[RPGWiZaRD]

Quote:

 
I get the feeling I'm going to opt to keep these and try a ZO with it.  The woman from digizoid is really helpful on the forums and claims you can use it in conjunction with another amp without getting any negative side effects of "double amping" as she says it acts like a preamp.

There fixed it for you, thought it was awkward to read "guy" ,  her name is Karen btw and is really kind and helpful. Every company needs a person like her.

 

[TMRaven]

Quote:

 

I don't know if we can trust the FR graphs, I mean the LCD-2 looks like a bass monster. My thing has always been about neutral with a good amount of good bass impact, and that's why I've ended up with the 880 and stuck with it for a while.
 
Any headphone with +dB bass will have this 'woofer-mode' I'm talking about, all Denons are bass attuned. Comparing the headphone directly with a D1100 might make the D2000 normal in comparison, and that's your neutral. I see you also have the AD700s, have you ever listened to them for a week straight without touching the D2000/DT990 and then switching over for comparison?
 
You can read reviews on the 336i including tube rolling threads, it would be worth picking up to at least see for yourself if it does anything for your 990. It will have a slight humm however with lower impedance headphones.
 
I don't consider myself a cable guy, this is far from being a placebo, the differences are very apparent.

How does the 336SE compare to the 336i?
 
And I've tried going from AD700 for days and going back to DT990 and D2000, but I always come away knowing which ones sound anemic and which ones don't extend low.  Both the 990s and AD700 roll-off, plain and simple.  I've even read a couple posts saying the AD700s extend super low too.  As I mentioned before, being bass prominent shouldn't have anything to do with extension, extension should be how much bass the headphone has at 20hz +/- to its mid bass.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

How does the 336SE compare to the 336i?
 
And I've tried going from AD700 for days and going back to DT990 and D2000, but I always come away knowing which ones sound anemic and which ones don't extend low.  Both the 990s and AD700 roll-off, plain and simple.  I've even read a couple posts saying the AD700s extend super low too.  As I mentioned before, being bass prominent shouldn't have anything to do with extension, extension should be how much bass the headphone has at 20hz +/- to its mid bass.

 
The 336SE and 336i are the same amp with the same tubes, the only difference is cosmetic as far as I know. I have only heard the 336i.
 
The majority of headphones will extend to and past 20Hz, the difference been some do it louder than others. DT990 and AD700 don't roll-off considerably, you're likely experiencing accuracy in the recording. A few years back I used to do some mastering, the D2000s I owned were way-off the monitors, the DT880 however were extremely close. You can test this yourself by creating a 20-40hz tone; my DT880s sound like a truck parked outside (you know, the resonating sound that comes in through the walls), my Sony XB500/HFI-780 sound almost identical in depth. Now if I move the tone around +/- 10hz the difference is much more audible on my DT880s than it is on the bass prominent headphones, this is because they are introducing additional bass, and this also goes back to my initial statement of neutral headphones handling bass better.
 
Apply this information to music with the likes of Nero; on my DT880s I hear no deep bass like I just created but more of a mid-bass with no impact, on the XB500s/HFI-780s that same deep bass I heard in the tone test is present. Therefor this has nothing to do with the ability of the headphone to extend but how the headphones are attuned to handle bass, bass forward headphones turn mid-bass into sub-bass much sooner. This gives the illusion of extension.
 
To tell you the truth I prefer Nero on the bass forward cans because it sounds lacking on my 880s, however when a track is well mastered (like Trentemoller) I prefer it on my 880s. With this bass boost in mind what else is being incorrectly boosted by the bass heavy headphones? And ultimately because of the wide range of genres I listen too and desire for accuracy I sold the Denons.

 

[TMRaven]

Quote:

 
 You can test this yourself by creating a 20-40hz tone; my DT880s sound like a truck parked outside (you know, the resonating sound that comes in through the walls), my Sony XB500/HFI-780 sound almost identical in depth. Now if I move the tone around +/- 10hz the difference is much more audible on my DT880s than it is on the bass prominent headphones, this is because they are introducing additional bass, and this also goes back to my initial statement of neutral headphones handling bass better.
 

