New Audeze LCD3
Sep 14, 2015 at 7:58 PM Post #10,696 of 11,506

Stereolab42

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 11, 2014
Posts
874
Likes
501
   
Yes there is certainly a loss of bass from C to F. But I do not believe this loss is due to the addition of the fazor array. Near as I can tell, the loss of bass is due to the replacement of the 50-ohm C driver with the 110-ohm F driver. That's because the magnetic field strength is proportional to current not voltage, and the F driver has less than half the current.
 
Source: my BSEE comes in handy sometimes.

 
It only has less current if sensitivity increased right? Does anyone know if it did?
 
Sep 14, 2015 at 9:43 PM Post #10,698 of 11,506

Peter_S

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 9, 2002
Posts
214
Likes
21
  I'm not in favor of the fazor :)
What you get in treble you lose it in the bass.


I can say that I was favoring my HD800's by a wide margin over the classic LCD3's.  The LCD3c's sounded muffled to me - though I don't think they were part of the early versions that had issues with rolled off high ends (they were produced in 2013).  Based on this, I think I'll like the Fazors a lot better.
 
Sep 14, 2015 at 10:32 PM Post #10,699 of 11,506

Mach3

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Posts
1,104
Likes
330
Location
Melbourne
 
I can say that I was favoring my HD800's by a wide margin over the classic LCD3's.  The LCD3c's sounded muffled to me - though I don't think they were part of the early versions that had issues with rolled off high ends (they were produced in 2013).  Based on this, I think I'll like the Fazors a lot better.

 
I'm on the same boat. I was about to sale my LCD3c once it came back from Audeze for driver replacement. 
If it wasn't for the free upgrade to Fazor/drivers very likely I would have purchased the LCD-X.
I still prefer the HD800, but I likely the LCD3F enough to justify keeping them.
 
Sep 15, 2015 at 11:50 AM Post #10,700 of 11,506

mrip541

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 14, 2011
Posts
434
Likes
55
I received a new LCD-3f yesterday and want to just share my very quick initial reaction.
 
I previously owned the LCD-2f. I feel with the LCD-3 everything is significantly improved, except the bass.
 
From memory, the LCD-2 extended lower, had greater impact and strangely felt tighter. I remember feeling that with a few particular tracks the bass stopped and started with such precision and power you could hear tiny spaces between notes that just weren’t there with other headphones. And, when listening to rock/metal/edm you just wanted to get up and jump around. I’m not getting that feeling with the LCD-3.  
 
A few months ago I heard the LCD-X and immediately felt it sounded so natural and effortless, so real, it was like listening to live music rather than headphones. Just a completely different experience. To my ears the LCD-3 sounds like, well, a headphone. A very good one, but still a headphone. The different could have been in the rest of the chain.
 
Obviously, making comparisons to headphones I haven’t heard in a long time, that I listened to through a different chain, is kind of sketchy. Just my random thoughts. Ymmv.
 
Sep 15, 2015 at 12:26 PM Post #10,701 of 11,506

Gibalok

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 9, 2013
Posts
220
Likes
22
Sounds like you preffered punch of LCD2, liked a lot X but finally got LCD3F. Im also willing to get pairs of LCDs to my collection but heard only LCD2f which i liked a lot but dont want to get these ones but dreaming of 3F or X being better than 2F :)
 
Sep 16, 2015 at 6:13 PM Post #10,702 of 11,506

rmsanger

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Posts
594
Likes
512
Location
SLC
  I received a new LCD-3f yesterday and want to just share my very quick initial reaction.
 
I previously owned the LCD-2f. I feel with the LCD-3 everything is significantly improved, except the bass.
 
From memory, the LCD-2 extended lower, had greater impact and strangely felt tighter. I remember feeling that with a few particular tracks the bass stopped and started with such precision and power you could hear tiny spaces between notes that just weren’t there with other headphones. And, when listening to rock/metal/edm you just wanted to get up and jump around. I’m not getting that feeling with the LCD-3.  
 
A few months ago I heard the LCD-X and immediately felt it sounded so natural and effortless, so real, it was like listening to live music rather than headphones. Just a completely different experience. To my ears the LCD-3 sounds like, well, a headphone. A very good one, but still a headphone. The different could have been in the rest of the chain.
 
Obviously, making comparisons to headphones I haven’t heard in a long time, that I listened to through a different chain, is kind of sketchy. Just my random thoughts. Ymmv.

 
I own both LCD 3F and X's and do A -> B listening regularly and was trying to pick between the two and sell the others.  I agree that the X's are more "fun" to listen to and prefer them when listening to Rock (Black Keys, Jack White, Alabama Shakes).  But when I put on live music or blues (Muddy Watters - Folk Singer, DMB - Live at Luther, AKUS - Live) than the 3F's completely dominate.
 
