[SgtE]

Thanks for your input.
I just spoke with a guy running a hifi-shop in Sweden, that sell he-500. I'm going to listen to the 339 + he-500 before making a move on the lcd-3.

And sorry for stealing the tread.

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

Thanks for your input.
I just spoke with a guy running a hifi-shop in Sweden, that sell he-500. I'm going to listen to the 339 + he-500 before making a move on the lcd-3.
And sorry for stealing the tread.

 
Please let me know then what you think on their treble - if it is any offensive or so... If you have some neutral amp, that would be very nice to assess the phones on them.
 
Official headphone seller from Slovakia told me that he would take both LCD-2 and LCD-3 anytime as he finds Audeze's bass, mids and treble to be more distinguished/defined, that you can better realise the instruments and their position and also that he finds the treble on HE-500 to be too agressive overally. But it was quite obvious that he loves Audezes sound as well as I do... 

 

[vc1187]

Quote:

 
I need to disagree here, at least based on my experience with rev2 version...
 
1) Rev2 version has revised pads and headband and I do find them comfortable enough for long listening sessions (I have had comfortable phones like D7000 or T50RP with FA-003 pads).
 
2) Rev2 have more apparent treble... I unfortunately cannot compare but I haven't seen anyone here to mention that rev2 version do have the completely same treble.
 
3) I do find both male and vocals to be absolutely great+present and as I do not hear any sense of glare with female parts (as I have heard with any other pair so far), I am extremely satisfied about LCD-2's performance here.
 
4) Rev2 has significantly improved measurements... They should be more detailed and accurate.
 
I still haven't heard HE-500 so I am lacking in this area... Their peak in treble around 7 - 10 khz worries me very much - this is the most critical area for people who are sensitive to ovetreble =/

The HE-500 will only sound harsh if it is under-powered.  For instance, I owned the Burson HA-160D prior to my current headphone amplifiers, and I did not like the HE-500.  After acquiring the LF339 and V200, it has become one of my favorite headphones.
 
I have read from multiple forums and asked professional reviewers what their opinions on the comfort differences were from Rev.1 to Rev.2.  The most common consensus from professional reviewers is that while it is an improvement, if you found the Rev.1 to be uncomfortable, the Rev.2 isn't suddenly going to be a dramatic change.  As I stated before, my issue with the comfort was the clamping force on the cheekbones.  Unless they completely changed the way the LCD-2 fits on your head, I believe this would still be an issue for me.
 
I don't doubt that the Rev.2 sounds better than the Rev.1, however I do doubt that if the Rev.1 did not synergize well with the LF339, I can see that the Rev.2 may have the same issue.  This is just my opinion, but I'm sure with more research (namely headfonia.com) you may be able to confirm this yourself.

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

The HE-500 will only sound harsh if it is under-powered.  For instance, I owned the Burson HA-160D prior to my current headphone amplifiers, and I did not like the HE-500.  After acquiring the LF339 and V200, it has become one of my favorite headphones.
 
I have read from multiple forums and asked professional reviewers what their opinions on the comfort differences were from Rev.1 to Rev.2.  The most common consensus from professional reviewers is that while it is an improvement, if you found the Rev.1 to be uncomfortable, the Rev.2 isn't suddenly going to be a dramatic change.  As I stated before, my issue with the comfort was the clamping force on the cheekbones.  Unless they completely changed the way the LCD-2 fits on your head, I believe this would still be an issue for me.
 
I don't doubt that the Rev.2 sounds better than the Rev.1, however I do doubt that if the Rev.1 did not synergize well with the LF339, I can see that the Rev.2 may have the same issue.  This is just my opinion, but I'm sure with more research (namely headfonia.com) you may be able to confirm this yourself.

 
Well, I cannot speak on synergizing etc. as I do not believe in it... I just want a neutral, transparent and powerful amp that is going to work with any pair of headphones that is able to sound great itself (like if you plug the phones directly to your laptop's output or to neutral sounding and technically powerful amp). It the headphone cannot sound great this way, it tells me that something is wrong with them to my hearing... I am not purchasing amps in order to mitigate what's wrong with headphones.
 
As for comfort, it's pretty individual... It's very difficult to recommend or even comment. I just wanted to say that do very like comfort of Audeze LCD-2 rev2 even though I have owned D7000 etc. I thought that I should have a more comfortable pair of headphones along with LCd-2 rev2 but when they arrived, I realised that they are just... perfect. Though I am selling my T50RP modded now...
 
The treble peak with HE-500 is definitely there, unfortunately for me... =/

 

[SgtE]

Quote:

 
Please let me know then what you think on their treble - if it is any offensive or so... If you have some neutral amp, that would be very nice to assess the phones on them.
 