Or maybe it's just because the 880 has a bigger rolloff.
 
 
 
D2000 introduces sub-bass sooner than others?  Where are the objective stats on this?  I know headphones have harmonics, but bass 60hz-100hz sound nearly identical on the D2000 and DT990 for me.  There is no 'added' sub-bass on the Denons compared to the beyers when playing those higher tones.  I can't believe you said the AD700s don't have that much of a rolloff.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Or maybe it's just because the 880 has a bigger rolloff.
 
 
 
D2000 introduces sub-bass sooner than others?  Where are the objective stats on this?  I know headphones have harmonics, but bass 60hz-100hz sound nearly identical on the D2000 and DT990 for me.  There is no 'added' sub-bass on the Denons compared to the beyers when playing those higher tones.  I can't believe you said the AD700s don't have that much of a rolloff.

 

I don't see how it could mean the 880s roll-off sooner?
 
Bass forward headphones add bass, I am very sure they don't extend an additional amount. You are inadvertently saying the D2000s have better frequency response than 90% of headphones, at the very least better than all flagships. This thread was about IEMs sounding bassier than LCD-2s, do you honestly think the IEMs have the better extension or in fact it is the recording like I say. Don't you also wonder why they don't put out a flagship headphone that 'extends like a D2000?' have you heard the D7000 btw?
 
If the 60-100Hz sounds nearly identical on both phones this comes as no surprise as both phones are bass heavy, the difference is one is closed while the other open. The sound bouncing around inside the cups is responsible for what you call extension, coincidentally this is what people try to remove, kees mod, and this is also subdued in the D7000.

 

[TMRaven]

I'm over it.  I've asked for objective stats time and time again from you to back up that statement of about how the 880 extends lower than other cans renown for their excellent extension, but havn't gotten any other than subjective ranting.
 
No, I'm not trying to say the Denons have a better frequency response than 90% of other cans out there, or even better than flagships (frequency response favoritism is subjective anyways, so it doesn't matter in the end).
 
Nobody has a flagship that extends like the D2000?
 

 
 
 
Last post from me on the matter, it's not getting anywhere like I would have liked.

 

[Graphicism]

We're not discussing cans renowned for their excellent extension, we're discussing how cans like the LCD-2 are accurate and bass-heavy cans are not. You're right this isn't getting anywhere, you've closed the door to new information and your not longer responding to what I've taken the time to write.
 
You mention objective stats and then post a FR graph which proves nothing, this graph would have me believe the LCD-2 is a bass monster.
 
If you get the chance to listen to a Denon D7000 I think you might be pleasantly surprised, or disappointed, either way you might get an inkling of what I've been discussing.

 

[Mochan]

Well the LCD2 is a bass monster IMO.  But I still don't think it's a "woofer mode" can, the cans I consider that are stuff like the XB series, the Pro 900, D1100, and a bunch of others.  LCD2's bass is surprisingly controlled but still has a lot of bass meatiness, and doesn't exactly thud like the "woofer mode" does. That's really just my opinion.
 
It may have a db increase above 0, but since it's relatively flat all the way to the mids that means the response is relatively smoothed out without the dips and peaks that cause the contrast to make you notice the "woofer mode."

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

Yea so many people read the graphs wrong, it's the difference between the lows, mids and highs which makes it bassy or not, it doesn't matter if bass is at +10 or -10 if the rest of the range is also fairly at the same level. LCD-2 is fairly even curve so there's plenty of mids and highs that will cover that slightly boosted bass range compared to basshead headphones. Sony XB500/700 has like ~20dB difference between lows and mids/highs (take avg mids to highs value (from say 300Hz to 16kHz+) and compare to avg value of <300Hz to get the proper comparision of bass quantity/strength. 

