LCD3 Measurements

[rhythmdevils]

Quote:

Do you have the serial numbers for both the R1s and the R2? You can PM me if the information is sensitive. 

 
There are no rev2 measurements in this thread, there's two rev1 which are quite different and one LCD3.

 

[purrin]

I probably should have jotted down that info.

 

[koonhua90]

I got my LCD-3! I am still waiting for my Lyr amp to come in, poor student can't afford to buy 3k amps....

 
So far so good, maybe I will need to let it burn in a bit, but right now I feel that the treble is, even though natural, a bit edgy. I am not sure whether this has to do with the peak at 18 kHz. My young ears that are still in their 20s can hear up to roughly 19.5 kHz.
 
Maybe it's due to the nature of headphone, but the LCD-3 does convey ambiance better than my Jh16, at times I heard certain soft instrument sounds or background sound that I haven't really heard before. I can see why people say that the soundstage isn't huge, it certainly does a great job at portraying depth and width, but it ain't gonna make you feel like you are in an orchestra. Basically, if the music has it the headphone will show it to you.
 
By the way Mr. Purrin, based on your post #22, http://www.head-fi.org/t/580283/lcd3-measurements/15#post_7892979, can you comment on the CSD of LCD-3 vs Stax 009 vs HD 800. From how I see it, seems that the Stax has a very smooth decay at first, then as it goes on there are more ridges, and there were tiny peaks/ridges from 1ms to 3ms. Are those audible? From first look, it seems that the HD 800 has the most smooth decay of all 3 headphones. 
 
And regarding the peak centered around 18kHz on the LCD-3, why is there such a peak, or why do they design it so that there is such a peak there?

 

[purrin]

Quote:

I got my LCD-3! I am still waiting for my Lyr amp to come in, poor student can't afford to buy 3k amps....

 
So far so good, maybe I will need to let it burn in a bit, but right now I feel that the treble is, even though natural, a bit edgy.
 
By the way Mr. Purrin, based on your post #22, http://www.head-fi.org/t/580283/lcd3-measurements/15#post_7892979, can you comment on the CSD of LCD-3 vs Stax 009 vs HD 800. From how I see it, seems that the Stax has a very smooth decay at first, then as it goes on there are more ridges, and there were tiny peaks/ridges from 1ms to 3ms. Are those audible? From first look, it seems that the HD 800 has the most smooth decay of all 3 headphones. 
 
And regarding the peak centered around 18kHz, why is there such a peak, or why do they design it so that there is such a peak there?

I'll go back to the post above and make a more thorough analysis tonight. As far as the 18kHz peak, I'm still investigating the cause and making sure it's not a measurement anomaly. It's possible the 18kHz peak is actually well controlled when the diaphagm is pushing / pulling against an air cushion as would be the case with a proper seal against the head / ear.
 
The upward shift with the driver resonance on the LCD3 from the 2r1 / 2r2 wouldn't be unexpected given the thinner diaphagm material (assuming the same tension.) I don't have any data to back it up, but I believe I was hearing a resonance on the r2 between 10kHz-13kHz. 
 
Maybe arnaud can provide us with some animation models showing us predicted behavior. I believe the LCD3 diaphagm material is 1/6 the thickness of the r1? Not sure.
 
P.S. On the HD800 (and even other Sennheiser models): Even though I don't agree with the tonal balance of the HD800 (hence the mods), I'm still amazed what Sennheiser can do with dynamic drivers. They probably have a secret lab facility with engineers who have been doing these kinds of measurements (and even more) for some time now.

 

[rhythmdevils]

Audeze's own graph doesn't look that dissimilar.  A bit more flattering, but there's still a peak in the treble with a bit slower decay. 

 

[Skylab]

Note of course that a resonance at 18 kHz is going to be very musically benign the overwhelming majority of the time (whereas at 10 kHz it could be much more noticeable on a regular basis).  Regardless of whether one can hear well at 18 kHz, there is not a great deal of musical content there.  You would be more bothered if it were missing than to have it boosted.

 

[Argo Duck]

This is great stuff Purrin!
 
I agree with Cee Tee that a larger sample would be good. But assuming tight manufacturing tolerances and quality control, any one unit is more likely to be typical.
 

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

Note of course that a resonance at 18 kHz is going to be very musically benign the overwhelming majority of the time (whereas at 10 kHz it could be much more noticeable on a regular basis).  Regardless of whether one can hear well at 18 kHz, there is not a great deal of musical content there.  You would be more bothered if it were missing than to have it boosted.

