[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

LCD3 vs "HeadRoom's suggested 4db bump"
 
 

Few things:
"Headphones also need to be rolled-off in the highs to compensate for the drivers being so close to the ear; a gently sloping flat line from 1kHz to about 8-10dB down at 20kHz is about right.""
Your "perfect graph"  doesn't accout for this. But under 1kHz, it's pretty good.
 
Secondly, this data is from...?
 
EDIT, playing around a bit with the prescription above for "natural sounding" headphones from Headroom and think this is the better match. I also included the "treble rolled off from 1kHz to 20kHz of about 10dB. The Audeze cans seemed to be voiced with this process in mind:
 

 

[dminches]

And why are these graphs important?

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

And why are these graphs important?

Not sure really.

 
 

 

[Olias of Sunhillow]

Quote:

And why are these graphs important?

They're awfully pretty to look at when the lights are out and I'm listening to Sandy Denny on my LCD-3s. 

 

 

[dminches]

Well, that's the best explanation I have heard to date.

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

Few things:
"Headphones also need to be rolled-off in the highs to compensate for the drivers being so close to the ear; a gently sloping flat line from 1kHz to about 8-10dB down at 20kHz is about right.""
Your "perfect graph"  doesn't accout for this. But under 1kHz, it's pretty good.
 
Secondly, this data is from...?

Instead of quoting HeadRoom's opinions, why do don't you just admit you prefer a measurably dark sound signature?

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

And why are these graphs important?

The graphs mean nothing other than to provide an objective comparison of HeadRoom's bass boost hypothesis to the LCD3's tuning.

 

[dminches]

Quote:

 

Instead of quoting HeadRoom's opinions, why do don't you just admit you prefer a measurably dark sound signature?

I really like the LCD-3s but would not characterize my preference as dark.  On the other hand, why must someone use an adjective to define what they like?  Isn't that subjective and relative?
 

 

[dminches]

Quote:

 

The graphs mean nothing other than to provide an objective comparison of HeadRoom's bass boost hypothesis to the LCD3's tuning.

Understood, but listening preference is completely subjective.  Anything objective is just noise.
 
Also, isn't this also very dependent on the other equipment in the mix, including the amps and cables?  Is there an absolute zero or other standard that results in a true controlled measure? 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

 

Instead of quoting HeadRoom's opinions, why do don't you just admit you prefer a measurably dark sound signature?

 
 

If you will admit you prefer a measurably bright signature.

 
I'm sorry, I didn't realize that you knew more about headphone design than the folks at Headroom.
 
Did you not read my comments that I actually can appreciate either signature? I love my HD800s and am a big fan of Grados. Or maybe the comments where I commended Audeze for coming out with a "different" signature than the standard bright=more detail and real life bass=bad headphones?

There is already a plethora of bright/bass light headphones out there...why do we want all new ones to conform to that signature?
 
 
 
 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

I really like the LCD-3s but would not characterize my preference as dark.  On the other hand, why must someone use an adjective to define what they like?  Isn't that subjective and relative?
 

Very well put!

 
 

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

 
I love my HD800s and am a big fan of Grados. Or maybe the comments where I commended Audeze for coming out with a "different" signature than the standard bright=more detail and real life bass=bad headphones?

There is already a plethora of bright/bass light headphones out there...why do we want all new ones to conform to that signature?

This is pretty much where I am coming from as well, as I can appreciate a variety of sound signatures.
 
And: I love that thunderstorm analogy, and agree 100% with the Headroom statement in principle regardless of the FR numbers.

 

[Olias of Sunhillow]

Quote:

 
Did you not read my comments that I actually can appreciate either signature? I love my HD800s and am a big fan of Grados. Or maybe the comments where I commended Audeze for coming out with a "different" signature than the standard bright=more detail and real life bass=bad headphones?

There is already a plethora of bright/bass light headphones out there...why do we want all new ones to conform to that signature?
 
 

 
This a key observation for me as well. I find that the LCD-3s often convey a level of detail similar to my HE-6s and T1s, but manage to do so without the run-of-the-mill brightness that makes the HD800 and K702s "seem" to be such detail monsters.
 
This isn't always the right approach for a given recording. I just downloaded the 24/88.2 Harmonia Mundi version of "The Brandenburg Concertos," and the LCD-3 just doesn't do this recording justice. The sound is too relaxed. No problem, the T1 (and even my RS-1) makes everything right. On the other hand, the 24/192 release of Modern Jazz Quartet's "Last Concert" has ear-piercing (and decidedly un-lifelike and non-neutral) treble on all of my cans except the LCD-3. The Audez'es are just perfect for this recording.
 
In my non-scientific testing so far, I prefer the LCD-3 to the rest of my headphones for about 90% of my recordings.

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

I really like the LCD-3s but would not characterize my preference as dark.  On the other hand, why must someone use an adjective to define what they like?  Isn't that subjective and relative?

 
Preferences and descriptions are subjective - that's fine - we all have our preferences. While there will be variations from person to person with the use of adjectives, they should for the most part be fairly consistent and most of all based on a reference - that can  actually be objectively measured or determined.
 
What I find disturbing, and this goes back to the LCD2, is when people attempt to describe or imply that the LCD# as "neutral", which may be true to them, but not true to measurements. The problem with this is that it impedes transmission of knowledge. If person A implies headphone X is neutral and person B implies Y headphone is neutral, with the qualified "at least to me", this obviously causes a lot of problems, especially for readers who are trying to ascertain the sonic properties of said headphone.
 
I hope you understand - and that I'm not trying to shiit on the LCD3 or your personal preferences.
 
 

 

[purrin]

Quote:

 
If you will admit you prefer a measurably bright signature.

 
I'm sorry, I didn't realize that you knew more about headphone design than the folks at Headroom.
 
Did you not read my comments that I actually can appreciate either signature? I love my HD800s and am a big fan of Grados. Or maybe the comments where I commended Audeze for coming out with a "different" signature than the standard bright=more detail and real life bass=bad headphones?

There is already a plethora of bright/bass light headphones out there...why do we want all new ones to conform to that signature?

 
Well perhaps more precisely:  Why can't you admit you like Audeze's unique approach to a measurably dark sound signature (that in your opinion sounds the most natural to you?) So far you've only quoted HeadRoom and "different".