The X's provide the punch and a little bit of magic up to while the 3F's are much more transparent with fantastic resolution and clarity. 
 
I have yet to hear the HD800's but would be intrigued to see how they compare.
 
Sep 16, 2015 at 8:00 PM Post #10,703 of 11,506

Rico613

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 5, 2012
Posts
1,209
Likes
101
  I have yet to hear the HD800's but would be intrigued to see how they compare.

They don't !!!   IMHO . . . 
ksc75smile.gif

 
Sep 18, 2015 at 6:33 AM Post #10,704 of 11,506

potkettleblack

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 1, 2014
Posts
1,374
Likes
546
I've put my x's on sale 
frown.gif

 
 
I'll be putting a review/comparison up soon but at the minute I now know the 3f's are the one's for me. It's the hardest decision I've had to make since starting this hobby and I wouldn't be surprised if I own the x's again (in fact I'm convinced I will), but unfortunately for now I have to pick one, and after very long listening periods I'm going with the 3f's (if the he-1000's don't best them)
 
If any UK users are interested feel free to inbox me.
 
Sep 19, 2015 at 3:19 AM Post #10,705 of 11,506

greenkiwi

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 21, 2009
Posts
1,383
Likes
203
Location
New Zealand
As an LCD-2f-er thinking about +1ing it, I'm curious what others have found and whether it is worth it.
 
For me, the moment came when I was swapping back and forth between my XC and the 2s.  I noticed two things:
1. The XC seemed to have just as much bass, but there was additional higher energy that the 2 was lacking. So the 2 feels like it has more bass, but it is relative to the higher end.
 
2. The XC seemed to me considerably more transparent than the 2.  It was as if I'd opened a window... when I put them on.
 
That being said, I really love listening to the 2s, they just have a very "natural" and musical feel to them.
 
If it makes sense, what I would be hoping is that the 3 would retain the musical feel while increasing the level of transparency.
 
Sep 19, 2015 at 8:43 AM Post #10,706 of 11,506

TMRaven

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 6, 2011
Posts
7,312
Likes
1,063
3 is basically that.  If you happen to find a good LCD3, it's basically just an LCD2 that's more transparent without having to spike the mid-treble like the LCD-X and LCD-XC.  I can't comment on the fazor'd LCD3.
 
XC has the typical closed-back coloration where there's a lower midrange dip and an upper midrange hump, which can make it sound tinny at times.  For that reason I prefer the midrange of the X.  
 
Sep 19, 2015 at 9:56 PM Post #10,708 of 11,506

RUMAY408

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Posts
7,657
Likes
147
Location
Tennessee
   
I own both LCD 3F and X's and do A -> B listening regularly and was trying to pick between the two and sell the others.  I agree that the X's are more "fun" to listen to and prefer them when listening to Rock (Black Keys, Jack White, Alabama Shakes).  But when I put on live music or blues (Muddy Watters - Folk Singer, DMB - Live at Luther, AKUS - Live) than the 3F's completely dominate.
 
The X's provide the punch and a little bit of magic up to while the 3F's are much more transparent with fantastic resolution and clarity. 
 
I have yet to hear the HD800's but would be intrigued to see how they compare.


I'll be more specific since I own both, and I've heard the LCD-2, LCD-2.1, LCD-X and my preference is still the LCD-3F
 
The HD800 is a different animal entirely, with a mid-fi amp (ex. Meier and Schit -Rag) the LCD-3F is more impressive,
but with the GS-Xmk2 amp which I am currently using the HD800 gets scary good, the soundstage, comfort, and imaging>LCD-3F the Bass and Mids are close to =
 
Sep 19, 2015 at 10:34 PM Post #10,709 of 11,506

potkettleblack

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 1, 2014
Posts
1,374
Likes
546
  3 is basically that.  If you happen to find a good LCD3, it's basically just an LCD2 that's more transparent without having to spike the mid-treble like the LCD-X and LCD-XC.  I can't comment on the fazor'd LCD3.
 
XC has the typical closed-back coloration where there's a lower midrange dip and an upper midrange hump, which can make it sound tinny at times.  For that reason I prefer the midrange of the X.  


In your experience how much do the 3f's vary in sound?
 
Sep 19, 2015 at 10:58 PM Post #10,710 of 11,506

jhljhl

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
May 23, 2013
Posts
871
Likes
81
 
I'll be more specific since I own both, and I've heard the LCD-2, LCD-2.1, LCD-X and my preference is still the LCD-3F
 
The HD800 is a different animal entirely, with a mid-fi amp (ex. Meier and Schit -Rag) the LCD-3F is more impressive,
but with the GS-Xmk2 amp which I am currently using the HD800 gets scary good, the soundstage, comfort, and imaging>LCD-3F the Bass and Mids are close to =


dubstep girl says the gx-xmk2 and schitt rag sound nearly identical - you disagree?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top