That is a good point. I doubt most people could hear a 18kHz tone at realistic sound levels. 17kHz was around the limit of my hearing last time I got tested - and that was a few years ago. Most people who claim magickal hearing - it's just that. A boost at 18k could actually be a good thing.
 

 

[arnaud]

I really need to get an audiogram done one of these days... I am so convinced I can hear 18kHz content at regular listening levels . I am surprised it is considered such irrelevant part of the audio range as I would have though this is where all the texture from cymbals sound comes from for instance. A stereotypical high-fi speaker does increase that upper treble to increase apparent detail. I agree though that the boost might be actually preferred by many ears.
 
In regards to the simulation, little I can do without design specs. What I can already say though is that, if anything, you'd expect the diaphragm resonances to shift down in frequency, not upward, as you make the diaphragm thinner (at constant tensioning and material properties). Furthermore, if we're talking about diaphragm like estat, I expect the resonance in the range of 50-100Hz so quite different.
 
So, the only wild guess I can make is that the diaphragm of the LCD3 is more like a rigid web (the "circuit board" with the electrical traces) upon which is laid a thin tensioned diaphragm. If there are significantly more traces than in previous design such that the tensioned surface is split into individual surfaces quite smaller than LCD1/2 generations, then you'd expect such shift in resonance from say 13kHz to 18kHz (the resonance you see is basically the pumping mode of all the individual small radiating surfaces). Only thing that does not make sense to me with that hypothesis is that the moving mass of the diaphragm + web would be very high so there would be no benefit in using a very thin diaphragm (the moving mass would be controlled by the "circuit board") apart from increase acoustic transparency and probably no way to have such high frequency extension.
 

 

[Skylab]

I can hear 20 kHz in my right ear, but not my left - an unfortunate development as I have aged.  I can hear only to about 17 kHz in my left hear, unless I turn the volume WAY up (this is using test tones from the Stereophile Test CD 3).
 
There is some overtone content of cymbals and chimes at 18 kHz, but not the fundamental.  The highest note on a piano is @ 4 kHz, and the highest note on a flute is @ 2 kHz.  The highest note that the average female human can hit is 1 kHz.  So unless you are listening to music with a lot of very specialized percussion instruments like a triangle, there is not much going on at 18kHz.  Now again, I would much rather have it boosted than have it missing, as what content there is up there isn't easy to hear regardless.

 

[gurus]

I can hear 20khz but not 18 or 19Khz. What gives?

 

[Cya|\|]

Ok, I've read just  the first posts (the ones with measurements).
I've read somehwere else that the lcd-3 have more bass than the lcd-2 (both rev.1 and rev.2).
Having had the lcd-2 rev.1, having heard the rev.2 in a hifi-show, and been able to confirm that the rev.2 extend deeper than the rev.1, I would like to give my opinion based on the lcd-3 frequency response.
I also have a high-end speaker system, with a subwoofer. Even though it does not extend linearly down to 20hz, you can feel the bass much stronger than with the lcd-2. It's well known how low frequencies are felt with the body too, especially the bottom ones.  The lcd-3 doesn't extend very low in the bass region, linearly, yet I do believe that the fact that people do hear more bass, could be caused by the fact that the upper bass is like a little boosted, compensating for the lack of the bottom bass. Certainly it could be due to non-perfect sealing, but heck, we're talking about 8db difference. For instance, I remember reading in another thread, how the denon can simulate the subwoofer feeling, thanks to their bass boost.

 

[WarriorAnt]

Quote:

I can hear 20 kHz in my right ear, but not my left - an unfortunate development as I have aged.  I can hear only to about 17 kHz in my left hear, unless I turn the volume WAY up (this is using test tones from the Stereophile Test CD 3).
 
There is some overtone content of cymbals and chimes at 18 kHz, but not the fundamental.  The highest note on a piano is @ 4 kHz, and the highest note on a flute is @ 2 kHz.  The highest note that the average female human can hit is 1 kHz.  So unless you are listening to music with a lot of very specialized percussion instruments like a triangle, there is not much going on at 18kHz.  Now again, I would much rather have it boosted than have it missing, as what content there is up there isn't easy to hear regardless.

I came across this site today  for hearing tests if anyone is interested.
 
http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/jw/hearing.html

 


 

 

[Anaxilus]

For some reason what one site calls 20khz isn't the same on another site.  Not sure why there would be a discrepancy but there is.  On one site my hearing will stop at 17-18khz, another will go up to 22khz.  /Shrug.

 

[purrin]

Test tone generator for Windows: http://www.esseraudio.com/test-tone-generator-windows-software-generate-test-signal-sine-pink-noise-crest-factor.html