thereabouts), so I could easily accept the proposition that the scope of treble frequencies includes 1khz.
It seems silly to me that the term "trebles" would be relegated to the realm of overtones, as no natural voices or instruments (excluding pipe organ) play fundamental frequencies higher than about 3.5khz.
If you want to consider treble as beginning at 1 kHz, then sure, you can call it "rolled off"
I fail to see why suggesting we use accurate descriptions of technical phenomenon to facilitate discourse is so bad. If you guys prefer to be inaccurate for the purpose of making your point forcefully, then enjoy.
Bass is ruler flat; rolls offa little too much at the very top though.
Impedance and phase is ruler flat ... A normal planar-magnetic characteristic.
30 hz square wave is stunning due to the good bass response.
THD is the best ive seen.
300hz square shows a little stored enpergy after the first overshoot. But i like the fact that its not overshooting a lot...most headphones do, and thats the brightness Kevin mentions.
Impulse response shows that blip of energy coming in after the first impulse again as a fat little wiggle.
Ive been listening to both a lot lately, and Im thinking the LDC-2 is a tad too slow, and the HE6 is a bit more of a tad too fast.
I think the Audeze is my desert island can at the moment."
If it's good enough for Tyll, then it's certainly good enough for me.
I think you should have used the HE-6s in place of the HE-500s as the Hifiman flagship. I'm sure the HE-500s are great, but a few good friends (Skylab and Frank I) have heard both and prefer the HE-6s (assuming you have enough juice for them.)
Have not seen Tyll's measurement in a while, but I don't recall it showing a roll off at the top octave or beyond - note that he does say "very top". But if the measurements show that, then so be it. The measurements I have seen do not show this. In any case, the point is this is not a subjective thing. Either there is a measured roll off or there is not, and a roll off is a specific thing, which is a declining amplitude as frequency increases. That some, or even many, people feel that the LCD-2 has too little treble energy does not make it rolled off.
Contrast that to the very measurable spike in the low treble that an HD-800 has, followed by a drop off in the top octave, and one might guess while Tyll called the LCD-2 his "desert island" headphone, and why many of the rest of us like them. The treble is inarguably smoother than the top tier dynamics, whether you like the balance or not.
Rasmutte yes the HE-6 is much harder to drive than the HE-500.
If you want to consider treble as beginning at 1 kHz, then sure, you can call it "rolled off"
I fail to see why suggesting we use accurate descriptions of technical phenomenon to facilitate discourse is so bad. If you guys prefer to be inaccurate for the purpose of making your point forcefully, then enjoy.
FWIW, middle C on the piano is around 500Hz, the C an octave above is around 1000Hz. I "want" to consider this the beginning of the treble region. It would appear that you do not? My former LCD-2s were about -6db at 2000Hz relative to 0db at 1000Hz, -9db at 3000Hz, -12db at 4000Hz. For accuracy's sake, the question becomes, is this rolled off or shelved? Given the apparent importance that many folks give to FR graphs, rightly or wrongly, maybe Audez'e would be wise to stop including them with their product, then we could just write our descriptions in anecdotal terms or refer to Tyll's charts, but perhaps not his FR graphs.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
