**MrSpeakers Mad Dog: Impressions and Discussion Thread**
Sep 23, 2013 at 3:18 PM Post #1,757 of 3,201

24Bit

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 29, 2013
Posts
153
Likes
49
   
Thanks for clarifying. I think I should clarify too... When I use the price difference of LCD-2 and LCD-3, I was pointing out that higher end headphones users really appreciate that subtle improvement at the very high end despite the sharp diminishing returns. You yourself agree that MDs, despite how good they sound, are still pretty far off in comparison to the higher end headphones. So what makes you think that the overall value of Audezes and Hifimans will depreciate drastically because of MDs?

 
When an $85 set of drivers is modded to sound that good, the overall value of drivers that cost 20 times the price in the LCD-3 and 13 or so times the price in the HE-6 becomes unjustifiable to me.   Unjustified price means nothing to audio nutcases like myself, we pay premiums for that extra 10-25%.  While my wallet and bank account want to stab me for these purchases, I personally have no problem with paying $1950 for the LCD-3 to enjoy the genres and applications that I find it to be sublime with.  However, an audiophile newbie or a regular consumer looking for a new set of headphones would probably value the information I have given with that statement.  The Normals ( as I call them ) got wide eyed and shocked when I tell them this or that headphone costs 20 times as much as this Mad Dog.  I had the same experience when I first started out, but the knowledgeable audio enthusiasts are aware of how Hi-Fi audio works.  Typical consumers would be happy to know the Mad Dog offers an excellent well rounded experience and for common applications the LCD-3 by comparison becomes pretty much a terrible purchase.  By the way, the next headphone review I post on Headfonics will be the LCD-3 and I will do my best to acquire the Alpha Dog once it is released. As I said, price to performance is not relative or linear in this hobby.  The LCD-3 certainly is not 20 times as clear or dynamic as the stock T50RP.   While the LCD-3 happens to be my absolute favorite headphone of all time, I still feel it to be a specialist and not a well rounded headphone.  When comparing general all around qualities ( not clarity ) the value of a specialize elite headphone like the HE-6 or LCD-3 depreciates in overall value to me.   That is just my opinion, froger.  Please take that with a grain of salt and not as one of the 10 audiophile commandments :)
 
Sep 23, 2013 at 5:36 PM Post #1,758 of 3,201

gikigill

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 29, 2012
Posts
4,313
Likes
1,094
Location
Australia
  You guys are like ships passing in the night.
cool.gif

 
* No one said "HE-6" prior to their vigorous defense by gikigill .
 
* Someone ( deadie ) who has the Mad Dog and the LCD TWO claims that he would buy the Mad Dog in preference to the LCD TWO
 
* The LCD3 is superior to the LCD2, otherwise they could never have sold it for very long in the ruthless comparison world of head-fi
 
* So, no one claimed the Mad Dog is better than HE-6 or the LCD3, that's a "straw man" argument.
 
PS  The detail and technicalities of the Mad Dog 3.2 are superior to the HE-400...
cool.gif

 
 
 
"overall value of the LCD-3 and Hifiman Planar Magnetic’s to drastically depreciate in value"
 
Guess who makes the HE-6? Hifiman.
 
Guess what the HE-6 is? A Planar Magnetic.
 
Guess what that makes it:
 
A " Hifiman Planar Magnetic"
 
Straw man????
 
Sep 23, 2013 at 9:13 PM Post #1,759 of 3,201

froger

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 26, 2013
Posts
414
Likes
103
   
 Please take that with a grain of salt and not as one of the 10 audiophile commandments :)

Take your comment as one of the 10 audiophile commandments? 
blink.gif
 Definitely not me...
 
Sep 23, 2013 at 11:24 PM Post #1,761 of 3,201

kstuart

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Posts
1,281
Likes
298
FYI -
 
I tried the Mad Dog 3.2 (Universal) with the JDSlabs Cmoy 2.03 amplifier.... and like the HE-400... it did not work.   I think the Cmoy needs a dynamic driver, and simply does not work well with a planar headphone.
 
I found the Mad Dog 3.2 to actually sound better straight out of the headphone jack of a Thinkpad T61 laptop.
 
So, only one data point, but I recommend against using a Cmoy with planar headphones...
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:09 AM Post #1,762 of 3,201

hans030390

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Posts
1,372
Likes
608
  * The LCD3 is superior to the LCD2, otherwise they could never have sold it for very long in the ruthless comparison world of head-fi

 
I'm not speaking for which of the two is superior (haven't heard either of them), but the bolded simply isn't true. In a completely hypothetical situation, Audeze could have simply changed the name from LCD-2 to LCD-3 with double the price and you'd still see a large number of Head-Fiers purchasing them and claiming a noticeable improvement in sound (large enough number of people that Audeze could continue on doing it and going about their business).
 