 

[Br777]

EQ-ing the LCD-2
 
well, after doing a bit of venting, and nearly giving up and selling my LCD-2's in the process due to their anemic bass.. yeah i said it...     I have finally after nearly 2 weeks dialed in an EQ setting that i feel is nearly universally appealing for all music genres.
 
first a few notes - I have had TONS of practice eqing headphones via sine waves / rolling frequency sweeps. I have done many a/b comparisons with stock headphone sound vs eq'd "flat" and my goodness you woudlnt belive how imbalanced most cans are, and how much they can be improved.
The idea is usually to get all frequencies to sound the same volume, or close to it.
obviously this setting does not make the bass sound the same volume as the other frequencies, however to my ears, it ads the missing bass  and makes the music sound "right"   no bass bloat, or covering up other frequencies, or ... blah blah blah...   i admit its probably a little bass heavy for some people, but to me this sounds great, and is a far cry from overdoing the bass/sub bass or eye shaking.. which by the way the LCD-2 can be eq'd to do like crazy.
 
after using this setting for quite a few days, its interesting to go back to flat and hear, not only that the bass was clearly lacking to the point of major parts of the music not being heard, but that there was some clear sibilance happening.. though not much, but certainly enough to explain why these cans felt strangely fatiguing when i first listened to them.
 
my rig = ipod touch 4th gen, lossless files, "equalizer" app - LOD - RSA SR71B - balanced out - LCD-2 r.2
 

 
frequency settings from left to right
 
+3.2 @ 23hz Q. 3.0
+10 @ 67hz  Q 1.0
-3.6 @ 99hz Q 0.8 - this is only in place in order to flatten the frequency response starting at 100hz that gets pulled up by the previous setting.
-2 @ 605hz Q 1.0 - evening out a slight peak here
+0.5 @ 1534 Q 0.8  - to bring the curve up to flat where it is being ever so slightly pulled down by the 2 settings surrounding it
-6 @ 3500hz  Q 1.5 - evening out a larger peak here
+12@ 8300 Q 7 - my cans have a dead spot here. (actually a very common phenomenon in headphones though not always in the same spot)  this fixes it.
 
and most importantly - set the pre-amp to -12 to avoid any chance of distortion (could probably be at -10 or -10.5, but this setting is touchy on this app, and -12 was close enough)

 

[RPGWiZaRD]

Yea I'm the same, I keep EQing all my headphones and can usually just by listening to some music tell whereabouts I'd need a bump or decrease but I'm not necessarily aiming for a perfect flat response though as that's not optimal for me, my optimal curve looks a bit more like a slanting slope with a bigger bump in the bass as well as a smaller bump around the midrange and highs are kept a little lower in comparision as I like a warm sound (I'm sure I'd like the sound of LCD-2 apart from the bass response, would be nice with a closed version of LCD-2 with similar FR response but stronger bass). Will you try the ZO with your LCD-2? Would be interesting.

 

[swbf2cheater]

the machbass setting on my J3 provides enough bass to satisfy me, its not a lot and it comes with a small price as the overall presentation of the highs tones just down a bit, but not really enough to gripe about.  I do not think the LCD2 are capable of bass levels that will satisfy you, I hope the ZO provides the sound you are looking for but I wouldnt get your hopes up.  If your mp3 player and source EQ cant provide close to what you want, then adding yet another EQ to it in the ZO wont help much except change the overall tone of the bass.  

 

[Br777]

i re-wrote my eq settings thread  with a few tweaks, and less wordiness

 

[Br777]

i have tweaked the lcd-2 eq even more, and now think its near perfect and sounds fantastic, and decided to have some fun and start this thread.
 
 
LCD-2 Equalization CHALLENGE!!!

 

[johnzz4]

I read the first few pages of this thread and then decided I need to reply..  looks like this thread has gone off on some tangent.  Regarding the bass of the LCD-2, it is very adequate, but the problem the OP is having is with the DACmini.  It's not that it doesn't 'technically' have enough power, but I owned this amplifier for all of a day and couldn't believe how light the bass was from the LCD-2s and the treble was a bit hot for my liking.  I was trying to upgrade from the NuForce HDP but found I strongly preferred the HDP.  I now have the Burson HA160D and life is good again, but found the exact same issue with the DACmini that the OP did.
 
Again, on paper, the DACmini is a high quality amp and the specs are more than adequate, but the sound is something else altogether.  The DACmini seemed to be the amp equivalent of the Sennheiser HD800s...  Good soundstage, strong highs and controlled, but light bass (compared to the LCD2s anyway).