[Stereodude]

It seems like everyone is overlooking the elephant in the room.  Maybe the difference in impressions are caused by the fact that not everyone has a equally good hearing.  Maybe some people don't have good enough hearing to be able to appreciate the differences between the LCD2 and the LCD3.
 
I know from experience auditioning speakers with other people that some people don't / can't hear things that others do.  Some people couldn't hear things even after they had it pointed out to them in reasonable detail what to listen for and had the section replayed for them (even more the once).

 

[grokit]

 
Quote:

Thanks for the recommendation. I am looking at Apache and possibly Darkstar... I am leaning more towards Darkstar and Rob said its good for HE6 and I was wondering if its good for LCD-3 as well.

You're welcome. Neither of those amps that I recommended would be adequate for the HE-6 though, it's a very different animal as far as driving requirements. You will want to make sure that there's a gain switch if you want to drive both cans out of an amp that will drive the HE-6 well, so you have room to attenuate the volume with the LCD-2/3. Or at least have the ability to attenuate your source properly.

 

[Anaxilus]

Quote:

I can confirm the 323 was also rather inadequate and I was never much a fan of that amp anyway.  I'd expect to invest close to the price of a 009 for an amp unless you build one yourself to really get them to perform properly.  
 

 

[googleli]

I remember Rev2 owners reporting the effect of burn in back in the old LCD2 thread. 
Quote:

Quote:

Mine didn't change a bit.  They were fantastic straight out of the box and still are.  They are from one of the first batches before the driver issues arose.

 
 

 

[dminches]

It is an interesting situation where people think that going from an $1000 headphone to a $2000 headphone should be revolutionary.  I am not trying to minimize the value of $1000 since money doesn't grow on trees, but in the speaker world, a $1000 is nothing.  If you look at various models of relatively high-end speakers, and I would call the Audez'e line high-end, going from one model to another could easily cost $10k if not more. I guess my point is, a $1000 increment is not huge in the world of audiophilia.  Others may disagree.
 
 

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

Great explanation of the Law of Diminishing Returns in this hobby 

x2.
 
I'm of the opinion that when one has a really good system dialed-in, if changes are not subtle, a short-coming was overlooked (not dialed-in). There are exceptions, however...

 

[googleli]

I completely agree. It is just that most of the LCD2 owners do not come from that world but LCD2 really let us have a glimpse of that world with a very reasonable price, people would expect pretty much the same if not more bang for the buck with the LCD3. To me,the LCD3 with a really good source and amp actually is worth that extra grand. But this is from someone who bought a power cord at the price of the LCD3, so take it with a grain of salt. 

 

[dyl1dyl]

Quote:

I completely agree. It is just that most of the LCD2 owners do not come from that world but LCD2 really let us have a glimpse of that world with a very reasonable price, people would expect pretty much the same if not more bang for the buck with the LCD3. To me,the LCD3 with a really good source and amp actually is worth that extra grand. But this is from someone who bought a power cord at the price of the LCD3, so take it with a grain of salt. 

Hey googleli, have you had a chance to compare the LCD-3s against a Stax 007 mk2 yet? 
 

 

[googleli]

No I don't have the 007 Mk II.

 

[clifwst]

 
 
Quote:

It is an interesting situation where people think that going from an $1000 headphone to a $2000 headphone should be revolutionary.  I am not trying to minimize the value of $1000 since money doesn't grow on trees, but in the speaker world, a $1000 is nothing.  If you look at various models of relatively high-end speakers, and I would call the Audez'e line high-end, going from one model to another could easily cost $10k if not more. I guess my point is, a $1000 increment is not huge in the world of audiophilia.  Others may disagree.

 

 
Except $1000 isn't a 100% price increase for most speakers, "at various models of relatively high-end speakers,". 
 
100% increase in price in the speaker world does amount to a serious upgrade, incremental or not.
 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Quote:

Perhaps it's because they are merely an incremental step up in the LCD sound.  Macedonian said it best so far when he stated they are evolutionary not revolutionary.
 
Personally I'm really appreciating the type of feedback we have received compared to the typical hyperbole driven hype fest.

The LCD-2s were very unique and revolutionary when they came out. Nothing sounded like them...their bass was unparalleled. The LCD-3s are very much voiced as Audeze headphones (just like how Grados sound like Grados I guess), but they do improve on the LCD-2s in many ways. One of the biggest improvements for me is that the sound staging is now on par with the HE-6s and the treble is phenomenal (I had some issues with the LCD-2's treble...less so though with the R2s). But I don't find them (LCD-3s) as revolutionary as their predecessors because the LCD-2s are just that great. However, they are both amazing headphones IMO.

 

[visualguy]

 
Well, at least they're still selling the LCD-2 rev. 2, so people who want this type of sound signature can go with that rather than spend twice as much on the LCD-3 which sound about the same.
 
If they started selling the LCD-3 pads, and if those fit the LCD-2 without affecting the sound, then one could get the LCD-2 with the LCD-3 pads, and save quite a bit of money without losing anything that I can detect so far. I think the sound variations between units of the same model are larger than the sound differences between the LCD-3 and the LCD-2 rev. 2...
 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Thanks. In terms of soundstage and air, do you think it's a big step-up from the LCD2 and is it comparable with the 007 MK1 or is the O2 better still? 

I find the LCD-3s sound stage similar now to the HE-6s (SillySally has also noted this). And for me this is a good improvement over my (now old) LCD-2 R2 (shipped out today). The treble and air on the LCD-3s (along with sound staging) are the biggest improvements to my ears.
 


Quote:

 

 
 
Did the r2s actually require a lot of burn-in? I thought I read otherwise. My LCD3s have been burning in for about 50+ hours now with no change. The best thing I did for it was to swap the driver tube.
 

 

Yep...I've got about 40 hours on my LCD-3s and no real changes to report from burn in. I found my LCD-2 R1s didn't change much either, but my R2s did change a bit over the first 50 or so hours.
 

 

[HK_sends]

Quote:

The LCD-2s were very unique and revolutionary when they came out. Nothing sounded like them...their bass was unparalleled. The LCD-3s are very much voiced as Audeze headphones (just like how Grados sound like Grados I guess), but they do improve on the LCD-2s in many ways. One of the biggest improvements for me is that the sound staging is now on par with the HE-6s and the treble is phenomenal (I had some issues with the LCD-2's treble...less so though with the R2s). But I don't find them (LCD-3s) as revolutionary as their predecessors because the LCD-2s are just that great. However, they are both amazing headphones IMO.

Seconded! 

 
Cheers!

-HK sends
 
 

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

I would agree with your impressions in that case, but I think the more interesting comparison is LCD-2 rev. 2 to LCD-3 where I find the differences to be minute at best other than the fact that my LCD-3 are slightly darker.
 

I would classify the improvements of the LCD-3s bigger over the LCD-2 R2s (on my rig anyway with my ears) than the R2s were over the R1s. Again, nothing HUGE here, but still noticeable.