Official headphone seller from Slovakia told me that he would take both LCD-2 and LCD-3 anytime as he finds Audeze's bass, mids and treble to be more distinguished/defined, that you can better realise the instruments and their position and also that he finds the treble on HE-500 to be too agressive overally. But it was quite obvious that he loves Audezes sound as well as I do... 

 
Will do (report my findings).
 
regarding "that you can better realise the instruments" - this is something I really appreciate. 
I used to have Audio Physic Avanti 3 speakers and they could almost reveal if a wooden guitar was made of oak or pine (somewhat exagerating but somewhat true) and you really felt the instrument with these speakers.
They did strike me as somewhat unnaturally thin in the bass area tho, causing a slight analytical sound...

 

[ardilla]

Quote:

The HE-500 will only sound harsh if it is under-powered.  For instance, I owned the Burson HA-160D prior to my current headphone amplifiers, and I did not like the HE-500.  After acquiring the LF339 and V200, it has become one of my favorite headphones.
 
I have read from multiple forums and asked professional reviewers what their opinions on the comfort differences were from Rev.1 to Rev.2.  The most common consensus from professional reviewers is that while it is an improvement, if you found the Rev.1 to be uncomfortable, the Rev.2 isn't suddenly going to be a dramatic change.  As I stated before, my issue with the comfort was the clamping force on the cheekbones.  Unless they completely changed the way the LCD-2 fits on your head, I believe this would still be an issue for me.
 
I don't doubt that the Rev.2 sounds better than the Rev.1, however I do doubt that if the Rev.1 did not synergize well with the LF339, I can see that the Rev.2 may have the same issue.  This is just my opinion, but I'm sure with more research (namely headfonia.com) you may be able to confirm this yourself.

 
I think you are right on that one. However - it can be un-harsh and nice even when underpowered. 
 
With regards to rev.1 vs rev.2 I think the rev.1 is more comfortable and sounds better (warmer, more intimate)

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

 
I think you are right on that one. However - it can be un-harsh and nice even when underpowered. 
 
With regards to rev.1 vs rev.2 I think the rev.1 is more comfortable and sounds better (warmer, more intimate)

 
Oh, someone finds rev1 to be more comfortable, interesting to know!
 
I can see that you like rev1 more... But do you find it more neutral, more versatile regardless the genre and quality? I've tried to EQ them a bit to get them nearer neutrality (against my already neutralised pair of T50RP modded and the graph I have received from Audeze) but I have found the differences to be subtle... I do find LCD-2 rev2 to be very near to neutrality.

 

[SgtE]

Quote:

The HE-500 will only sound harsh if it is under-powered.  For instance, I owned the Burson HA-160D prior to my current headphone amplifiers, and I did not like the HE-500.  After acquiring the LF339 and V200, it has become one of my favorite headphones.
 
I have read from multiple forums and asked professional reviewers what their opinions on the comfort differences were from Rev.1 to Rev.2.  The most common consensus from professional reviewers is that while it is an improvement, if you found the Rev.1 to be uncomfortable, the Rev.2 isn't suddenly going to be a dramatic change.  As I stated before, my issue with the comfort was the clamping force on the cheekbones.  Unless they completely changed the way the LCD-2 fits on your head, I believe this would still be an issue for me.
 
I don't doubt that the Rev.2 sounds better than the Rev.1, however I do doubt that if the Rev.1 did not synergize well with the LF339, I can see that the Rev.2 may have the same issue.  This is just my opinion, but I'm sure with more research (namely headfonia.com) you may be able to confirm this yourself.

 
This is really interesting to me, as an owner of an OTL amp that can produce amazing amounts of volts but not amazing amounts of ampere.
 
To me, the Hifiman HE-500 seem more hard to drive then LCD-2.
 
Hifiman: Specifications:
Frequency Response: 15 to 50 KHz
Impedance: 38 Ohm
Efficiency: 89 DB
 
Audeze: - Impedance:  50 Ohms, nominal
- Maximum diaphragm excursion:  2.5 mm p-p
- Efficiency:  93 dB/1 mW
 
What is causing this synergy between HE-500 and LF339, that's missing with the LCD-X?

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

 
This is really interesting to me, as an owner of an OTL amp that can produce amazing amounts of volts but not amazing amounts of ampere.
 
To me, the Hifiman HE-500 seem more hard to drive then LCD-2.
 