The sad fact is that this type of stuff has actually happened a few times before, though I won't point out any particular manufacturers or headphones. I'm already off topic as-is, and I don't want to ruffle too many feathers. :wink:
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 3:06 AM Post #1,763 of 3,201

froger

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 26, 2013
Posts
414
Likes
103
Are you hinting that the Mad dogs and the Alpha dogs are in the same situation?
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 9:22 AM Post #1,764 of 3,201

hans030390

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Posts
1,372
Likes
608
Are you hinting that the Mad dogs and the Alpha dogs are in the same situation?

 
Not at all. Dan is an honest, good dude as far as I can tell. He's given me no reason to doubt him, really (subjectively and objectively).
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 12:15 PM Post #1,766 of 3,201

aamefford

I have a custom title!
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Posts
3,914
Likes
644
   
I'm not speaking for which of the two is superior (haven't heard either of them), but the bolded simply isn't true. In a completely hypothetical situation, Audeze could have simply changed the name from LCD-2 to LCD-3 with double the price and you'd still see a large number of Head-Fiers purchasing them and claiming a noticeable improvement in sound (large enough number of people that Audeze could continue on doing it and going about their business).
 
The sad fact is that this type of stuff has actually happened a few times before, though I won't point out any particular manufacturers or headphones. I'm already off topic as-is, and I don't want to ruffle too many feathers. :wink:

My personal opinion is that there is a significant level of sound quality increase in both the LCD2 to LCD3 step, and the Mad Dog to Alpha Dog step.  The MD to AD is very much in the realm of good value for the dollars spent to step up.  The Audeze is a much more significant price jump.  The value proposition becomes much more individual at this point.  In my case, as much as I like the LCD3, it is unlikely that I will own them.
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 12:29 PM Post #1,767 of 3,201

doublea71

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Posts
3,077
Likes
568
3.2s just arrived today and they sound fantastic. It has been awhile since I heard the 3.0s, so I can't make a comparison. These have a sound signature that I really enjoy - non-fatiguing, neutral (or thereabouts), and....big-boned. I don't know how else to say it, but some headphones push sound that doesn't have much weight behind it. Yes, big-boned, like Charles Barkley in his prime.
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:02 PM Post #1,768 of 3,201

Andeby

Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Posts
69
Likes
11
  3.2s just arrived today and they sound fantastic. It has been awhile since I heard the 3.0s, so I can't make a comparison. These have a sound signature that I really enjoy - non-fatiguing, neutral (or thereabouts), and....big-boned. I don't know how else to say it, but some headphones push sound that doesn't have much weight behind it. Yes, big-boned, like Charles Barkley in his prime.

 
The best part in my opinion is that they work so well with everything I've thrown at them. No genre I've listened to so far has been disappointing on them. From bass-heavy dubstep, rap, trance to piano music to classical music to rock, whatever I feed them comes back out in amazing quality. Wish the rest of the world worked like that.
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 2:53 PM Post #1,769 of 3,201

martybm5

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 3, 2013
Posts
198
Likes
14
   
The best part in my opinion is that they work so well with everything I've thrown at them. No genre I've listened to so far has been disappointing on them. From bass-heavy dubstep, rap, trance to piano music to classical music to rock, whatever I feed them comes back out in amazing quality. Wish the rest of the world worked like that.

 
+1 on that !!
 
Sep 24, 2013 at 4:55 PM Post #1,770 of 3,201

kstuart

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 11, 2011
Posts
1,281
Likes
298
 
  3.2s just arrived today and they sound fantastic. It has been awhile since I heard the 3.0s, so I can't make a comparison. These have a sound signature that I really enjoy - non-fatiguing, neutral (or thereabouts), and....big-boned. I don't know how else to say it, but some headphones push sound that doesn't have much weight behind it. Yes, big-boned, like Charles Barkley in his prime.

 
The best part in my opinion is that they work so well with everything I've thrown at them. No genre I've listened to so far has been disappointing on them. From bass-heavy dubstep, rap, trance to piano music to classical music to rock, whatever I feed them comes back out in amazing quality. Wish the rest of the world worked like that.

I would say that is true because all the other headphones with equal emphasis on clarity, are either far more expensive, or else they are light on bass.
 
The T50RP drivers are uniquely inexpensive for the level of clarity they provide, and the Mad Dog 3.2 has managed to improve the bass level and bass quality.   Only the HE-400 comes close at this price level (which is why I own both).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top