Hifiman: Specifications:
Frequency Response: 15 to 50 KHz
Impedance: 38 Ohm
Efficiency: 89 DB
 
Audeze: - Impedance:  50 Ohms, nominal
- Maximum diaphragm excursion:  2.5 mm p-p
- Efficiency:  93 dB/1 mW
 
What is causing this synergy between HE-500 and LF339, that's missing with the LCD-X?

 
I think it's more about the amp being coloured in a certain way that "works" better with HE-500...
 
I would say - use an neutral amp with LCD-2 rev2 or LCD-3, and a warmer one with HE-500.

 

[ardilla]

That doesn't mean it is going to be harsh-sounding on the 339. It's regarded a good match. Send a pm to user Ultrainferno. He has the HE-500, 339 and other amps to compare. 
 
My guess is you're gonna end up with multiple amps and cans soon anyway
Quote:

 
This is really interesting to me, as an owner of an OTL amp that can produce amazing amounts of volts but not amazing amounts of ampere.
 
To me, the Hifiman HE-500 seem more hard to drive then LCD-2.
 

 

[MHOE]

Quote:

That doesn't mean it is going to be harsh-sounding on the 339. It's regarded a good match. Send a pm to user Ultrainferno. He has the HE-500, 339 and other amps to compare. 
 
My guess is you're gonna end up with multiple amps and cans soon anyway

 
I am going to own my LCD-2 rev2 only and do not want anything else... They are just perfect for everything I want or am going to want in near future. It is not a rule even though the majority of people here would most probably find silly to say that they in reality only need one or two pair of headphones (do you really need more of them?).
 
Also, the majority of people would just tell you that O2 with any pair of headphones is just a poor match even though you will use the most suitable amp configuration (without battery power + the most suitable gain resistors) and powerful enough transformer to get your phones enough voltage and current (+ suitable output impedance etc.). It's just that people like it distorted and coloured, not that there is any sort of wrong synergy. ,-)

 

[SgtE]

Quote:

 
My guess is you're gonna end up with multiple amps and cans soon anyway

 
No, no, go away, I refuse to! 

 

[SgtE]

Quote:

 
So I have owned the LCD-2 rev.1 and currently own the HE-500 along with the LF339.  To my ears, the LF339 did not have much synergy with the LCD-2, but work tremendously well with the LF339.  I also own the V200, which worked very well with the LCD-2 and works well with the HE-500.  Best combination to my ears is the HE-500 and LF339 (With Tung Sol 5998 and RCA 5693 tubes).  It does every genre justice, and has an extremely deep, impactful bass.  There is no sense of harshness on the treble with this combination, if you may be concerned about that, and vocals are as beautiful as ever.  I will say that I prefer the HE-500 over the LCD-2 (I feel like the vocals on the LCD-2 are portrayed as somewhat far away), however my main issue with the LCD-2 was comfort (something you may want to consider).  Though they both have a strong clamping force, the HE-500s force is allocated around your ears, and the LCD-2s force is allocated closer to your cheekbones.  The pressure to the cheekbones is just too uncomfortable for me, but I can deal with and wear the HE-500 for a long time.
 
In essence, both are wonderful pairs of headphones, but if comfort is a biggy for you, I'd recommend going HE-500.  Also, with your setup (assuming you own the LF339), from one owner to another, trust me, the HE-500 is excellent with the setup I listed above 

 
Oh on a side note, while I spoke about the LCD-2 rev.1 (and have never heard the LCD-2 rev.2 or LCD-3) If pressure on your cheekbones is going to bother you, it's not going to change from rev 1 to rev 2 or LCD-3, as they're all designed to fit on your head the same way.  Can't really comment on synergy for the LF339 with the rev.2 or lcd-3, but my bets are that it will not synergize as well with the LF339 as it may with something like a V200.
Yep, very well spoken.

 
 
You mean HE-500, right?

 

[vc1187]

Quote:

 
 
You mean HE-500, right?

Yeah, that's what I meant, my bad.  To be fully honest, my sound signature preference is very much like UltraInferno's (That's my disclaimer).  A powerful full bodied sound with a deep bass and very clear, musical vocals.  Less emphasis on treble to avoid sibilance.  That's my definition of the typical 'hi-fi' sound signature and the one I personally enjoy the most.
The HE-500 is more amp picky than the LCD-2 in my setups.
Quote:

 
I think it's more about the amp being coloured in a certain way that "works" better with HE-500...
 
I would say - use an neutral amp with LCD-2 rev2 or LCD-3, and a warmer one with HE-500.

No, synergy does not mean coloured a certain way.  It just means what sounds like the best pairing to the person listening.  As you're a fan of neutrality and believe synergy doesn't exist, I don't believe neutrality exists.

 

[olor1n]

To the Mod who obliged MHOE's desire to be banned: THANK YOU!